Not all monopolies are illegal. The patents need to be challenged, on the basis that their use doesn't create a new machine, they simply carry out different algorithms on glorified calculators. An old Commodore 64, with enough extra storage, can carry out the same calculations, albeit a lot slower.
Two different officers gave him contradictory orders. No matter which one he obeyed, he was "failing to comply" with the other one. On this pretense, they gave him the "bad outcome" they wanted so desperately.
That nobody involved directly with the case mentioned "entrapment" is an epic fail. His defense lawyer should be disbarred for incompetence.
Because you have a ticket from when you got on the road. Based on that ticket, they know how many miles you've gone. Put a time stamp on the ticket, and they can tell your average speed between entry and exit.
I live near a toll road. The state highway patrol will issue a ticket to you, if your average speed between your entry and your exit on that road is over the speed limit.
Hence, it's always a good idea to take at least one 10- or 15-minute break at a rest stop, while on that road.
The Amiga's "Guru Meditation Error" is derived from a balance board connected as a peripheral. IA did not have an original idea here. I strongly doubt it was original with Amiga, either.
Or was it merely a testament to how memorable Escalante's teaching methods were, that all of his students remembered very well the material and how he covered it? The self-appointed guardians of "real" knowledge, including ETS, will never accept that outsiders have something to contribute, until forced to.
Having identical stuff on an exam is no big deal. My very first semester in college included a course in Pascal, and my final exam included a couple code-writing exercises. I was the second one to finish, and the instructor showed me an answer on the first student's exam. The only difference between his code and mine was symbol names; the compiled code would have been identical.
The ETS and the teaching establishment at Garfield High don't want students to learn. They just want kids to regurgitate, without any real understanding of the material. Heaven forbid, they might start thinking for themselves.
I did QA for a massive accounting package that was being converted from Btrieve. The benefit of a "real" SQL engine was supposed to be stored statements, but it was outweighed by the massive wrong-ness in the engine. Observed behaviors too often didn't match the documentation. A lot of the self-tuning features in SQL Server 2008 are due to our head of R&D taking up matters directly with SQL Server developers.
That's just one example of why I no longer support Microsoft products on the job. I'll use them if need be, but if something breaks, someone else gets to fix it.
From your own post: "a crime that he had no previous intent to commit". So, if the Watts case is not entrapment, then he went into the situation intending to commit a "failure to comply" crime.
Sorry, I'm not buying that. He was given contradictory orders. No matter which officer he complied with, he was "failing to comply" with the other one. That fits the entrapment definition you quoted. Even the link you provide shows no reason why this case doesn't constitute entrapment.
no man should have the power to be judge and jury.
Nonsense. Any single juror can pronounce the defendant "not guilty," and it would have the force of law behind it. Same goes for a summary judgment of "not guilty" from the bench, or a refusal by the assigned judge to hear the case. There has to be full agreement between the grand jury, the judge, and the petit jury for a conviction. That's at least 25 people, maybe more if there's more than 12 grand jurors.
As for "only Peter Watts was on trial," the answer for that is simple. Ask all the jurors, "Faced with the same situation, would you have done the same thing? And if you did, could you still see yourself as a law-abiding citizen?" Any one juror answering "yes" to the second question would mean an acquittal.
When two police officers are giving contradictory orders, as in this case, and the result is a charge of "failure to comply," it's entrapment, pure and simple. The shocking thing is, as I type this, I see no mention of the term on here, in well over 100 comments.
Well, that's your choice. In my case, a few of them outside our group-of-four contacted me of their own accord, and they had indeed grown up. So I decided to take the gamble, and I'm glad I did.
There were 3 that I'd talk to on graduation day. And now, I've lost touch with two of them.
Far be it from me to equate my experience to yours, but bear with me. Twenty years ago, I was ecstatic to get out, get away, and shrug off the ties that held me down. All four in our group felt like that, and all four of us went out and made our marks on our corners of the world (mixed results, but mostly good). We each did things that the other three didn't; mine was waving a red cloth in front of a bull. Google "shakabuku" for an idea of what that's like.
At our twentieth reunion, between 1/3 and 1/2 of our class was there--sadly, only one other from our group of four--and there wasn't a single frown in the bunch. Everyone had grown up, and everyone was happy to see one another. I even have a picture of myself with the two women who were the biggest elitist snobs of the class. Back then, I was the last person they would have posed with.
I don't know how old you are, or how fresh the pains of high school are, so the only real bit I can pass to you is in the subject line. I certainly won't extol the virtues of FB; I'm too security-conscious for that. But I can promise you, after you give yourself time, you'll breathe easier at the prospect of dealing with your classmates once again. I'm living proof of it.
And never mind the above comment about carrying HS grudges past 20. That's far too soon; 30 is more reasonable. I would have modded it down, but my mod points are fresh, so I'll comment instead.
Okay, I read it. I see nothing there that any sensible team of a business programmer and a UI designer wouldn't do.
After that single click on the "Buy It Now!" icon, I don't care how many HTTP cookie name/value pairs are sent, I don't care how much database processing goes on, I don't care how many forms are printed out in how many warehouses. Carrying out any set of actions, from popping up a message box to ordering an ICBM launch, as a result of a single click from a user, is as old as the mouse itself.
I guess the dunces at the USPTO think computing history started with the IBM PC, and the first browser was Internet Explorer. They've lost sight of the fact that Clippy is just the visual manifestation of a glorified calculator's formulas, decoded from the magnetic patterns on a spinning platter.
1-Click fails on every point, but most of all on prior art. A single click to "perform action X now" has been around at least since Douglas Englebart gave the Mother Of All Demos in 1968. If nobody in the USPTO's review process could see that, then they all deserve to be demoted to janitors. (But I wouldn't hire them to clean my floors.)
When a kernel upgrade goes south.... I learned my way through that just yesterday, in fact!
In the case of LILO, you want to configure a known-good kernel as the default and the test kernel as non-default. Run "lilo" to install this configuration, then run "lilo -R test-kernel" to boot the test kernel on the next reboot only. After reboot, if the test kernel causes a lock-up, a hard reset (button or power cycle) will take you back to the known-good kernel.
If you're using GRUB, I think you'll find this link informative.
At my last IT job, we had a serial-to-telnet converter/concentrator, with 20 or 24 RJ-45 serial ports. We also had ~30 headless systems, of all stripes: IBM Power, HP PA-RISC 6U rack-mounts, and lots of Sparcs and PC's. Only LILO or GRUB on the PC's needed to be configured post-install to talk to the serial port; the others were already set up to talk to the serial port, either by default or as a fall-back if the keyboard was detached. Add to that a telnet-enabled power strip, and it was a remote developer's dream.
The big advantage the serial concentrator gave us was being able to reboot and recover from a kernel panic, by being able to manipulate kernel command lines. In the event of a corrupt filesystem, if the fsck program couldn't repair it automatically during boot, the serial console made it possible to attempt a repair remotely. Not having that ability would have severely hampered our development ability.
I have even (very, very carefully) typed serial console parameters into a Linux boot command in SYSLINUX, blindly, and done a Slackware install through a serial console. It took a few tries to get it right, but it saved moving my only monitor, which let me continue working on my desktop system while the install ran.
Well, okay, there was also the "because I can" aspect to it...
climate scientists disagree with you and (unlike astrologers) actually want to put their predictions on record because they have confidence in them. I say we let them.
I take it you haven't read the emails from East Anglia? Obfuscation, "hide the decline," discussion of how to destroy the careers of those who disagree with them, and subvert legal FOIA requests. Hardly the behavior of people who want to go on public record.
When scientific research is used as the basis of public policy decisions, that research should automatically be made available for public scrutiny, along with any associated monetary interests of the researchers. Then taxpayers can find out how badly they got screwed.
Slashdot Mirror
Not all monopolies are illegal. The patents need to be challenged, on the basis that their use doesn't create a new machine, they simply carry out different algorithms on glorified calculators. An old Commodore 64, with enough extra storage, can carry out the same calculations, albeit a lot slower.
Sigh.
Two different officers gave him contradictory orders. No matter which one he obeyed, he was "failing to comply" with the other one. On this pretense, they gave him the "bad outcome" they wanted so desperately.
That nobody involved directly with the case mentioned "entrapment" is an epic fail. His defense lawyer should be disbarred for incompetence.
Ali Larter has a sister? Cool!
Because you have a ticket from when you got on the road. Based on that ticket, they know how many miles you've gone. Put a time stamp on the ticket, and they can tell your average speed between entry and exit.
I live near a toll road. The state highway patrol will issue a ticket to you, if your average speed between your entry and your exit on that road is over the speed limit.
Hence, it's always a good idea to take at least one 10- or 15-minute break at a rest stop, while on that road.
Not impossible, but it *is* less likely.
Please, don't confuse the terms. It only motivates the lawyers to continue muddying the waters.
The Amiga's "Guru Meditation Error" is derived from a balance board connected as a peripheral. IA did not have an original idea here. I strongly doubt it was original with Amiga, either.
Not to mention the long insistence from Adobe that there would never be a 64-bit Flash plugin.
Pot, kettle, black.
Or was it merely a testament to how memorable Escalante's teaching methods were, that all of his students remembered very well the material and how he covered it? The self-appointed guardians of "real" knowledge, including ETS, will never accept that outsiders have something to contribute, until forced to.
Having identical stuff on an exam is no big deal. My very first semester in college included a course in Pascal, and my final exam included a couple code-writing exercises. I was the second one to finish, and the instructor showed me an answer on the first student's exam. The only difference between his code and mine was symbol names; the compiled code would have been identical.
The ETS and the teaching establishment at Garfield High don't want students to learn. They just want kids to regurgitate, without any real understanding of the material. Heaven forbid, they might start thinking for themselves.
I did QA for a massive accounting package that was being converted from Btrieve. The benefit of a "real" SQL engine was supposed to be stored statements, but it was outweighed by the massive wrong-ness in the engine. Observed behaviors too often didn't match the documentation. A lot of the self-tuning features in SQL Server 2008 are due to our head of R&D taking up matters directly with SQL Server developers.
That's just one example of why I no longer support Microsoft products on the job. I'll use them if need be, but if something breaks, someone else gets to fix it.
From your own post: "a crime that he had no previous intent to commit". So, if the Watts case is not entrapment, then he went into the situation intending to commit a "failure to comply" crime.
Sorry, I'm not buying that. He was given contradictory orders. No matter which officer he complied with, he was "failing to comply" with the other one. That fits the entrapment definition you quoted. Even the link you provide shows no reason why this case doesn't constitute entrapment.
Nonsense. Any single juror can pronounce the defendant "not guilty," and it would have the force of law behind it. Same goes for a summary judgment of "not guilty" from the bench, or a refusal by the assigned judge to hear the case. There has to be full agreement between the grand jury, the judge, and the petit jury for a conviction. That's at least 25 people, maybe more if there's more than 12 grand jurors.
As for "only Peter Watts was on trial," the answer for that is simple. Ask all the jurors, "Faced with the same situation, would you have done the same thing? And if you did, could you still see yourself as a law-abiding citizen?" Any one juror answering "yes" to the second question would mean an acquittal.
When two police officers are giving contradictory orders, as in this case, and the result is a charge of "failure to comply," it's entrapment, pure and simple. The shocking thing is, as I type this, I see no mention of the term on here, in well over 100 comments.
It might work for some, but it could never work for others. Can you see Jimmy Durante with a prosthetic turn-up nose?
But you two both blew it, and now this thread is totally boogered up.
Nice going, guys.
Well, that's your choice. In my case, a few of them outside our group-of-four contacted me of their own accord, and they had indeed grown up. So I decided to take the gamble, and I'm glad I did.
There were 3 that I'd talk to on graduation day. And now, I've lost touch with two of them.
Far be it from me to equate my experience to yours, but bear with me. Twenty years ago, I was ecstatic to get out, get away, and shrug off the ties that held me down. All four in our group felt like that, and all four of us went out and made our marks on our corners of the world (mixed results, but mostly good). We each did things that the other three didn't; mine was waving a red cloth in front of a bull. Google "shakabuku" for an idea of what that's like.
At our twentieth reunion, between 1/3 and 1/2 of our class was there--sadly, only one other from our group of four--and there wasn't a single frown in the bunch. Everyone had grown up, and everyone was happy to see one another. I even have a picture of myself with the two women who were the biggest elitist snobs of the class. Back then, I was the last person they would have posed with.
I don't know how old you are, or how fresh the pains of high school are, so the only real bit I can pass to you is in the subject line. I certainly won't extol the virtues of FB; I'm too security-conscious for that. But I can promise you, after you give yourself time, you'll breathe easier at the prospect of dealing with your classmates once again. I'm living proof of it.
And never mind the above comment about carrying HS grudges past 20. That's far too soon; 30 is more reasonable. I would have modded it down, but my mod points are fresh, so I'll comment instead.
"In other words," you won't be satisfied until I compile a complete patent objection that traces its way clear back to the Big Bang.
Whatever.
Okay, I read it. I see nothing there that any sensible team of a business programmer and a UI designer wouldn't do.
After that single click on the "Buy It Now!" icon, I don't care how many HTTP cookie name/value pairs are sent, I don't care how much database processing goes on, I don't care how many forms are printed out in how many warehouses. Carrying out any set of actions, from popping up a message box to ordering an ICBM launch, as a result of a single click from a user, is as old as the mouse itself.
I guess the dunces at the USPTO think computing history started with the IBM PC, and the first browser was Internet Explorer. They've lost sight of the fact that Clippy is just the visual manifestation of a glorified calculator's formulas, decoded from the magnetic patterns on a spinning platter.
1-Click fails on every point, but most of all on prior art. A single click to "perform action X now" has been around at least since Douglas Englebart gave the Mother Of All Demos in 1968. If nobody in the USPTO's review process could see that, then they all deserve to be demoted to janitors. (But I wouldn't hire them to clean my floors.)
The USPTO may find itself the butt of many jokes if SCOTUS invalidates 99% of software patents in their Bilski ruling.
"Amazon 1-Click Patent Survives Almost Unscathed." Respect for the USPTO, not so much.
When a kernel upgrade goes south.... I learned my way through that just yesterday, in fact!
In the case of LILO, you want to configure a known-good kernel as the default and the test kernel as non-default. Run "lilo" to install this configuration, then run "lilo -R test-kernel" to boot the test kernel on the next reboot only. After reboot, if the test kernel causes a lock-up, a hard reset (button or power cycle) will take you back to the known-good kernel.
If you're using GRUB, I think you'll find this link informative.
At my last IT job, we had a serial-to-telnet converter/concentrator, with 20 or 24 RJ-45 serial ports. We also had ~30 headless systems, of all stripes: IBM Power, HP PA-RISC 6U rack-mounts, and lots of Sparcs and PC's. Only LILO or GRUB on the PC's needed to be configured post-install to talk to the serial port; the others were already set up to talk to the serial port, either by default or as a fall-back if the keyboard was detached. Add to that a telnet-enabled power strip, and it was a remote developer's dream.
The big advantage the serial concentrator gave us was being able to reboot and recover from a kernel panic, by being able to manipulate kernel command lines. In the event of a corrupt filesystem, if the fsck program couldn't repair it automatically during boot, the serial console made it possible to attempt a repair remotely. Not having that ability would have severely hampered our development ability.
I have even (very, very carefully) typed serial console parameters into a Linux boot command in SYSLINUX, blindly, and done a Slackware install through a serial console. It took a few tries to get it right, but it saved moving my only monitor, which let me continue working on my desktop system while the install ran.
Well, okay, there was also the "because I can" aspect to it...
Or George Lucas' dialog for Jar-Jar.
climate scientists disagree with you and (unlike astrologers) actually want to put their predictions on record because they have confidence in them. I say we let them.
I take it you haven't read the emails from East Anglia? Obfuscation, "hide the decline," discussion of how to destroy the careers of those who disagree with them, and subvert legal FOIA requests. Hardly the behavior of people who want to go on public record.
When scientific research is used as the basis of public policy decisions, that research should automatically be made available for public scrutiny, along with any associated monetary interests of the researchers. Then taxpayers can find out how badly they got screwed.