Apple filed an application; they have no legal right to this technology yet. Repeat after me: an application is not a patent. This headline is like saying "New Cancer Drug Hits the Market" when it's still in clinical trials.
Turn in your geek card, CmdrTaco. After having this explained to you so many times, by so many different people, you really should be ashamed.
The problem with your logic is, in most of these cases, no one from the local government personally witnessed the alleged infraction, and therefore any testimony they would offer should be inadmissible based on lack of personal knowledge. This differs from a bank robbery which has plenty of witnesses, including most obviously the teller who was robbed.
In a red light camera case, who has personal knowledge of the crime?
I may have to start incrementally dropping my use of Google's products. You know, for one of their competitors' products. When their short-sightedness compels me to do so because they don't provide applications I want for the technology I have.
I realize slashdot is into the whole libertarian dog eat dog business thing, but it's really in Groupon's best interest to make sure this sort of thing doesn't happen, in particular when they're dealing with so many smaller businesses that might not have all that much expertise and probably aren't totally familiar with the business model. Yeah, the guy shouldn't have done the deal in the first place, but he didn't know what he was getting into and it looks really bad for Groupon to be running their own customers out of business (and it's a pretty terrible long term strategy)
Groupon doesn't care if their customers fail, new businesses are cropping up all the time. As P.T. Barnum said, there's a sucker born every minute. And Groupon gets 50% in the meantime, sounds like a sweetheart deal to me.
Lawyers don't sue people for fun, they sue people because their client told them to. Usually, because their client's a douchebag and wants to make a quick buck off a doctor that's just trying to help. Or, occasionally, because the doctor really did screw something up, but it's mostly the sue-happy patient that causes the problem.
I bought Portal 2 as soon as it was available for pre-order, and I'll tell you why: to support developers and artists who put out a superior product. If you wait a few years to buy the product, the creators have no feedback that their product is a big hit at the critical moment when their team is still assembled and could be devoted to working on a sequel.
Portal is a bit of a special case, as I'm sure many people got it through the Orange Box that they bought for other reasons. However, my point still stands: if you like a game, buy it sooner rather than later. The huge, and more importantly immediate success of Portal caused Valve to build out their team and start work right away on Portal 2.
The point of teaching math at all, at least past checkbook arithmetic, is to endow students with the ability to think logically. Those who have an aptitude for science and engineering may find more advanced math such as calculus and linear algebra useful for their careers. However, the vast majority of people will never use more than arithmetic "for math's sake". Still, the hope is that those geometry classes taught them how to think carefully, break a problem down into its constituent parts, and solve it. This is a skill that is useful well beyond applied mathematics.
In practice, publication prevents filing for a patent in the rest of the world. If you only care about the US, it's not a big deal. But once you publish, you don't get to change your mind -- you're locked out, forever.
When was the last time you complained to your representatives about defense spending? Or the education budget? Or the overreaching power of the FBI? This is your government. Participate in it.
Is this cheating? Perhaps not. But would it change your mind if they spent millions of dollars advertising that they were better / different than Google and tried to take away from Google's market share?
This smacks of unfair business practices. Microsoft should be ashamed, but more than that they should be sued.
The best part was when he/she downloaded a copy of win2ksp3.exe.
From the comments of the Youtube video, apparently this is standard practice to test bandwidth. Because SP3 is so huge. Insert obligatory Microsoft joke here.
It's appropriate, since the entire "social security trust fund" is nothing but IOUs from a government that's deeper in debt than any other government has ever been in all of recorded history.
-jcr
But the US also has an economy that's larger than any other economy in recorded history. How large is the debt in proportion to the economy? How much of that debt is owed to the social security trust fund?
There were precisely six years in our nation's history when our debt-to-GDP ratio was over 90%: 1944-1949. Of course, we had a huge jobs program back then, which was pumping up the economy. We were able to leverage that momentum to pay down the debt to 50-year debt/GDP lows by the mid 1970s (although the absolute size of the debt kept increasing through that period).
The net present value of total OASDI costs over the next 75 years is estimated to be about $5.3T, or about 37% of the present value of the debt. On the other hand, the net present value of Medicare part A costs over the same window is $13.4T, or 94% of the present value of the debt. As anyone who is familiar with the numbers will tell you, Medicare is a much larger and more immediate problem than Social Security.
VCs like Thiel are getting more desperate to find young, talented, ignorant people to control, so they have to "generate leads" by this kind of promotion. Young entrepreneurs who already have business sense won't be fooled by this kind of offer. However, if you are really young, really smart, and really naive, you just might go for it and end up owing Thiel 50% of your idea.
There is *no* explicit right to privacy in the Constitution, or any other doctrine that the USA was founded on. There is a limitation on unreasonable search and seizure, but no explicit right to privacy.
Check out Caroline Kennedy's "The Right to Privacy". A bit dated, but still relevant.
Correct, there is no explicit right to privacy in the Constitution. Luckily, there doesn't have to be. Read the Ninth Amendment. Also, check out Warren and Brandeis' "The Right to Privacy". A bit dated, but still relevant.
People at the top easily forgot how much the country is supporting them, they live under the surreal impression that somehow they pay for everthing themselves.
Actually, they mostly do pay for it. According to the IRS's own tables of tax statistics for individuals, the top one tenth of one percent of tax returns account for over 20% of the total personal income tax revenue. The top one percent of returns account for over 40% of revenue. The bottom FIFTY PERCENT account for less than 3% of revenue. That was in 2007, and the trend is actually in the direction of getting even more skewed. Not to mention that the effective tax rate actually starts to decrease for people who make below $400k a year... so much for the "excessively taxing the middle class" hype.
Apparently I'm a Libertarian then. I assume fiscal responsibility is part of the package as well, right?
Yes. In fact, many people mistake us Libertarians for Republicans because we spend so much time harping on fiscal responsibility.
Of course, the truth is that we're socially liberal, sometimes extremely so. It's just that issues like rights for gay couples seem so obvious that there isn't much to debate, and complex issues like the national debt are much more fun to argue.
Intelligent, dedicated laymen attempting to navigate the courts (and doing anything else that isn't philanthropic) generally have their own interests at heart, not those of the broader society. It is those latter, broader interests that laws are supposed to serve, not the interests of any one individual. The concept is called "rule of law", to be contrasted with "rule of man". Personally, I think where we are is a fine place for us to be.
In response to the obvious questions "wasn't he taken advantage of? doesn't he deserve compensation for his pain?", I ask the logical follow-up question: "how would you design a system of laws that uniformly makes punishment fit the crime, without favoring one person over another?" The answer we've come up with is insanely complex, because life is insanely complex. You are welcome to suggest alternatives, but I think it's a good thing having a guide who has been specially trained on public policy, politics, and the history of thinking on how societies should progress (not to mention the mundane details, like the actual laws in your jurisdiction). Of course, I am a lawyer, so feel free to accuse me of bias.
Most people are selfish, and don't think about the broader interests of society before they act. We've even come to expect selfishness and short-term greed in our citizens, rather than community-minded thinking and long-term planning. That's the real shame.
TSA is security theater, complete with uniforms for the actors and Uncle Sam as the librettist. If the TSA disappeared tomorrow, the SAME DAY there would be airline-hired security guards in their place, because what airline wants to be sued by 300 angry widows/widowers when a plane gets blown up? And the airline guards would have to actually follow all the privacy laws, unlike the TSA (whom otherwise rational people seem to think should be exempt for some reason).
[sarcasm] And in this recession, how dare you criticize them? TSA is a jobs program -- these people have families to feed, you heartless bastard. [/sarcasm]
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903)
Slashdot Mirror
Apple filed an application; they have no legal right to this technology yet. Repeat after me: an application is not a patent. This headline is like saying "New Cancer Drug Hits the Market" when it's still in clinical trials.
Turn in your geek card, CmdrTaco. After having this explained to you so many times, by so many different people, you really should be ashamed.
The problem with your logic is, in most of these cases, no one from the local government personally witnessed the alleged infraction, and therefore any testimony they would offer should be inadmissible based on lack of personal knowledge. This differs from a bank robbery which has plenty of witnesses, including most obviously the teller who was robbed.
In a red light camera case, who has personal knowledge of the crime?
I may have to start incrementally dropping my use of Google's products. You know, for one of their competitors' products. When their short-sightedness compels me to do so because they don't provide applications I want for the technology I have.
What kind of job do you want?
The Palestinians don't believe in freedom of speech. RMS should cancel his entire trip; his talk would be wasted on them anyway.
I realize slashdot is into the whole libertarian dog eat dog business thing, but it's really in Groupon's best interest to make sure this sort of thing doesn't happen, in particular when they're dealing with so many smaller businesses that might not have all that much expertise and probably aren't totally familiar with the business model. Yeah, the guy shouldn't have done the deal in the first place, but he didn't know what he was getting into and it looks really bad for Groupon to be running their own customers out of business (and it's a pretty terrible long term strategy)
Groupon doesn't care if their customers fail, new businesses are cropping up all the time. As P.T. Barnum said, there's a sucker born every minute. And Groupon gets 50% in the meantime, sounds like a sweetheart deal to me.
Lawyers don't sue people for fun, they sue people because their client told them to. Usually, because their client's a douchebag and wants to make a quick buck off a doctor that's just trying to help. Or, occasionally, because the doctor really did screw something up, but it's mostly the sue-happy patient that causes the problem.
Next time, don't shoot the messenger.
I bought Portal 2 as soon as it was available for pre-order, and I'll tell you why: to support developers and artists who put out a superior product. If you wait a few years to buy the product, the creators have no feedback that their product is a big hit at the critical moment when their team is still assembled and could be devoted to working on a sequel.
Portal is a bit of a special case, as I'm sure many people got it through the Orange Box that they bought for other reasons. However, my point still stands: if you like a game, buy it sooner rather than later. The huge, and more importantly immediate success of Portal caused Valve to build out their team and start work right away on Portal 2.
The point of teaching math at all, at least past checkbook arithmetic, is to endow students with the ability to think logically. Those who have an aptitude for science and engineering may find more advanced math such as calculus and linear algebra useful for their careers. However, the vast majority of people will never use more than arithmetic "for math's sake". Still, the hope is that those geometry classes taught them how to think carefully, break a problem down into its constituent parts, and solve it. This is a skill that is useful well beyond applied mathematics.
In practice, publication prevents filing for a patent in the rest of the world. If you only care about the US, it's not a big deal. But once you publish, you don't get to change your mind -- you're locked out, forever.
When was the last time you complained to your representatives about defense spending? Or the education budget? Or the overreaching power of the FBI? This is your government. Participate in it.
That's why they poll all the time.
Gurl'yy fjvgpu gb ebg39. Nsgre nyy, vg zhfg or zber frpher!
ebg39: vg'f whfg yvxr ebg13, bayl guerr gvzrf nf frpher! Xvaqn yvxr gevcyr QRF sbe qhzzvrf. Gur wbxrf jevgr gurzfryirf.
http://lmgtfy.com/
Is this cheating? Perhaps not. But would it change your mind if they spent millions of dollars advertising that they were better / different than Google and tried to take away from Google's market share?
This smacks of unfair business practices. Microsoft should be ashamed, but more than that they should be sued.
The best part was when he/she downloaded a copy of win2ksp3.exe.
From the comments of the Youtube video, apparently this is standard practice to test bandwidth. Because SP3 is so huge. Insert obligatory Microsoft joke here.
It's appropriate, since the entire "social security trust fund" is nothing but IOUs from a government that's deeper in debt than any other government has ever been in all of recorded history.
-jcr
But the US also has an economy that's larger than any other economy in recorded history. How large is the debt in proportion to the economy? How much of that debt is owed to the social security trust fund?
Year, Debt (in $B), Debt/GDP
2005 12638.4 62.77
2006 13398.9 63.49
2007 14077.6 63.99
2008 14441.4 69.15
2009 14258.2 83.29
2010 14623.9 94.27 (projected)
There were precisely six years in our nation's history when our debt-to-GDP ratio was over 90%: 1944-1949. Of course, we had a huge jobs program back then, which was pumping up the economy. We were able to leverage that momentum to pay down the debt to 50-year debt/GDP lows by the mid 1970s (although the absolute size of the debt kept increasing through that period).
Source: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_debt_chart.html
The net present value of total OASDI costs over the next 75 years is estimated to be about $5.3T, or about 37% of the present value of the debt. On the other hand, the net present value of Medicare part A costs over the same window is $13.4T, or 94% of the present value of the debt. As anyone who is familiar with the numbers will tell you, Medicare is a much larger and more immediate problem than Social Security.
Source: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/rpt/2010-R-0197.htm
Next time, look up the numbers yourself, ya lazy bum.
On the restoration processes used in the past can be found on the RT's website, if you dig around a bit: http://restoration-team.co.uk/
Good luck with enforcing that.
VCs like Thiel are getting more desperate to find young, talented, ignorant people to control, so they have to "generate leads" by this kind of promotion. Young entrepreneurs who already have business sense won't be fooled by this kind of offer. However, if you are really young, really smart, and really naive, you just might go for it and end up owing Thiel 50% of your idea.
There is *no* explicit right to privacy in the Constitution, or any other doctrine that the USA was founded on. There is a limitation on unreasonable search and seizure, but no explicit right to privacy.
Check out Caroline Kennedy's "The Right to Privacy". A bit dated, but still relevant.
Correct, there is no explicit right to privacy in the Constitution. Luckily, there doesn't have to be. Read the Ninth Amendment. Also, check out Warren and Brandeis' "The Right to Privacy". A bit dated, but still relevant.
Mod parent up. If Assange should be executed for leaks, so should Scooter Libby. And Karl Rove. And Dick Cheney.
The hypocrisy and/or selective memory loss of the Republican Party is mind boggling.
People at the top easily forgot how much the country is supporting them, they live under the surreal impression that somehow they pay for everthing themselves.
Actually, they mostly do pay for it. According to the IRS's own tables of tax statistics for individuals, the top one tenth of one percent of tax returns account for over 20% of the total personal income tax revenue. The top one percent of returns account for over 40% of revenue. The bottom FIFTY PERCENT account for less than 3% of revenue. That was in 2007, and the trend is actually in the direction of getting even more skewed. Not to mention that the effective tax rate actually starts to decrease for people who make below $400k a year... so much for the "excessively taxing the middle class" hype.
Raw data here: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/07in05tr.xls
Apparently I'm a Libertarian then. I assume fiscal responsibility is part of the package as well, right?
Yes. In fact, many people mistake us Libertarians for Republicans because we spend so much time harping on fiscal responsibility.
Of course, the truth is that we're socially liberal, sometimes extremely so. It's just that issues like rights for gay couples seem so obvious that there isn't much to debate, and complex issues like the national debt are much more fun to argue.
Intelligent, dedicated laymen attempting to navigate the courts (and doing anything else that isn't philanthropic) generally have their own interests at heart, not those of the broader society. It is those latter, broader interests that laws are supposed to serve, not the interests of any one individual. The concept is called "rule of law", to be contrasted with "rule of man". Personally, I think where we are is a fine place for us to be.
In response to the obvious questions "wasn't he taken advantage of? doesn't he deserve compensation for his pain?", I ask the logical follow-up question: "how would you design a system of laws that uniformly makes punishment fit the crime, without favoring one person over another?" The answer we've come up with is insanely complex, because life is insanely complex. You are welcome to suggest alternatives, but I think it's a good thing having a guide who has been specially trained on public policy, politics, and the history of thinking on how societies should progress (not to mention the mundane details, like the actual laws in your jurisdiction). Of course, I am a lawyer, so feel free to accuse me of bias.
Most people are selfish, and don't think about the broader interests of society before they act. We've even come to expect selfishness and short-term greed in our citizens, rather than community-minded thinking and long-term planning. That's the real shame.
TSA is security theater, complete with uniforms for the actors and Uncle Sam as the librettist. If the TSA disappeared tomorrow, the SAME DAY there would be airline-hired security guards in their place, because what airline wants to be sued by 300 angry widows/widowers when a plane gets blown up? And the airline guards would have to actually follow all the privacy laws, unlike the TSA (whom otherwise rational people seem to think should be exempt for some reason).
[sarcasm] And in this recession, how dare you criticize them? TSA is a jobs program -- these people have families to feed, you heartless bastard. [/sarcasm]
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903)