The amount of crime is inversely proportional for the tolerance of the crime. That is, if the punishment for a crime were to be severe enough there would be little of it.
Ignorant bullshit!
If that was true then there would be virtually no murders in the US due to the death penalty. We all know how that worked out, the US now is one of the last places in the developed world with a death penalty and also the place with the highest murder rate.
FTFA: Thing is, this guy only came forward after the fact that the flight crew had realized some kind of foreign object was blocking the lavatory from beeing flushed. It was even after they had contacted the authorities on the ground about this suspicious object. I dont think they had much choice other than going through the motions in case it actually was something dangerous.
But how about reading the provided summary at least, or what part of "study of changes in recurring natural events, such as when plants flowered" did you not understand?
Kids follow fashion like sheep, dont think for themselves and have bad taste in music. Is is a characteristic of the human species, nothing strange at all. It has been this way for thousands of year, at least as long as we have a written historical record.
What is amazing, is that every generation seems to think that 'their generation' is somehow different. I suppose realising the truth is to depressing.
Of course 'grandpa' has just forgotten his own youth, when he followed fashion like the other good little sheeps.
However, once the application is submitted, the contents are retroactively protected if the application succeeds.
IANAL but it is my understanding after dealing with such lawyers that patent protection is from filing date. But you usually can only get awarded back-damages from the publication date.
Second, the fact that the site is "public" is ot the relevant fact for patent validity. What matters is if the inventor makes one of a few categories of "disclosure". That includes most avenues of publishing, sales, etc. But if the USPTO does something that resembles disclosure (like posting it in a review wiki), they are still free to give it whatever legal definition they deem appropriate. And there's no way that they would define any part of their review process as a disclosure.
You are free to publicly disclose your invention in any way, form or shape after you have filed the patent application. At least this is what our lawyers told us.
A sale might not be considered disclosure if the invention is of such a nature that you cannot tell how it works be simply studying the product. (I.E. a black box, some software patents etc).
>The patent office actually has a procedure to handle national security sensitive patents. Some examiners have a >security clearance, and the patents are granted but held in secret. It kind of runs counterintuitive to the >public disclosure nature of patents, but it's there nonetheless.
That is not correct.
The government can declare a patent application secret due to national security, but if they do then the patent will not get granted until the secrecy order is lifted again. The patent process is freezed right at the step of actually granting the patent. So you cannot actually have 'black patents' that no one knows about but 'black patent applications' which is a bit different.
Publication is a very fundamental part of the patenting process, if you do not want your competition to know about your invention then you cannot patent it either. The idea is that if your invention really is novel then you will get protection sooner or later and can go after anyone thats infringing on your patent.
If your application does not get approved, then you are correct that you will have lost any edge on your competition by way of secrecy. But then again, if your application is rejected then its most likely not very valuable anyway.
BTW: This is the reason a lot of millitary research or technology deemed important for national security is never patented. Patent applications implies publishing.
Well, thats good for Xerox. Perhaps they might save that trademark. But the very fact that you say "I used to hear it" means it have been in generic use, also several dictionaries list it as a english verb. This implies that they might actually loose it if they ever have to go to court over it.
Actually I have to disagree. Xerox is defacto an accepted english word for a copying machine or even the process of copying itself (xeroxing). That no court of law has yet struck down the Trademark does not change the reality that the trademark is now very diluted indeed. Xerox Corp might be fighting this tooth and nail but it wont change reality. They might however prevent other companies using the trademark in their own marketing, and it might prevent the courts invalidating the trademark. But it WILL NOT prevent the populace from using the word in everyday english.
Also this does not invalidate my argument in my previous post. After all if you RTFA you will se this is exactly why Google is sending out those letters.
But I grant you that I could have chosen a better example like; aspirin, bikini, cola, margarine, petrol etc which are all genericized trademarks.
If google/googling effectively becomes a part of the English language then their trademark becomes part of the public domain. You cannot have/enforce trademark on generic words.
When this happens everyone and their dog can call their own search engine for google. This will greatly reduce the value of their trademark. It might already be to late now, google is in the latest versions of Oxford dictionary.
BTW: This is what happened to Xerox. 'A xerox machine' once used to mean that the machine actually was made by Xerox Corporation.
>The fact that you can't do anything in Windows without being the admin has always been a major source of problems. If they had >a model whereby users could install software into their own "user programs" or somesuch, and that was separated from the rest >of the damned OS, these things couldn't happen.
Strangly enough this is possible. You can install almost any kinds of software in "user space" on Windows, except programs that need to hook into the kernel like device drivers, daemons, antivirus software and such. But I guess this exception would hold for *nix system too.
However the installer must be made for it. Just install files in the users home directory, and write any registry changes under HKEY_CURRENT_USER. That part of the registry is stored in a separate file in the users home directory and wont effect other users. It is even possible to register file types, register dll's/ocx's, desktop enhancment (like context menues), new protocols etc and only have it visible for that particular user.
The problem seems to be that NO ONE USES THIS! Not that it is not possible. I suppose (guess) this is mostly due to developer inertia, doing it the way they always did it, and possibly due to bad or to little information from Microsoft.
The reason I know this, is that I wrote the software installer in the company I work for, and one of the requirements I got was that the software should be possible to install without administrator priviligies. My installer checks for admin privs and only offers "all users" install if with administrator privs. This works on Windows XP & 2003, I have not checked older versions since we do not support them.
It can be done and it is not even that hard, but sadly so few developers/companies seems to want to do that extra effort.
PLEASE NOTE: I'm not trying to excuse Microsoft in any way. I still think it is mostly they to blame for this mess since they did not establish and make known proper routines and guidelines for installing software without admin priviligies in the early days of Windows.
-- Dont bother to flame my spelling/grammar unless your Norwegian is better than my English.
Only, ONLY saved 10.000 lives? That is 3 times as many that was killed in the 911 attacks! And even more, the 911 attack was a one time event, traffic accidents happens regularly on a pretty stable basis each year.
I would say mandatory use of seatbelts (a very minor inconvenience) makes a hell of a lot more sense than all this hysteria concerning terrorist attacks, and will save hundreths as many lifes as all the draconian anti-terror safeguards put together will.
>Additionally, when will the media stop referenceing hot coffee? While rockstar took a retarded route in defending >themselves initially, the fact is, while the code to show it existed in the game it took a 3rd party modification to make >it actually accessible. Why is that so goddamned hard to understand?
It is not hard to understand at all, even media reporters can understand this.
But it destroys the story!
Media absolutely hates facts that destroys the story and will often go to great length ignoring such facts.
Slashdot Mirror
The amount of crime is inversely proportional for the tolerance of the crime. That is, if the punishment for a crime were to be severe enough there would be little of it.
Ignorant bullshit!
If that was true then there would be virtually no murders in the US due to the death penalty. We all know how that worked out, the US now is one of the last places in the developed world with a death penalty and also the place with the highest murder rate.
FTFA: Thing is, this guy only came forward after the fact that the flight crew had realized some kind of foreign object was blocking the lavatory from beeing flushed. It was even after they had contacted the authorities on the ground about this suspicious object. I dont think they had much choice other than going through the motions in case it actually was something dangerous.
Meaningless? How can they be meaningless when quite a large number of people even denies they occure at all.
First step is to document that changes are indeed happening. Then, and only then, does it give any meaning to study *why* they happen.
You may very well be right that this might be nothing more than natural occuring changes, but it by no means make studying them meaningless.
I know this is Slashdot and no one reads TFA.
But how about reading the provided summary at least, or what part of "study of changes in recurring natural events, such as when plants flowered" did you not understand?
Kids follow fashion like sheep, dont think for themselves and have bad taste in music. Is is a characteristic of the human species, nothing strange at all. It has been this way for thousands of year, at least as long as we have a written historical record.
What is amazing, is that every generation seems to think that 'their generation' is somehow different. I suppose realising the truth is to depressing.
Of course 'grandpa' has just forgotten his own youth, when he followed fashion like the other good little sheeps.
Did you live under a rock 10 years ago? Even here in Europe we heard about the suspicions.
Wish I had mod points for you. Very insightful post.
Never heard of someone confessing to something they didn't do.. that just sounds insane. :|
Yes, that is why insane people are known to do it from time to time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_confession
However, once the application is submitted, the contents are retroactively protected if the application succeeds.
IANAL but it is my understanding after dealing with such lawyers that patent protection is from filing date. But you usually can only get awarded back-damages from the publication date.
Second, the fact that the site is "public" is ot the relevant fact for patent validity. What matters is if the inventor makes one of a few categories of "disclosure". That includes most avenues of publishing, sales, etc. But if the USPTO does something that resembles disclosure (like posting it in a review wiki), they are still free to give it whatever legal definition they deem appropriate. And there's no way that they would define any part of their review process as a disclosure.
You are free to publicly disclose your invention in any way, form or shape after you have filed the patent application. At least this is what our lawyers told us.
A sale might not be considered disclosure if the invention is of such a nature that you cannot tell how it works be simply studying the product. (I.E. a black box, some software patents etc).
>The patent office actually has a procedure to handle national security sensitive patents. Some examiners have a
>security clearance, and the patents are granted but held in secret. It kind of runs counterintuitive to the
>public disclosure nature of patents, but it's there nonetheless.
That is not correct.
The government can declare a patent application secret due to national security, but if they do then the patent will not get granted until the secrecy order is lifted again. The patent process is freezed right at the step of actually granting the patent. So you cannot actually have 'black patents' that no one knows about but 'black patent applications' which is a bit different.
Source: http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2005/07/1716951.php
Bullshit.
h tml
Already today the USPTO publishes pending patent applications, usually years before they are either approved or denied.
You can see for yourself here: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.
Publication is a very fundamental part of the patenting process, if you do not want your competition to know about your invention then you cannot patent it either. The idea is that if your invention really is novel then you will get protection sooner or later and can go after anyone thats infringing on your patent.
If your application does not get approved, then you are correct that you will have lost any edge on your competition by way of secrecy. But then again, if your application is rejected then its most likely not very valuable anyway.
BTW: This is the reason a lot of millitary research or technology deemed important for national security is never patented. Patent applications implies publishing.
Well, thats good for Xerox. Perhaps they might save that trademark. But the very fact that you say "I used to hear it" means it have been in generic use, also several dictionaries list it as a english verb. This implies that they might actually loose it if they ever have to go to court over it.
Actually I have to disagree. Xerox is defacto an accepted english word for a copying machine or even the process of copying itself (xeroxing). That no court of law has yet struck down the Trademark does not change the reality that the trademark is now very diluted indeed. Xerox Corp might be fighting this tooth and nail but it wont change reality. They might however prevent other companies using the trademark in their own marketing, and it might prevent the courts invalidating the trademark. But it WILL NOT prevent the populace from using the word in everyday english.
Also this does not invalidate my argument in my previous post. After all if you RTFA you will se this is exactly why Google is sending out those letters.
But I grant you that I could have chosen a better example like; aspirin, bikini, cola, margarine, petrol etc which are all genericized trademarks.
Yes, you missed something.
If google/googling effectively becomes a part of the English language then their trademark becomes part of the public domain. You cannot have/enforce trademark on generic words.
When this happens everyone and their dog can call their own search engine for google. This will greatly reduce the value of their trademark. It might already be to late now, google is in the latest versions of Oxford dictionary.
BTW: This is what happened to Xerox. 'A xerox machine' once used to mean that the machine actually was made by Xerox Corporation.
Sounds like an urban myth.
>The fact that you can't do anything in Windows without being the admin has always been a major source of problems. If they had
>a model whereby users could install software into their own "user programs" or somesuch, and that was separated from the rest
>of the damned OS, these things couldn't happen.
Strangly enough this is possible. You can install almost any kinds of software in "user space" on Windows, except programs that need to hook into the kernel like device drivers, daemons, antivirus software and such. But I guess this exception would hold for *nix system too.
However the installer must be made for it. Just install files in the users home directory, and write any registry changes under HKEY_CURRENT_USER. That part of the registry is stored in a separate file in the users home directory and wont effect other users. It is even possible to register file types, register dll's/ocx's, desktop enhancment (like context menues), new protocols etc and only have it visible for that particular user.
The problem seems to be that NO ONE USES THIS! Not that it is not possible. I suppose (guess) this is mostly due to developer inertia, doing it the way they always did it, and possibly due to bad or to little information from Microsoft.
The reason I know this, is that I wrote the software installer in the company I work for, and one of the requirements I got was that the software should be possible to install without administrator priviligies. My installer checks for admin privs and only offers "all users" install if with administrator privs. This works on Windows XP & 2003, I have not checked older versions since we do not support them.
It can be done and it is not even that hard, but sadly so few developers/companies seems to want to do that extra effort.
PLEASE NOTE: I'm not trying to excuse Microsoft in any way. I still think it is mostly they to blame for this mess since they did not establish and make known proper routines and guidelines for installing software without admin priviligies in the early days of Windows.
-- Dont bother to flame my spelling/grammar unless your Norwegian is better than my English.
Only, ONLY saved 10.000 lives? That is 3 times as many that was killed in the 911 attacks! And even more, the 911 attack was a one time event, traffic accidents happens regularly on a pretty stable basis each year.
I would say mandatory use of seatbelts (a very minor inconvenience) makes a hell of a lot more sense than all this hysteria concerning terrorist attacks, and will save hundreths as many lifes as all the draconian anti-terror safeguards put together will.
Perhaps time to get a sense of perspective?
In other words, now there is a summary death penalty for fleeing the police.
Wow I'm really happy I live in the western civilization, you know the one with freedom and democarcy.
Is that why he needed all the oil in Iraq?
This is sound not light. 2.5 cm wavelength is correct.
More like young at ear ;)
It seems to me that "whether it's their business or not" is exactly the question considering the context (ths ./ article).
And what was that interesting experience?
Did they shout out your prescription loud or something?
>Additionally, when will the media stop referenceing hot coffee? While rockstar took a retarded route in defending
>themselves initially, the fact is, while the code to show it existed in the game it took a 3rd party modification to make
>it actually accessible. Why is that so goddamned hard to understand?
It is not hard to understand at all, even media reporters can understand this.
But it destroys the story!
Media absolutely hates facts that destroys the story and will often go to great length ignoring such facts.
Bah! By now, everyone knows you can "punch through" the EM windows that are created by normal shield frequency rotation! ;-)