This isn't true. A prior art will still cause an application to be denied under 35 USC 102. This means that if any sort of prior art is published (i.e. available to the public) that would anticipate or render an application invalid, it would still operate to render the application unpatentable.
Yeah, sure.
Like USPTO concerns itself with prior art searches. Or like you're going to waste hundreds thousands of dollars in multi-year lawsuits if a patent troll approaches you with 'an offer you can't refuse'.
I'm a native Russian speaker and this phrase, indeed, can't be mistranslated this way (I just used it as a well known example). However, it's true that attempting to automatically translate ANYTHING non-trivial from English to Russian invariably results in hilarity.
For example, I've tried to translate the next Slashdot article's blurb:
"Google Voice users learned late Monday that the service now has a way of making purely Internet-based phone calls. Making a SIP call with a "sip:" prefix, the Google Voice phone number and @sip.voice.google.com skips the conventional phone network entirely, saving users cellphone minutes. Disruptive Telephony tested it and found that a call worked "great.""
"Disruptive" was translated as "explosive" in the sense of "trinitrotoluene", and "great" was translated as "big". Translating it back resulted in:
"Google Voice users learned late Monday that the service is now a way to make a clean Internet phone calls Make a call with SIP. "Sip:" prefix, Google Voice phone transmits the number and@sip.voice.google.com common telephone network fully, saving minutes of mobile phone users. Explosive Telephone tested it and found that the call worked "big""
You can probably still guess the meaning, but it's not exactly easy.
Mail and DNS is easy, just add backup MX records with lower priority. For Web, not so much.
The real solution is getting your own AS ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_system_(Internet) ) and PI range from your RIR. It costs about $1700 initially with $100 a year for maintenance. This will allow you to do real seamless failover.
Russian fantasy is actually quite different. The motif of 'restoring the balance' is present in a lot of works, but quite a lot of fantasy books focus on _transformations_ of society or about factions vying to transform society. Lukjanenko's 'Night Watch' (which is available in English) is a typical example.
I particularly like Loginov's "The Many-handed God of Dalayn", though I'm not sure it's translated.
This might be a reflection of recent turbulent history in Russia.
No, probably the most of the world will run on electricity with biogasoline/biodiesel used where electricity is not cost-effective (like, farm machinery, ships, airplanes, etc.)
Spread out over 20 years, the economy is not really an issue. That works out at about 6 trillions a year for the whole world, that's about 10% of the global GDP.
In reality, probably even less if one considers impacts of mass production and technological improvements.
LISP is old. It's seriously old, even though its concepts are still very advanced.
It doesn't have pattern matching - a staple of modern functional languages, for example. There's no algebraic types and they can't be emulated using macroses without writing half of a buggy Haskell implementation in LISP. No good list comprehensions as well. LISP macroses also look antiquated now - there's no quasiquotation.
Also, not much tools.
And as for niche markets, they does not mean anything. There's a niche market in VB6, MUMPS, COBOL and Fortran.
"You do know there is flight reservation management software, and web-store CMSes written in LISP, right?"
No I don't. Haven't seen them, maybe it's possible to find them if one looks in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of The Leopard". Yeah, they might exist but they are irrelevant.
No popular sites I know use LISP, no popular tools I know use LISP, etc. And I know a lot of tools.
Oh, sorry. I know of one tool which used LISP. It was Microsoft's CLR, which initially used LISP to implement GC. It later got translated to C# and then moved to F#.
"LISP is pretty much perfect, thing is, everything else is good enough, making them eternal enemies..."
Yep. And you know what else is perfect? - Hitler!
About 10 years ago I've seen a nice quote: "LISP programmers use the 'lazy evaluation' system - programs are not written until they are called. And because they are not written they are not getting called. And so nothing gets written in LISP." Nothing has changed since then, except for LISP programmers' hubris maybe.
"The enterprise "java app" is actually a plugin to a framework which runs on an application server. To get your code to compile/test/debug cycle you need all 3."
Sure. And you also need an OS, and microcode in firmware. Oh, and probably electric connection as well.
"Not really a problem, until you find out that each of them have their own rats nest of xml configs, in not-quite-readable form. "
My current app has exactly one 20-line XML config, even though it uses Hibernate, Guice, GWT, querydsl, Wicket with about 50 indirect dependencies.
Though I'm going to move it back to Maven, so I guess I'll have to live with 10-20 kilobytes of POM files because they are nicer tha uber-kewl DSLs.
"But not a problem, because yet another 3 plugins exist to provides a web-frontend to each of those java stacks. Of course, you end up subclassing a class that has already been subclassed 8 times, with 4 different xml configs."
And _that_ is pure nonsense.
"Don't get me wrong - I'm all for more abstraction, only the problem I see with all of these chained stacks is that they are abstracting *away* from the solution and towards a technology, and not abstracting towards the solution and away from the technology."
Whoa, a whole shitload of managerial bullshit. Hint: you should use word 'synergistic' more.
Frameworks merely allow one to work on the solutions with additional tools. That's all.
"And I can solve most problems faster in Lisp than in Java, C++, python or most other things. What was your point?"
I somehow doubt it. LISP programmers always brag how LISP is uber-productive, yet the end result of 50 years of LISP is dying Emacs. At least Python people produce interesting software.
Uhm. Have you ever had a thought that 'solved' problems tend to be unsolved in reality?
15 years ago most of Java enterprise stuff would have been written in crashy C++ with a lot of impenetrable CORBA mappings and weird UI frameworks. Or maybe if you are 'lucky' in impenetrable COBOL.
And actually, I can write software in Java (and now in Scala) single-handedly faster than several Python programmers. Because I know how to use all these tons of frameworks.
Well, if a better influenza vaccine comes along, then maybe achieving herd immunity will be possible. Right now it isn't even if we vaccinate everyone.
No. Russia is first-to-file as US is going to be soon.
"With this new system, if IBM files for a patent in Europe and Microsoft files for the same patent in the US for the same thing, but at a later date, then the courts can easily look at the file date of IBM's patent, and then Microsoft's patent, and determine immediately which one came first."
Except that foreign patents are not automatically considered to be relevant for the 'first-to-file'.
In Russia in this case even if MS loses the court battle and IBM is granted patent in the US based on a European filing, MS is still allowed to use the invention (with some restrictions).
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't true. A prior art will still cause an application to be denied under 35 USC 102. This means that if any sort of prior art is published (i.e. available to the public) that would anticipate or render an application invalid, it would still operate to render the application unpatentable.
Yeah, sure. Like USPTO concerns itself with prior art searches. Or like you're going to waste hundreds thousands of dollars in multi-year lawsuits if a patent troll approaches you with 'an offer you can't refuse'.
For example, I've tried to translate the next Slashdot article's blurb:
"Google Voice users learned late Monday that the service now has a way of making purely Internet-based phone calls. Making a SIP call with a "sip:" prefix, the Google Voice phone number and @sip.voice.google.com skips the conventional phone network entirely, saving users cellphone minutes. Disruptive Telephony tested it and found that a call worked "great.""
"Disruptive" was translated as "explosive" in the sense of "trinitrotoluene", and "great" was translated as "big". Translating it back resulted in:
"Google Voice users learned late Monday that the service is now a way to make a clean Internet phone calls Make a call with SIP. "Sip:" prefix, Google Voice phone transmits the number and@sip.voice.google.com common telephone network fully, saving minutes of mobile phone users. Explosive Telephone tested it and found that the call worked "big""
You can probably still guess the meaning, but it's not exactly easy.
The vodka is good, but the meat is rotten!
Inkjets are good for printing on transparent film and non-bendable objects.
So add 3 independent computers so they can vote on each decision. It's not like computer power is expensive today.
Standards of proof are already as high as they get. Yet still innocent people are killed by the death penalty.
You can argue that relatively few innocents are killed or that the ends justify the means.
But you can't argue with the fact that not only criminals are executed.
Because it kills innocent people. That's why.
It's quite simple.
Actually, it's not true.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/international-polls-and-studies - support for death penalty in most progressive countries is either low or declining.
And yes, death penalty is a neanderthal throwback.
"You're a consumer, aren't you? Do you like people who think they are smarter than you telling you what to do... because they are smarter?"
If my doctor tells me to do something I'll do it. Because he's smarter and more educated in medicine than I am.
Because consumers are stupid - that's why.
No, the government should stop people accepting SSNs as authenticators.
They work just fine as ID numbers.
Mail and DNS is easy, just add backup MX records with lower priority. For Web, not so much.
The real solution is getting your own AS ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_system_(Internet) ) and PI range from your RIR. It costs about $1700 initially with $100 a year for maintenance. This will allow you to do real seamless failover.
Russian fantasy is actually quite different. The motif of 'restoring the balance' is present in a lot of works, but quite a lot of fantasy books focus on _transformations_ of society or about factions vying to transform society. Lukjanenko's 'Night Watch' (which is available in English) is a typical example.
I particularly like Loginov's "The Many-handed God of Dalayn", though I'm not sure it's translated.
This might be a reflection of recent turbulent history in Russia.
No, probably the most of the world will run on electricity with biogasoline/biodiesel used where electricity is not cost-effective (like, farm machinery, ships, airplanes, etc.)
Spread out over 20 years, the economy is not really an issue. That works out at about 6 trillions a year for the whole world, that's about 10% of the global GDP.
In reality, probably even less if one considers impacts of mass production and technological improvements.
"The only other move was to use Android, but that caries its own set of risks"
They could have continued developing MeeGO, so moving to Android certainly was not the only other move.
LISP is old. It's seriously old, even though its concepts are still very advanced.
It doesn't have pattern matching - a staple of modern functional languages, for example. There's no algebraic types and they can't be emulated using macroses without writing half of a buggy Haskell implementation in LISP. No good list comprehensions as well. LISP macroses also look antiquated now - there's no quasiquotation.
Also, not much tools.
And as for niche markets, they does not mean anything. There's a niche market in VB6, MUMPS, COBOL and Fortran.
"You do know there is flight reservation management software, and web-store CMSes written in LISP, right?"
No I don't. Haven't seen them, maybe it's possible to find them if one looks in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of The Leopard". Yeah, they might exist but they are irrelevant.
No popular sites I know use LISP, no popular tools I know use LISP, etc. And I know a lot of tools.
Oh, sorry. I know of one tool which used LISP. It was Microsoft's CLR, which initially used LISP to implement GC. It later got translated to C# and then moved to F#.
"LISP is pretty much perfect, thing is, everything else is good enough, making them eternal enemies..."
Yep. And you know what else is perfect? - Hitler!
About 10 years ago I've seen a nice quote: "LISP programmers use the 'lazy evaluation' system - programs are not written until they are called. And because they are not written they are not getting called. And so nothing gets written in LISP." Nothing has changed since then, except for LISP programmers' hubris maybe.
It works just fine in Europe. Actually, it works TOO fine for those who have to listen to conversations of fellow passengers.
Packet drops, however, might become a problem for these trains.
Kansas is a net receiver of Federal money. Why should other states pay for Kansas?
"The enterprise "java app" is actually a plugin to a framework which runs on an application server. To get your code to compile/test/debug cycle you need all 3."
Sure. And you also need an OS, and microcode in firmware. Oh, and probably electric connection as well.
"Not really a problem, until you find out that each of them have their own rats nest of xml configs, in not-quite-readable form. "
My current app has exactly one 20-line XML config, even though it uses Hibernate, Guice, GWT, querydsl, Wicket with about 50 indirect dependencies.
Though I'm going to move it back to Maven, so I guess I'll have to live with 10-20 kilobytes of POM files because they are nicer tha uber-kewl DSLs.
"But not a problem, because yet another 3 plugins exist to provides a web-frontend to each of those java stacks. Of course, you end up subclassing a class that has already been subclassed 8 times, with 4 different xml configs."
And _that_ is pure nonsense.
"Don't get me wrong - I'm all for more abstraction, only the problem I see with all of these chained stacks is that they are abstracting *away* from the solution and towards a technology, and not abstracting towards the solution and away from the technology ."
Whoa, a whole shitload of managerial bullshit. Hint: you should use word 'synergistic' more.
Frameworks merely allow one to work on the solutions with additional tools. That's all.
"And I can solve most problems faster in Lisp than in Java, C++, python or most other things. What was your point?"
I somehow doubt it. LISP programmers always brag how LISP is uber-productive, yet the end result of 50 years of LISP is dying Emacs. At least Python people produce interesting software.
Uhm. Have you ever had a thought that 'solved' problems tend to be unsolved in reality?
15 years ago most of Java enterprise stuff would have been written in crashy C++ with a lot of impenetrable CORBA mappings and weird UI frameworks. Or maybe if you are 'lucky' in impenetrable COBOL.
And actually, I can write software in Java (and now in Scala) single-handedly faster than several Python programmers. Because I know how to use all these tons of frameworks.
Well, if a better influenza vaccine comes along, then maybe achieving herd immunity will be possible. Right now it isn't even if we vaccinate everyone.
No. Russia is first-to-file as US is going to be soon.
"With this new system, if IBM files for a patent in Europe and Microsoft files for the same patent in the US for the same thing, but at a later date, then the courts can easily look at the file date of IBM's patent, and then Microsoft's patent, and determine immediately which one came first."
Except that foreign patents are not automatically considered to be relevant for the 'first-to-file'.
In Russia in this case even if MS loses the court battle and IBM is granted patent in the US based on a European filing, MS is still allowed to use the invention (with some restrictions).