While the example slides in the article are very bad; the key point here is that a presentation is not the slides and the slides are not the presentation. Slides are supposed to be a presentation aid and help reinforce what was being said and the story being told. Taking slides in isolation to the context of what was being said and how they were used in the presentation is just as bad as giving the bad presentation in the first place.
The worst things about PowerPoint are the emphasis on bulleted lists: almost everyone using ToDo lists or outliners has moved on to GTD style approaches rather than simple bullet points - why haven't the developers of PP learnt this ? at least get rid of the default layout being title and bullets; the abundance of "clip art" which should have been phased out when DTP went out of fashion; the default of scaling without preserving aspect and allowing massive zooms on bitmap graphics; and finally the crappy animations and transitions that there are far too many of.
As they say, power corrupts and PowerPoints corrupt absolutely.
A programmable remote you tell what frequencies to use; a non programmable you choose from a table of frequencies that different manufacturers are known to use.
Actually, Amazon claims it was for defensive purposes only.
In that case they only had to publish a blog post to generate prior art. And it would have been a lot cheaper. Or are you suggesting that Amazon don't know how patents work ?
I think that it's a little bit late to come out with the "we almost caught him, we were so close" story.
The TSA doesn't work. If they were more focused on quality of information than groping and assuming everyone is a terrorist, then maybe, maybe they could have caught him.
How many TSA agents were working in Boston around the time of the bombing; how many checkpoints did they pass, how many innocent people were inconvenienced and they still didn't catch the brothers until after the event and a long drawn out chase and firefight. They even cornered the surviving brother in a small boat, injured and then had to shoot him upteen times in order to capture him.
I have been to other countries, such as Singapore, where porn and censorship laws are stricter. They don't have problems accessing porn. They have less easy access to free speech, but they know where they can talk freely.
Most of the time the justification for such things is not "think of the children", but social harmony or "protection of public morals".
It's like a handful of sand. The tighter the grip, the more slips through your fingers.
No, it's down to politicians who don't know what they're talking. Specifically, the UK Prime Minister who wants his kids to surf Facebook. Nothing to do with practicalities of real life or security theatre.
They obviously didn't use a designer for this project. I'm not a designer but I'm pretty confident that I could come up with a better design than that.
But does anyone care ? I mean Ya-who ? I used to use them for email but they kept "upgrading" (i.e. redesign with less features) the service.
With that line there you clearly demonstrated you don't know what you're talking about.
Despite the fact that none of them support animations; they are either completely over the top or utterly basic. Let me see, BMP - if you ever used this "standard" you would know it's pretty awful and not standard. TGA would be fine if this was 1986, we might as well switch to PPM. EXR would be great if we wanted animations to be some kind of WebGL substitute and WEBP, well we might as well switch to JPEG-2000.
By the way, that last bit wasn't facetious. I like JPEG-2000 a lot more than WEBP. And it's a standard.
So Joel Spolsky writes about how efficient and wonderful his own website is and no one here notices ?
OK, sterling work on shooting down a rubbish patent, but that is how the US patent system has been working for a long, long time. If any one had come after me with a claim of infringement on such a patent I would have laughed.
Absolutely right. It's been hilarious the last few days to see the UK press get themselves worked up because they might actually be forced to respect the law. What did they think they would get after the hacking scandal inquiry ? A "don't do it again" ? It's been clearly proven that they can't be trusted to regulate themselves.
This is a total non-story designed to scare the UK underclasses.
Not all Free software is open source and not all open source is free. It seems to me that your only concern is that the software is free; that's how you phrased it.
Yes, I think if your company uses open source software then you should try to give something back because you are a commercial user and you are no doubt saving a bundle of money.
"I am trying to set up a surveillance system... from the fixed cameras around our facility"
I see, so when you say Open Source what you really mean is Free because this has nothing to do with using and contributing something back. Otherwise you would have said so.
For example, you could donate to the programmers who make the software that you decide to use. You could have an interesting custom requirement that you could make a module for and release as OSS. Or you could find and fix bugs or documentation for some existing package. Why don't you offer to do something like that in your question ?
One user, Taylor Winkelmeyer, wrote: "I clicked on the link because I thought the warning was a joke.
"I am furious I had to see something like this. Someone please tell me how to get it off my feed."
Patent attorney Michael Bates of 1Place agreed that developers could use the patent system to ensure their inventions remained open source.
“If a group of open source collaborators can secure a patent, it can choose to grant a royalty-free licence to the open source community to use it just as open source software is licensed,” Bates noted.
What a joke! Let me guess, Bates wants people to pay him to check patent applications for OSS. Prior art invalidates a patent. Simply publishing or releasing your software open source makes it prior art therefore preventing someone from claiming an "inventive step" - the usual requirement for a patent. Save your money.
You only created your account here on slashdot to write comments on this thread and all of them are excuses. Yes, replying directly after a troll post and addressing the subject of the troll *is* feeding the trolls. Have you ever heard of PR ? When someone says "All MacDonalds food is unhealthy" they (MacDonalds) don't immediately make a statement saying "Ignore that guy".
This girl is clearly an attention seeker. No one gets stalked for 10 years and not gather enough evidence to take some action.
While I think that Kickstarter could have handled it better; read the article on her website.
She got spam comments and she replied to them. She claims that she was being stalked and she recognised the stalker: why reply ? Just report them. You're not supposed to feed trolls.
It is clear the reason she got kicked off because she got interacted with the spammer and was part of the problem.
And WTF is a "transmedia artist" ? She uses various media, multimedia ?
People used to say the iPod would bomb, it's done well. People said the iPhone would bomb, it's done well. People used to say the iPad... well, you get the point.
No, not really.
When the iPod was launched mp3 players were already tiny and popular. The innovation was that iPod had a tiny hard drive (and it wasn't the first to do that). No one said iPod would bomb.
Then the iPod touch came out and everyone said what an awesome phone it could be; no one said the iPhone would bomb. In fact the hype was so strong at the time, Apple could have made almost any phone and it would have been popular.
Before the iPad came out, everyone said it would be awesome. Steve Jobs was the only one saying that they had tried large scale touch UI but it "didn't work".
If Apple is saying that the Galaxy Tab looks too similar to the iPad then they really should find some new designers because there is nothing visually innovative about the iPad since the iPod touch.
There's no point getting irate about freedom of speech. The whole point of domain names is to make money. The only reason.xxx was introduced was to "offer a new product", i.e. another TLD that could be subdivided and sold. Who would have thought it, people would pay money for the equivalent of a memorable telephone number.
Paul Mockapetris, inventor of DNS, said that "The DNS was built to be simple and predictable" so why is it handled by an organisational committee who make political decisions ? If it was only about ease of use then.xxx would have been decided years ago. And why do you have to pay more than a nominal admin fee to have your details entered into the DNS database ? It's all about money.
By "ready to go" I take it you mean "economical in functionality but with glossy social networking stuff"
and for "high-end" you mean "without multitasking" ?
What makes you think partnering with Microsoft will remove delays ? Are you thinking of another company named Microsoft ?
Now I feel like YouTube is evil. I hate advertising masquerading as normal content. It seems like YouTube is party to this; maybe this was their Faustian pact, put up with this crap or we'll sue you for every violation we ever find.
People who *try* to make a "viral" video are the epitome of uncool. Especially the fake ones; cellphones cooking popcorn, etc etc. I thought marketing departments were supposed to "get" people. Overpaid idiots.
Slashdot Mirror
While the example slides in the article are very bad; the key point here is that a presentation is not the slides and the slides are not the presentation. Slides are supposed to be a presentation aid and help reinforce what was being said and the story being told. Taking slides in isolation to the context of what was being said and how they were used in the presentation is just as bad as giving the bad presentation in the first place.
The worst things about PowerPoint are the emphasis on bulleted lists: almost everyone using ToDo lists or outliners has moved on to GTD style approaches rather than simple bullet points - why haven't the developers of PP learnt this ? at least get rid of the default layout being title and bullets; the abundance of "clip art" which should have been phased out when DTP went out of fashion; the default of scaling without preserving aspect and allowing massive zooms on bitmap graphics; and finally the crappy animations and transitions that there are far too many of.
As they say, power corrupts and PowerPoints corrupt absolutely.
A programmable remote you tell what frequencies to use; a non programmable you choose from a table of frequencies that different manufacturers are known to use.
In that case they only had to publish a blog post to generate prior art. And it would have been a lot cheaper. Or are you suggesting that Amazon don't know how patents work ?
It's been called POTS for at least 20 years. Sheesh, kids these days
.
I think that it's a little bit late to come out with the "we almost caught him, we were so close" story.
The TSA doesn't work. If they were more focused on quality of information than groping and assuming everyone is a terrorist, then maybe, maybe they could have caught him.
How many TSA agents were working in Boston around the time of the bombing; how many checkpoints did they pass, how many innocent people were inconvenienced and they still didn't catch the brothers until after the event and a long drawn out chase and firefight. They even cornered the surviving brother in a small boat, injured and then had to shoot him upteen times in order to capture him.
I have been to other countries, such as Singapore, where porn and censorship laws are stricter. They don't have problems accessing porn. They have less easy access to free speech, but they know where they can talk freely.
Most of the time the justification for such things is not "think of the children", but social harmony or "protection of public morals".
It's like a handful of sand. The tighter the grip, the more slips through your fingers.
No, it's down to politicians who don't know what they're talking. Specifically, the UK Prime Minister who wants his kids to surf Facebook. Nothing to do with practicalities of real life or security theatre.
They obviously didn't use a designer for this project. I'm not a designer but I'm pretty confident that I could come up with a better design than that.
But does anyone care ? I mean Ya-who ? I used to use them for email but they kept "upgrading" (i.e. redesign with less features) the service.
BMP, TIF, TGA, EXR, WEBP, various 'raw' formats.
With that line there you clearly demonstrated you don't know what you're talking about.
Despite the fact that none of them support animations; they are either completely over the top or utterly basic. Let me see, BMP - if you ever used this "standard" you would know it's pretty awful and not standard. TGA would be fine if this was 1986, we might as well switch to PPM. EXR would be great if we wanted animations to be some kind of WebGL substitute and WEBP, well we might as well switch to JPEG-2000.
By the way, that last bit wasn't facetious. I like JPEG-2000 a lot more than WEBP. And it's a standard.
So Joel Spolsky writes about how efficient and wonderful his own website is and no one here notices ? OK, sterling work on shooting down a rubbish patent, but that is how the US patent system has been working for a long, long time. If any one had come after me with a claim of infringement on such a patent I would have laughed.
Absolutely right. It's been hilarious the last few days to see the UK press get themselves worked up because they might actually be forced to respect the law. What did they think they would get after the hacking scandal inquiry ? A "don't do it again" ? It's been clearly proven that they can't be trusted to regulate themselves.
This is a total non-story designed to scare the UK underclasses.
Not all Free software is open source and not all open source is free. It seems to me that your only concern is that the software is free; that's how you phrased it.
Yes, I think if your company uses open source software then you should try to give something back because you are a commercial user and you are no doubt saving a bundle of money.
I see, so when you say Open Source what you really mean is Free because this has nothing to do with using and contributing something back. Otherwise you would have said so.
For example, you could donate to the programmers who make the software that you decide to use. You could have an interesting custom requirement that you could make a module for and release as OSS. Or you could find and fix bugs or documentation for some existing package. Why don't you offer to do something like that in your question ?
I love this report about the article:
It's got to be fake, right ?
You know the one; just cut it out; I'm not going to tell you again.
Yeah, but he wasn't black he was Klingon.
Oh you mean like Lursa and B'Etor the Klingon sisters ?
How about Gowron ? The actor who played him, Robert O'Reilly is white; in fact all these actors are white.
The core of the summary is this:
What a joke! Let me guess, Bates wants people to pay him to check patent applications for OSS. Prior art invalidates a patent. Simply publishing or releasing your software open source makes it prior art therefore preventing someone from claiming an "inventive step" - the usual requirement for a patent. Save your money.
You only created your account here on slashdot to write comments on this thread and all of them are excuses. Yes, replying directly after a troll post and addressing the subject of the troll *is* feeding the trolls. Have you ever heard of PR ? When someone says "All MacDonalds food is unhealthy" they (MacDonalds) don't immediately make a statement saying "Ignore that guy".
This girl is clearly an attention seeker. No one gets stalked for 10 years and not gather enough evidence to take some action.
While I think that Kickstarter could have handled it better; read the article on her website.
She got spam comments and she replied to them. She claims that she was being stalked and she recognised the stalker: why reply ? Just report them. You're not supposed to feed trolls.
It is clear the reason she got kicked off because she got interacted with the spammer and was part of the problem.
And WTF is a "transmedia artist" ? She uses various media, multimedia ?
No, not really.
When the iPod was launched mp3 players were already tiny and popular. The innovation was that iPod had a tiny hard drive (and it wasn't the first to do that). No one said iPod would bomb.
Then the iPod touch came out and everyone said what an awesome phone it could be; no one said the iPhone would bomb. In fact the hype was so strong at the time, Apple could have made almost any phone and it would have been popular.
Before the iPad came out, everyone said it would be awesome. Steve Jobs was the only one saying that they had tried large scale touch UI but it "didn't work".
If Apple is saying that the Galaxy Tab looks too similar to the iPad then they really should find some new designers because there is nothing visually innovative about the iPad since the iPod touch.
There's no point getting irate about freedom of speech. The whole point of domain names is to make money. The only reason .xxx was introduced was to "offer a new product", i.e. another TLD that could be subdivided and sold. Who would have thought it, people would pay money for the equivalent of a memorable telephone number.
Paul Mockapetris, inventor of DNS, said that "The DNS was built to be simple and predictable" so why is it handled by an organisational committee who make political decisions ? If it was only about ease of use then .xxx would have been decided years ago. And why do you have to pay more than a nominal admin fee to have your details entered into the DNS database ? It's all about money.
By "ready to go" I take it you mean "economical in functionality but with glossy social networking stuff" and for "high-end" you mean "without multitasking" ?
What makes you think partnering with Microsoft will remove delays ? Are you thinking of another company named Microsoft ?
Think of the children - they might see a nipple and then they would have serious psychological issues. For life. Thanks for the link, tuomasb.
Now I feel like YouTube is evil. I hate advertising masquerading as normal content. It seems like YouTube is party to this; maybe this was their Faustian pact, put up with this crap or we'll sue you for every violation we ever find. People who *try* to make a "viral" video are the epitome of uncool. Especially the fake ones; cellphones cooking popcorn, etc etc. I thought marketing departments were supposed to "get" people. Overpaid idiots.