Patents are not that bad... only need two important modifications:
Patents like "We have a way of doing X that has 2000 variables that describes how it's done. Each variable has 100 different possible values. I patent a method of doing X exactly like it's currently done only that variable number 1347 takes the value number 238 and i apply it to this particular field".
There are certain concepts that come from common sense or are too similar to existing concepts applied to other areas that shouldn't be patentable. If, in the example above, we patented every possibility, we would have 2000 x 100 = 200.000 different patents. Let's say that to create a complex tech device you use 100 different components, and each is covered by 5 patents, you could have 100 million possible patents filed that cover what you are developing. Patents too general or too specific shouldn't be allowed. Also, there is an important difference between discovering and inventing. Inventing is combining different existing concepts in a new way that has enough differences to other invents to be considered innovative. Discovering is finding out that something exists or has a given set of characteristics or can be explained in a certain way. You shouldn't be able to patent e=m.c2, or what a chromosome does. That's why we have patents and copyright. Certain ideas that are either very general or very specific should be used to build some product or explained in documents and those can be copyrighted. When you have some idea that is truly innovative, then you can get a patent.
If we accept patents for just anything that may be thought off that is a little bit different from something else, or hasn't been worded in that way before, we will end up by having everything patented.
Think about this:
- I patent the nail as "a cylindric piece of metal with a sharp edge that is inserted into other objects to hold them together."
- I patent the nail as "a cylindric piece of metal with a sharp edge that is inserted into other objects."
- I patent the nail as "a cylindric piece of metal with a sharp edge."
- I patent the nail as "a cylindric piece of metal."
- I patent the nail as "a piece of metal."
- I patent the nail as "something."
Those ideas are inclusive. As i progress to more general definitions, i could progress to more specific definitions ad infinitum.
In order to fix the patent system we need to:
- Set clear time limits for patents.
- Define how specific an idea has to be in order to be considered for a patent.
- Reject ideas that would actually stop innovation (for example, patents so simple and broad that could be applied to many things in many areas).
- Reject ideas that are just an application of common sense, existing laws or formulas, or applications of ideas from one are in other areas.
- Reject ideas that are so obvious, that it's just a matter of time that they appear.
In order to have a theory that explains why we exist, you have to deduce parting from NOW. Religion just sets an arbitrary starting point and determines other arbitrary facts. To put it in a different, mathematical expression:
Science uses squares and division, That is, I accept that all i know is that i currently AM, and even that is just is something that my mind experiences, and from empiric observations establish the existence and relation to "the real world". From then on, i deduce what led to this situation, always remembering that your eyes may trick you, and that actually we just think we have eyes because we can feel and see eyes, so it's also not a fact but something that i accept as correct. I try to understand from a given point of view, without any facts besides the fact that "I am trying to understand".
Religion Uses addition. They set an arbitrary start point, and from then on construct using addition.
So, you may believe that man evolved from other species, but you don't believe in the Evolution Theory, or ANY other scientific theories. All theories are affected by all other theories that you believe.
We, as Atheists, affirm that once life appeared as a very basic form of joint C-H-O-N molecules. From that on, evolution. We don't know yet all the steps in that evolution, but we are sure that once life on earth didn't exist, then a very basic form appeared just because the environment caused those chemical reactions, and that those very basic forms of life somehow evolved into us, into monkeys, into birds... We may not know the specifics, but we know THAT. And we are also sure that, because of this, at some point of evolution the chimp and what we currently are come from the same specimen. We just don't know how far away it is in this tree. It might be some close mammal that we both came from, or maybe our common origin was far away as the form of some primitive unicellular algae. OTH, religious persons say that some magnificent form of superior being designed us all. At the same time. So, we say that we and monkeys evolved from a common hominid somewhere in between the beginning of earth and Fri Apr 13 21:20:36 2007.
And we both are wright. We evolved from monkeys. They didn't =).
That's why i said that eventually the value of c determines this speed in a way. X-rays, visible light, radio signals, microwave are all electromagnetic radiations, they work on the same principle, but their wavelengths differ, so, when we are talking about latency in communications, they are for our purpose completely different things.
c is not the important speed here. Actually, the speed of the radio signals that go from and to the satellite. I think running fiber to the satellite would be pretty hard, and optic comunication using lasers is a bit far away, specially since the satellite is not still, and neither is the earth. Off course, if we take into account that all the "speeds" we may measure are eventually determined by the value of c, your comment would be correct.
Man, why don't you fucking read my whole post before answering??
I have been a user, advocate and developer of Free Software for more than 10 years. I fully understand the GPL. I follow closely what's coming on GPL v.3.
Please read my full post, and you will understand what I'm saying. There are a quite a few interesting Questions and some, maybe wrong, answers in my post. Read it.
I'm tired of GPL. I want just Public Domain. Companies make a profit from GPL source anyway, and there are ways to make pseudo proprietary solutions like Red Hat anyway based on Free Software code.
Not only that, but using the GPL let's all this assholes bother us just like SCO did, and let's all this shit happened.
Just put everything on Public Domain, no accountability, no patent infringement (Maybe, but it's public domain, who are you going to sue?).
Also, no more try to convince people that Free Software is good. People is stupid and they have the shit they asked for. They want to use Windows? Better for us. We already have a huge code base that is free and that everyone can use, and we will continue developing it.
Let's really fuck the big guys. Who is going to profit from using our code to make proprietary products? Some small company like codeweavers?, or even red hat?. Let them do it, that doesn't really affect us. And while we keep using the GPL, we are part of the market, and we play under their rules. What we have to give them is ZERO ACCOUNTABILITY.
And, about their FUD, should we care? Sometime ago i really wanted companies and individuals to know the benefits of Free Software, to use and contribute to it. Right now? The information is out there. The GNU System is complete, and it's the best operating system ever created. We have a great Kernel for it, a few years ago i would have minded if it was Linux and not something produced by the GNU Project. Right now?, i want the code, and i want it free. I still adhere to the ideals of RMS and the FSF, it's just that i want the rights we fought for only for us. Aristotle said that pity was a sick and dangerous state of mind. Thanks to the work started by RMS more than 20 years ago, we have a full Free Operating System, and lots of applications. They are under a Free License and everyone can use it. Trying to help certain people to understand the benefits of using this software after 20 years of doing it is feeling pity for them. And, as Nietzsche said "The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it." They are the weak. We should now get out of the middle, be happy using our software, and let them perish. It's the kind of life they have chosen.
Agreed. Specially since off course a lot of places are gonna block . domains right away. Off course, sites will have a mirror at a.com or.net or.whatever so everyone can access them. Eventually some republican will try to organize the "tubes" of the internet and make . domains for "cuestionable" content mandatory. The definition of cuestionable will be broad and actually very cuestionable =). many ISPs will reduce access to . by charging extra or limiting bandwidth or banning it alltogether. Censorship in the Internet at your fingertips. Yes, i'm paranoid. Yes, this is a bit far fetched, but it's far fetched not because there arent s that would make this a reality, it can be considered far fetched and won't probably happend because people will talk, and people will complaint, and people will write, and people will tell. So it isn't redundant to say it, it's exactly because NOW we say it will happend that it won't.-
First of all, i can spell very well in my native tongue, which is spanish, pedazo de yanqui puto mal cogido por el orto, Second, stop repeating what you hear on the CNN. It's just not true, it has nothing to do with the real world.
I'm going to put Matando Gueros by Brujeria while i see some videos of the WTC falling, with all those bastards dying a horrible and painfull dead you know, so i can relax and go to sleep. Stop messaging me, i will be busy.
You seem to really be an asshole. You remind me of why is so important to wear a condom, specially if you are a bastard like your father. People like you is way more dangerous than AIDS.
The USA is a Capitalism country who advocates killing anyone who stoods in the way of they being more powerfull and rich. They advocate the overthrow of stable governments simply because they do not let them dominate even more.
Ernesto Guevara was a rich Doctor from Argentina, who exchanged everything he had to advocate the change of the corrupt governments in Latin America that were under the control of the USA, to create a big socialist brotherhood of countrys in Latin America. He advocated the overthrow of corrupt governments dictated by the USA just because they were letting people starve.
Fidel Castro is someone smarter, braver, and more ethical than you, that fighted for his ideals, and killed a lot of US-supporting bastards that were sucking the blood of Cuba.
I Don't defend someone just because he is a socialist or a comunist or a capitalist or a metallica fan. I Don't defend the last 40 years of Russia. I Disagree with every single thing made by China in the last century.
And i support Cuba NOT BECAUSE IT'S A COMUNIST COUNTRY. I Do it because what they did and do is correct. If they were a Capitalist country in the same circunstances, i would think the same. There is no need to be comunist to do what Cuba is doing.
Being Comunist or Capitalist is irrelevant at a certain point, the point is if you are for-people or for-yourself.
- Cuba has been lossing 700 million dollars a year since Clinton expanded the embargo
- Bush took this one step further, trying to limit even more the flow of money, by trying to kill turism, reducing the American visits tp Cuba, even those of Cuban inmigrants (It's so terrible that Fidel won't let Cubans out of Cuba? You are doing the same)
- Bush limited the ammount of money that Cuban inmigrants may send back to their country
- The total loss for Cuba is estimaed in 70 BILLION DOLLARS
The USA didn't got what they wanted? Obviously not, they just cared for Cuba because of Russia. They just keep attacking Cuba because "comunism is evil".
An HDI 0.8 or more is considered to represent high development. This includes countries of northern and western Europe, North America, Republic of China (Taiwan), Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, the Southern Cone, Israel, Kuwait and the UAE. Other countries that exhibit high human development amidst countries with lower HDIs include (with their position) Costa Rica (47th), Cuba (52nd), Mexico (53rd) and Panama (56th).
Also, obviously they are way better than the US in public health, and also in education, judging by assholes like you. Get your act toghether before you post.
You don't have the lesser idea of what you are talking about.
It's more like sacrificing his carrier, his fortune, his family, his land and his life to fight for what he beleived, and to try to make this a better world to live in.
Did he succed? In a very reduced part of his goals, yes, he did. Fidel Castro is not everything Ernesto Guevara expected him to be, but he is a good man, an honest person, and he did and does everyday a lot for Cuba. You question his practices? Think about what the USA is doing to Cuba, What is worse? A few anti-castrists killed every year, or the economical disaster the USA causes them, helped by the UN? And, remember what was Cuba before the revolution? Just another prostitution paradise for the US, a poor, uneducated country, with a government totally controlled by the USA. Today is a Comunist country, with an excellent life quality, an educated and healthy population, that might not be rich, but is not hungry. Have you considered what would happend to Cuba if Fidel gives up? May be go back to what it was? The Castrist government doesn't really have a choice.
This eXtreme-whatever fashion really has to end. It's just the new buzzword, but it has been way to far this time. Everything from candy and books to programming and movies are X.
We don't need EXTREME things, why don't you try with creative, different, innovative things? People lives such boring lifes, and they have been buying shit for so many years that all the usual lies used to sell are not longer valid, so we have to go the the limits, THIS time there really is something new!. Bullshit.
All this stuff is the Paulo Coelho of Programming. Bullshit literature for those not manly enough to just code C/C++/Perl/Python/PHP. This are real languages, and they have all we need. But we are in the reign of Coelho's bullshit books; and so, something being just good is not enough anymore. It has to be different to everything else in every way possible, it needs shinny mirrors all over it, and it needs to be easy, it must "change your life", and "take you to new levels".
I'm tired of this world, that's why i don't live in it.
Just knowing on which quarter of the roulette the ball will fall is more than enough. You don't just go and put everything in one number. Putting money in consecutive numbers is a common practice. If you know it's going to fall arround 17, then three persons working togheter may place their bets on 17 and consecutive numbers.
Without help, you can win. Reducing the possible ressults to a 25%, or even 50% is good enough for most players. Thay may not win an all bets, but at the end of the night, they will get out of the casino with a very large ammount of cash.
Slashdot Mirror
Patents are not that bad ... only need two important modifications:
Patents like "We have a way of doing X that has 2000 variables that describes how it's done. Each variable has 100 different possible values. I patent a method of doing X exactly like it's currently done only that variable number 1347 takes the value number 238 and i apply it to this particular field".
There are certain concepts that come from common sense or are too similar to existing concepts applied to other areas that shouldn't be patentable. If, in the example above, we patented every possibility, we would have 2000 x 100 = 200.000 different patents. Let's say that to create a complex tech device you use 100 different components, and each is covered by 5 patents, you could have 100 million possible patents filed that cover what you are developing.
Patents too general or too specific shouldn't be allowed. Also, there is an important difference between discovering and inventing. Inventing is combining different existing concepts in a new way that has enough differences to other invents to be considered innovative. Discovering is finding out that something exists or has a given set of characteristics or can be explained in a certain way. You shouldn't be able to patent e=m.c2, or what a chromosome does. That's why we have patents and copyright. Certain ideas that are either very general or very specific should be used to build some product or explained in documents and those can be copyrighted. When you have some idea that is truly innovative, then you can get a patent.
If we accept patents for just anything that may be thought off that is a little bit different from something else, or hasn't been worded in that way before, we will end up by having everything patented.
Think about this:
- I patent the nail as "a cylindric piece of metal with a sharp edge that is inserted into other objects to hold them together."
- I patent the nail as "a cylindric piece of metal with a sharp edge that is inserted into other objects."
- I patent the nail as "a cylindric piece of metal with a sharp edge."
- I patent the nail as "a cylindric piece of metal."
- I patent the nail as "a piece of metal."
- I patent the nail as "something."
Those ideas are inclusive. As i progress to more general definitions, i could progress to more specific definitions ad infinitum.
In order to fix the patent system we need to:
- Set clear time limits for patents.
- Define how specific an idea has to be in order to be considered for a patent.
- Reject ideas that would actually stop innovation (for example, patents so simple and broad that could be applied to many things in many areas).
- Reject ideas that are just an application of common sense, existing laws or formulas, or applications of ideas from one are in other areas.
- Reject ideas that are so obvious, that it's just a matter of time that they appear.
Very well said sir.
In order to have a theory that explains why we exist, you have to deduce parting from NOW. Religion just sets an arbitrary starting point and determines other arbitrary facts. To put it in a different, mathematical expression:
Science uses squares and division, That is, I accept that all i know is that i currently AM, and even that is just is something that my mind experiences, and from empiric observations establish the existence and relation to "the real world". From then on, i deduce what led to this situation, always remembering that your eyes may trick you, and that actually we just think we have eyes because we can feel and see eyes, so it's also not a fact but something that i accept as correct. I try to understand from a given point of view, without any facts besides the fact that "I am trying to understand".
Religion Uses addition. They set an arbitrary start point, and from then on construct using addition.
So, you may believe that man evolved from other species, but you don't believe in the Evolution Theory, or ANY other scientific theories. All theories are affected by all other theories that you believe.
"the country"??
I Think you mean you mean the country where you currently are (USA).
This may be news to you, but the world is a little bigger than that. Get used to it.
Idiocracy. What a great movie that talks exactly about this possibility some 500 years in the future.
We, as Atheists, affirm that once life appeared as a very basic form of joint C-H-O-N molecules. From that on, evolution. We don't know yet all the steps in that evolution, but we are sure that once life on earth didn't exist, then a very basic form appeared just because the environment caused those chemical reactions, and that those very basic forms of life somehow evolved into us, into monkeys, into birds ... We may not know the specifics, but we know THAT. And we are also sure that, because of this, at some point of evolution the chimp and what we currently are come from the same specimen. We just don't know how far away it is in this tree. It might be some close mammal that we both came from, or maybe our common origin was far away as the form of some primitive unicellular algae.
OTH, religious persons say that some magnificent form of superior being designed us all. At the same time.
So, we say that we and monkeys evolved from a common hominid somewhere in between the beginning of earth and Fri Apr 13 21:20:36 2007.
And we both are wright. We evolved from monkeys. They didn't =).
"The Bible? Evolution put it there to test our stupidity."
"I think Evolution put you here to test my superiority, Dude."
That's why i said that eventually the value of c determines this speed in a way. X-rays, visible light, radio signals, microwave are all electromagnetic radiations, they work on the same principle, but their wavelengths differ, so, when we are talking about latency in communications, they are for our purpose completely different things.
c is not the important speed here. Actually, the speed of the radio signals that go from and to the satellite. I think running fiber to the satellite would be pretty hard, and optic comunication using lasers is a bit far away, specially since the satellite is not still, and neither is the earth.
Off course, if we take into account that all the "speeds" we may measure are eventually determined by the value of c, your comment would be correct.
Subtle. Elegant.
Best. Joke. Ever.
I won't be able to LEGALLY distribute the code. ... The Law and The Internet are two different worlds ...
Try to erase every copy of goatse
Man, why don't you fucking read my whole post before answering??
I have been a user, advocate and developer of Free Software for more than 10 years. I fully understand the GPL. I follow closely what's coming on GPL v.3.
Please read my full post, and you will understand what I'm saying.
There are a quite a few interesting Questions and some, maybe wrong, answers in my post. Read it.
I'm tired of GPL. I want just Public Domain. Companies make a profit from GPL source anyway, and there are ways to make pseudo proprietary solutions like Red Hat anyway based on Free Software code.
Not only that, but using the GPL let's all this assholes bother us just like SCO did, and let's all this shit happened.
Just put everything on Public Domain, no accountability, no patent infringement (Maybe, but it's public domain, who are you going to sue?).
Also, no more try to convince people that Free Software is good. People is stupid and they have the shit they asked for. They want to use Windows? Better for us. We already have a huge code base that is free and that everyone can use, and we will continue developing it.
Let's really fuck the big guys. Who is going to profit from using our code to make proprietary products? Some small company like codeweavers?, or even red hat?. Let them do it, that doesn't really affect us.
And while we keep using the GPL, we are part of the market, and we play under their rules. What we have to give them is ZERO ACCOUNTABILITY.
And, about their FUD, should we care? Sometime ago i really wanted companies and individuals to know the benefits of Free Software, to use and contribute to it. Right now? The information is out there. The GNU System is complete, and it's the best operating system ever created. We have a great Kernel for it, a few years ago i would have minded if it was Linux and not something produced by the GNU Project. Right now?, i want the code, and i want it free. I still adhere to the ideals of RMS and the FSF, it's just that i want the rights we fought for only for us. Aristotle said that pity was a sick and dangerous state of mind. Thanks to the work started by RMS more than 20 years ago, we have a full Free Operating System, and lots of applications. They are under a Free License and everyone can use it. Trying to help certain people to understand the benefits of using this software after 20 years of doing it is feeling pity for them. And, as Nietzsche said "The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it."
They are the weak. We should now get out of the middle, be happy using our software, and let them perish. It's the kind of life they have chosen.
Agreed. Specially since off course a lot of places are gonna block . domains right away. Off course, sites will have a mirror at a .com or .net or .whatever so everyone can access them. Eventually some republican will try to organize the "tubes" of the internet and make . domains for "cuestionable" content mandatory. The definition of cuestionable will be broad and actually very cuestionable =). many ISPs will reduce access to . by charging extra or limiting bandwidth or banning it alltogether.
Censorship in the Internet at your fingertips.
Yes, i'm paranoid. Yes, this is a bit far fetched, but it's far fetched not because there arent s that would make this a reality, it can be considered far fetched and won't probably happend because people will talk, and people will complaint, and people will write, and people will tell. So it isn't redundant to say it, it's exactly because NOW we say it will happend that it won't.-
There are people who plays videogames, and there are people who doesnt. There are people who kill persons,and some that doesnt.
Lets play with statistics:
75% of all gamers play GTA
1% of GTA players commit crimes
5% of all gamers commit crimes
10% of society commit crimes
30% of all crimminals play games
20% of all crimminals play GTA
I just made up those numbers, maybe some are not close to the real numbers, but im sure they are proportional.
There is no relation beetween games and crime.
First of all, i can spell very well in my native tongue, which is spanish, pedazo de yanqui puto mal cogido por el orto, Second, stop repeating what you hear on the CNN. It's just not true, it has nothing to do with the real world.
I'm going to put Matando Gueros by Brujeria while i see some videos of the WTC falling, with all those bastards dying a horrible and painfull dead you know, so i can relax and go to sleep. Stop messaging me, i will be busy.
Maybe because you replied to my comment trying to imply that because of my views i hate Cuba?
...
Just a guess
You seem to really be an asshole.
You remind me of why is so important to wear a condom, specially if you are a bastard like your father.
People like you is way more dangerous than AIDS.
The USA is a Capitalism country who advocates killing anyone who stoods in the way of they being more powerfull and rich. They advocate the overthrow of stable governments simply because they do not let them dominate even more.
Ernesto Guevara was a rich Doctor from Argentina, who exchanged everything he had to advocate the change of the corrupt governments in Latin America that were under the control of the USA, to create a big socialist brotherhood of countrys in Latin America. He advocated the overthrow of corrupt governments dictated by the USA just because they were letting people starve.
Fidel Castro is someone smarter, braver, and more ethical than you, that fighted for his ideals, and killed a lot of US-supporting bastards that were sucking the blood of Cuba.
I Don't defend someone just because he is a socialist or a comunist or a capitalist or a metallica fan. I Don't defend the last 40 years of Russia. I Disagree with every single thing made by China in the last century.
And i support Cuba NOT BECAUSE IT'S A COMUNIST COUNTRY. I Do it because what they did and do is correct. If they were a Capitalist country in the same circunstances, i would think the same. There is no need to be comunist to do what Cuba is doing.
Being Comunist or Capitalist is irrelevant at a certain point, the point is if you are for-people or for-yourself.
Sad but true? Who said this is sad?
One gringo that dies before the age of 18 is one gringo that won't be able to fuck the rest of the world.
In this world, we need more Cubans and less yanquis.
1st of all, who told you that there is that kind of poverty in Cuba?
1 41414
Read http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=196984&cid=16
2nd You ar NOBODY to tell cuba a FUCKING THING.
About the embargo:
- Cuba has been lossing 700 million dollars a year since Clinton expanded the embargo
- Bush took this one step further, trying to limit even more the flow of money, by trying to kill turism, reducing the American visits tp Cuba, even those of Cuban inmigrants (It's so terrible that Fidel won't let Cubans out of Cuba? You are doing the same)
- Bush limited the ammount of money that Cuban inmigrants may send back to their country
- The total loss for Cuba is estimaed in 70 BILLION DOLLARS
The USA didn't got what they wanted? Obviously not, they just cared for Cuba because of Russia. They just keep attacking Cuba because "comunism is evil".
From Wikipedia:
_ Human_Development_Index#endnote_2
An HDI 0.8 or more is considered to represent high development. This includes countries of northern and western Europe, North America, Republic of China (Taiwan), Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, the Southern Cone, Israel, Kuwait and the UAE. Other countries that exhibit high human development amidst countries with lower HDIs include (with their position) Costa Rica (47th), Cuba (52nd), Mexico (53rd) and Panama (56th).
Go check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by
Also, obviously they are way better than the US in public health, and also in education, judging by assholes like you.
Get your act toghether before you post.
You don't have the lesser idea of what you are talking about.
It's more like sacrificing his carrier, his fortune, his family, his land and his life to fight for what he beleived, and to try to make this a better world to live in.
Did he succed? In a very reduced part of his goals, yes, he did. Fidel Castro is not everything Ernesto Guevara expected him to be, but he is a good man, an honest person, and he did and does everyday a lot for Cuba.
You question his practices? Think about what the USA is doing to Cuba, What is worse? A few anti-castrists killed every year, or the economical disaster the USA causes them, helped by the UN? And, remember what was Cuba before the revolution? Just another prostitution paradise for the US, a poor, uneducated country, with a government totally controlled by the USA. Today is a Comunist country, with an excellent life quality, an educated and healthy population, that might not be rich, but is not hungry. Have you considered what would happend to Cuba if Fidel gives up? May be go back to what it was? The Castrist government doesn't really have a choice.
This eXtreme-whatever fashion really has to end. It's just the new buzzword, but it has been way to far this time. Everything from candy and books to programming and movies are X.
We don't need EXTREME things, why don't you try with creative, different, innovative things?
People lives such boring lifes, and they have been buying shit for so many years that all the usual lies used to sell are not longer valid, so we have to go the the limits, THIS time there really is something new!. Bullshit.
All this stuff is the Paulo Coelho of Programming. Bullshit literature for those not manly enough to just code C/C++/Perl/Python/PHP. This are real languages, and they have all we need. But we are in the reign of Coelho's bullshit books; and so, something being just good is not enough anymore. It has to be different to everything else in every way possible, it needs shinny mirrors all over it, and it needs to be easy, it must "change your life", and "take you to new levels".
I'm tired of this world, that's why i don't live in it.
An AC posted this, I Don't have modpoints so i'm taking it out of -1 hell.
u lettecomputer.htm these machines are FAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mark Howe is a scamster! see this website: http://www.roulettesystemreviews.com/r-markhowero
Just knowing on which quarter of the roulette the ball will fall is more than enough. You don't just go and put everything in one number. Putting money in consecutive numbers is a common practice. If you know it's going to fall arround 17, then three persons working togheter may place their bets on 17 and consecutive numbers.
Without help, you can win. Reducing the possible ressults to a 25%, or even 50% is good enough for most players. Thay may not win an all bets, but at the end of the night, they will get out of the casino with a very large ammount of cash.