You shoud not be able to patent a god damn UI concept.
Indeed. Imagine somebody patenting the steering wheel of a car, or the order of the pedals, or the order of the gears. That would be ridiculous. You'd never be able to switch brands of car.
Now besides USER-interfaces, I think actually that one should not be able to patent interfaces in general. Because any patent in this area will block interoperability and, as a result, innovation.
How can developers who are active on apple's platforms even look at themselves in the mirror anymore? Come on guys, show some balls, and stop supporting this greedy lawfirm.
Sorry, that music may have been produced in the US, but contains ingredients taken from music produced elsewhere. Ergo, there is no basis to declare that US copyright laws should extend to other countries.
Another way would be to eliminate secret courts, and secret court proceedings, which is an absolute requirement if we want people to believe we're a democracy.
Be careful here. If, say, you are in a divorce with your wife, do you want the world to know the gory details?
However, if the prosecutor is the public one, and the defendant agrees to an open court, then you might have a case.
There are some downsides to jailtime, as others pointed out.
A better penalty may be a temporary sales ban. In the case of Google, I would say a good penalty would be to disconnect them from the internet for a week or so.
And of course, we adhere to the adagium: three strikes and you're out!
But if one person (or company) has a monopoly (which is what a patent is) on artificial intelligence and robots, then basically we're all out of work. And also those people whose shoulders were used to stand on by these new monopolists. IMHO, another sign that patents are inherently wrong.
This is another instance where crowdsourcing is applied (people upload material to youtube), and one party (Google) takes all the profit. I hereby coin the term "crowdmilking" for this practice.
I didn't. If you ask me, blocking ad-money has the opposite effect, and improves privacy.
Further, if ads were integrated into movies and games, then piracy would not be a problem, and in fact it would be a solution. But of course, google does not like that solution, because they can't get between that flow of money.
Education has nothing to do with it. The fact that he didn't waste his time on slashdot gave him the advantage that allowed him to beat the competition.
The laws of capitalism, which are blind and are invisible to ordinary people, act upon the individual without he or she being aware of it. One sees only the vastness of a seemingly infinite horizon ahead. That is how it is painted by capitalist propagandists who purport to draw a lesson from the example of Rockefeller — whether or not it is true — about the possibilities of individual success. The amount of poverty and suffering required for a Rockefeller to emerge, and the amount of depravity entailed in the accumulation of a fortune of such magnitude, are left out of the picture, and it is not always possible for the popular forces to expose this clearly.... It is a contest among wolves. One can win only at the cost of the failure of others.
Now that the most brilliant people on this planet have found what was just waiting there to be found, they can focus on helping the rest of us build actual stuff with it.
Great, now besides grokking this complicated pricing model, I need to think of stuff to do in the idle-time of my instance to get the most bang for my buck.
Slashdot Mirror
Voting with your wallet rarely works, especially if the 99% of average Joes in this country don't give a shit.
You shoud not be able to patent a god damn UI concept.
Indeed. Imagine somebody patenting the steering wheel of a car, or the order of the pedals, or the order of the gears. That would be ridiculous. You'd never be able to switch brands of car.
Now besides USER-interfaces, I think actually that one should not be able to patent interfaces in general. Because any patent in this area will block interoperability and, as a result, innovation.
Makes one wonder why it took so long!
How can developers who are active on apple's platforms even look at themselves in the mirror anymore?
Come on guys, show some balls, and stop supporting this greedy lawfirm.
Sorry, that music may have been produced in the US, but contains ingredients taken from music produced elsewhere. Ergo, there is no basis to declare that US copyright laws should extend to other countries.
Indeed. At least the defendant should have a say in whether the records should be open or not.
Another way would be to eliminate secret courts, and secret court proceedings, which is an absolute requirement if we want people to believe we're a democracy.
Be careful here. If, say, you are in a divorce with your wife, do you want the world to know the gory details?
However, if the prosecutor is the public one, and the defendant agrees to an open court, then you might have a case.
What they can't check: if it is you who is carrying the phone.
Therefore, I suggest to regularly swap phones with random people on the street/in the subway/etc.
When I see someone with an iPhone or iPad, I'm going to see them as particularly uncool. I will tell them.
My grandma doesn't care. She uses the iPhone because it's the only interface she understands.
Same for my technophobic schoolteachers.
There are some downsides to jailtime, as others pointed out.
A better penalty may be a temporary sales ban. In the case of Google, I would say a good penalty would be to disconnect them from the internet for a week or so.
And of course, we adhere to the adagium: three strikes and you're out!
Now, when power is abused, you can do nothing.
That's where google comes in. In the future we'll be choosing our leaders using PageRank (tm).
And... no issues with patents. Since, afaik, stuff you don't sell isn't covered by patent laws.
I suggest that people should need a license to use advanced technology like mobile phones.
That may cost Apple its market share.
Apple copied the Kindle and its content-to-device-locking (and named it iPad), so now Amazon can copy the iPhone.
But if one person (or company) has a monopoly (which is what a patent is) on artificial intelligence and robots, then basically we're all out of work. And also those people whose shoulders were used to stand on by these new monopolists. IMHO, another sign that patents are inherently wrong.
This is downmodded, but where for example do we find the website for "Apple Research"?
...and it feels like a cold shower.
This is another instance where crowdsourcing is applied (people upload material to youtube), and one party (Google) takes all the profit.
I hereby coin the term "crowdmilking" for this practice.
I didn't. If you ask me, blocking ad-money has the opposite effect, and improves privacy.
Further, if ads were integrated into movies and games, then piracy would not be a problem, and in fact it would be a solution. But of course, google does not like that solution, because they can't get between that flow of money.
Education has nothing to do with it. The fact that he didn't waste his time on slashdot gave him the advantage that allowed him to beat the competition.
I wouldn't call it a lottery, but it is close. The chaotic nature of capitalism is what rules.
Che Guevara:
The laws of capitalism, which are blind and are invisible to ordinary people, act upon the individual without he or she being aware of it. One sees only the vastness of a seemingly infinite horizon ahead. That is how it is painted by capitalist propagandists who purport to draw a lesson from the example of Rockefeller — whether or not it is true — about the possibilities of individual success. The amount of poverty and suffering required for a Rockefeller to emerge, and the amount of depravity entailed in the accumulation of a fortune of such magnitude, are left out of the picture, and it is not always possible for the popular forces to expose this clearly.... It is a contest among wolves. One can win only at the cost of the failure of others.
The real evil is of course evolution itself, because it came up with the idea of "copy-and-improve" in the first place.
Actually, it makes sense now, the biblical Apple going against evolution.
So how about a (nontrivial) web-service that needs to be available 24/7, but is accessed on average only a few times a day?
Now that the most brilliant people on this planet have found what was just waiting there to be found, they can focus on helping the rest of us build actual stuff with it.
Great, now besides grokking this complicated pricing model, I need to think of stuff to do in the idle-time of my instance to get the most bang for my buck.