The problem with it in light aircraft, though, is that such aircraft tend to have very low power budgets--there's not much surplus energy around. If there were, they'd use anti-icing systems, but intermittently shedding accumulated ice is very energy-efficient, especially when compared to energetic ice prevention (some aircraft carry alcohol anti-icing solution, which is excreted through "weeping wings" to forestall ice formation, but such systems are limited in the protection they can offer, both in severity and duration of icing conditions). Thermal anti-icing is cost-prohibitive, and electrical systems in light aircraft tend to be adequate, but with little overhead--while this system is more efficient than (presumably electrical) heating, it still may not be efficient enough. I'd also be interested to see what kind of electrical and magnetic noise this system might generate, though I'm sure that's been considered.
The actual pulse needed to operate the stuff according to the article is in the manner of milliseconds all but the most heavily avionics laden aircraft should be able to handle the short pulse required to remove the ice from the surfaces.
Assuming the material is durable enough it would be great on the flying surfaces too preventing icing which adds considerable weight and changes the aerodynamics of the plane. This would probably be far lighter then current solutions for this.
I just have a special email for my wireless devices and simply white list devices or people who I allow to disturb me. I really can't say much about SMS since I had the feature removed once I started getting constantly spammed by it.
I assume you have proof of this? I have never seen a media lab with a strict ban on personal use.
The acid test is this, if he had produced a commercial-quality film (something like Blair Witch), would he have had the rights to market it commercially himself, or would the school have an interest in it? My guess is that the school would have easily been able to establish ownership rights.
As long as they own the copyright they have ever right to do this. If on the other hand the school had a rule against this the school may sue them for the damage caused by the commercial use. At no point would the developers of the video lose copyright.
And then on top of that, he abandoned it, further showing that in his own mind, he did not own it.
...or he could have forgot about it. Regardless even if he wished it be destroyed his right to copyright doesn't end there.
Canada as somewhat similar copyright law to the US except for a few aspects such as Fair-use. Automatic copyright protection is something both the US, Canada and most countries share (Berne convention). There are a number of differences between public schools and businesses the first being that school is mandatory, the studets are under the age of majority and most importantly the student doesn't receive compensation. It is unlikely that a contract like that could be legal without a lot of effort from the school.
So while the tape might have been stolen, it wasn't stolen from *him*. And thus he had no legal standing regarding the theft.
Perhaps so, I do not have intimate knowledge of that school's policy regarding tapes only that in my high school we had to provide our own. Regardless the issue of copyright still applies.
He performed the act in a public place (public school)
He recorded the act using public equipment (a camera owned by the public school system).
This has nothing to do with privacy and everything to do with property rights. Had these individuals taped him, things might be much different but the video was his and as such it was his to do with what he pleased. They did an illegal act by stealing the physical tape and then distributing a movie made from that and it was the result of that illegal act that caused a numbers of problems for him. Just because the damages from copyright are not lost sales doesn't make them any less valid.
Custom hardware on those beasts (which is rare these days) is typically done on FPGAs which can be configured by software. The development model for FPGAs can be nearly identical to that of software.
I don't really see how DMCA would have much to do with it, even if Alexis claimed it as a content protection measure, it would be your own work in which you would be accessing. It's really hard to pull copyright into this when the disks you are attempting interoperability with stock contain nothing.
IANAL of course.
My experience with most doctors is if you take away WebMD and PDR.net from a doctor and you got a very insecure individual. Seriously though, if it's a large hospital with multiple campuses (or even not) the EMR will probably require internet access.
Anything critical such as monitoring patient's equiptment etc is done over RF or rarely a seperate isolated network.
But how am I supposed to monitor every company in the world? What happens if, two years from now, I finally discover you've used my invention in your product? You could say I have a year from the time I know you've done it, but that just gives rise to another problem. Namely, how does anyone else know when I knew? Who can prove when NTP knew RIM was infringing?
Then it should be up to a judge to decide if a good faith effort was made to enforce the patent. As I have said before it should be a judgment call and it would likely not be used unless in rare circumstances. There is a vast chasm between making a solid effort to protect a patent and simply overlooking something and neglecting enforcing a patent at all. In this case it's rather clearly the later as AT&T has been involved in the MPEG-4 game since the start, to claim that AT&T was unaware of MPEG-4 would suggest retardation at an epic level for the company.
One solution would be to have a requirement that patent holders have to monitor major standards efforts in their field of invention, but how do you arrive at a legal definition of a standards effort? How do you avoid the problem of someone creating a bogus standards organization for the sole purpose of creating an exclusion to a patent?
I think for cases like these (submarine patents) the solution would be to treat patents similar to trademarks in such that patent holders have a requirement to defend the patent or risk losing it. It is certainly not an "automatic" remedy as it requires a judge to make a call in a case by case basis but it would prevent the most obvious examples of this behavior.
How does the shorter battery life make this defective? If the company had sold this as having a much longer battery life then failed to live up to it then that would be a problem.
That seems to be exactly what is happening judging from this quote in the article:
...but all of whom said this particular issue has prevented their systems from achieving the goal of four to five hours of battery life which Intel had led them to expect.
"It was some horrid hodgepodge of tags all slapped together around what amounted to a CVS dump. It was well formed, basically useless as an XML document."
Damn I feel the same way about RSS!
Client ID? User Id on the music store? IP address? Hello? The Sony rootkit hit one, non-changing and non-unique URL yet that created a massive backlash. Apple != Sony it seems, lot's of love for Apple, none for Sony.
You are reaching a bit far there.... Sony created a piece of software that was unstable, insecure and hid arbitrary files on the users computer not only could the behavior of their DRM not be disabled it could also not be uninstalled, the sending of information really wasn't what the fuss was about. The key part is that it could not be removed. Not only can iTunes be removed but it's documented how the behavior can be disabled.
Nikon is repositioning itself in a market, others will pick of the slack it certainly isn't the end of the world for 35mm.
Black and white is already is a specialty item, it has been since colour became cheap. People shoot TMax (or any black and white for that matter) because they want black and white, digital isn't going to change that as black and white is a very hard thing re-create properly on a colour digital camera. I really doubt this will have much impact on black and white film sales.
The US has a military budget that dwarfs most of EUs counrys entire budgets. They will find it no more a hardship to jam whatever the EU sends up there than they would flicking the switch on the GPS system. And the EU wouldnt know a damn thing about it, and if they did, there wouldnt be anything they could do without making it look like a threat which none of them would be willing to back up since most of the countrys dont even have a real army.
Anyone with basic physics knowledge should be able to tell when something is being jammed and add a highly directional antenna to the mix and you can tell where. Having a large investment in the military really isn't all that relevant in a technological war (don't kid yourself disabling someone's infrastructure is an act of war however to dice it) such as this as jamming technology and missiles able to shoot down sats aren't that expensive relatively speaking particularly countries with huge commercial space investments. Even the most naiive commanders should expect reciprocity from actions you describe.
They could threaten trade sanctions, but there is honestly very little in needed items that come out of europe that we couldnt get elsewhere. Most of europes trade is in luxuries.
It is very unlikely this would happen but... That is just foolish, sanctions regardless of where would drive the cost of products everywhere. However more damaging would be the lack of investment as the US economy is based heavily on outside investment.
However all this is discussion is really unnecessary since the US could/would simply place local jammers where coverage isn't wanted and would probably meet little or no resistance from the EU.
Unfortunatly Galileo can still be controled by the US. Europe more or less was told to hand over the controls, or the US would shoot the sattelites down.
That kind of force is exactly why Europe should have an independant positioning-system.
There is a large and blatantly obvious gap between shutting down (the accuracy) of a free service and committing acts of war. Actions like that are likely to be met with reciprocity which really is to no one benefit.
No, you would likely have died young because no private enterprise would have had the financial incentive to develop vaccines to protect you from childhood diseases.
You might try some basic research before bringing up polio as an example. It was developed by a medical school lab and never patented.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with it in light aircraft, though, is that such aircraft tend to have very low power budgets--there's not much surplus energy around. If there were, they'd use anti-icing systems, but intermittently shedding accumulated ice is very energy-efficient, especially when compared to energetic ice prevention (some aircraft carry alcohol anti-icing solution, which is excreted through "weeping wings" to forestall ice formation, but such systems are limited in the protection they can offer, both in severity and duration of icing conditions). Thermal anti-icing is cost-prohibitive, and electrical systems in light aircraft tend to be adequate, but with little overhead--while this system is more efficient than (presumably electrical) heating, it still may not be efficient enough. I'd also be interested to see what kind of electrical and magnetic noise this system might generate, though I'm sure that's been considered.
The actual pulse needed to operate the stuff according to the article is in the manner of milliseconds all but the most heavily avionics laden aircraft should be able to handle the short pulse required to remove the ice from the surfaces.
It's Saturday! You expect people to browse here when they are not getting paid to do something else?
Assuming the material is durable enough it would be great on the flying surfaces too preventing icing which adds considerable weight and changes the aerodynamics of the plane. This would probably be far lighter then current solutions for this.
I just have a special email for my wireless devices and simply white list devices or people who I allow to disturb me. I really can't say much about SMS since I had the feature removed once I started getting constantly spammed by it.
with no contract to use it for private use.
I assume you have proof of this? I have never seen a media lab with a strict ban on personal use.
The acid test is this, if he had produced a commercial-quality film (something like Blair Witch), would he have had the rights to market it commercially himself, or would the school have an interest in it? My guess is that the school would have easily been able to establish ownership rights.
As long as they own the copyright they have ever right to do this. If on the other hand the school had a rule against this the school may sue them for the damage caused by the commercial use. At no point would the developers of the video lose copyright.
And then on top of that, he abandoned it, further showing that in his own mind, he did not own it.
...or he could have forgot about it. Regardless even if he wished it be destroyed his right to copyright doesn't end there.
Canada as somewhat similar copyright law to the US except for a few aspects such as Fair-use. Automatic copyright protection is something both the US, Canada and most countries share (Berne convention). There are a number of differences between public schools and businesses the first being that school is mandatory, the studets are under the age of majority and most importantly the student doesn't receive compensation. It is unlikely that a contract like that could be legal without a lot of effort from the school.
So while the tape might have been stolen, it wasn't stolen from *him*. And thus he had no legal standing regarding the theft.
Perhaps so, I do not have intimate knowledge of that school's policy regarding tapes only that in my high school we had to provide our own. Regardless the issue of copyright still applies.
Ownership of equipment used to create a work has no bearing on copyright.
He performed the act in a public place (public school)
He recorded the act using public equipment (a camera owned by the public school system).
This has nothing to do with privacy and everything to do with property rights. Had these individuals taped him, things might be much different but the video was his and as such it was his to do with what he pleased. They did an illegal act by stealing the physical tape and then distributing a movie made from that and it was the result of that illegal act that caused a numbers of problems for him. Just because the damages from copyright are not lost sales doesn't make them any less valid.
Custom hardware on those beasts (which is rare these days) is typically done on FPGAs which can be configured by software. The development model for FPGAs can be nearly identical to that of software.
...or if he is masochist a and wants to sue himself. ;)
I don't really see how DMCA would have much to do with it, even if Alexis claimed it as a content protection measure, it would be your own work in which you would be accessing. It's really hard to pull copyright into this when the disks you are attempting interoperability with stock contain nothing. IANAL of course.
What you describe isn't even close to irony.
WTF do they need to be on the Internet for?
My experience with most doctors is if you take away WebMD and PDR.net from a doctor and you got a very insecure individual. Seriously though, if it's a large hospital with multiple campuses (or even not) the EMR will probably require internet access. Anything critical such as monitoring patient's equiptment etc is done over RF or rarely a seperate isolated network.
But how am I supposed to monitor every company in the world? What happens if, two years from now, I finally discover you've used my invention in your product? You could say I have a year from the time I know you've done it, but that just gives rise to another problem. Namely, how does anyone else know when I knew? Who can prove when NTP knew RIM was infringing?
Then it should be up to a judge to decide if a good faith effort was made to enforce the patent. As I have said before it should be a judgment call and it would likely not be used unless in rare circumstances. There is a vast chasm between making a solid effort to protect a patent and simply overlooking something and neglecting enforcing a patent at all. In this case it's rather clearly the later as AT&T has been involved in the MPEG-4 game since the start, to claim that AT&T was unaware of MPEG-4 would suggest retardation at an epic level for the company.
One solution would be to have a requirement that patent holders have to monitor major standards efforts in their field of invention, but how do you arrive at a legal definition of a standards effort? How do you avoid the problem of someone creating a bogus standards organization for the sole purpose of creating an exclusion to a patent?
I think for cases like these (submarine patents) the solution would be to treat patents similar to trademarks in such that patent holders have a requirement to defend the patent or risk losing it. It is certainly not an "automatic" remedy as it requires a judge to make a call in a case by case basis but it would prevent the most obvious examples of this behavior.
How does the shorter battery life make this defective? If the company had sold this as having a much longer battery life then failed to live up to it then that would be a problem.
...but all of whom said this particular issue has prevented their systems from achieving the goal of four to five hours of battery life which Intel had led them to expect.
That seems to be exactly what is happening judging from this quote in the article:
"It was some horrid hodgepodge of tags all slapped together around what amounted to a CVS dump. It was well formed, basically useless as an XML document." Damn I feel the same way about RSS!
Client ID? User Id on the music store? IP address? Hello? The Sony rootkit hit one, non-changing and non-unique URL yet that created a massive backlash. Apple != Sony it seems, lot's of love for Apple, none for Sony.
You are reaching a bit far there.... Sony created a piece of software that was unstable, insecure and hid arbitrary files on the users computer not only could the behavior of their DRM not be disabled it could also not be uninstalled, the sending of information really wasn't what the fuss was about. The key part is that it could not be removed. Not only can iTunes be removed but it's documented how the behavior can be disabled.
Have you seen the specs on these laptops? These laptops certainly qualify as immensely powerful.
Nikon is repositioning itself in a market, others will pick of the slack it certainly isn't the end of the world for 35mm.
Black and white is already is a specialty item, it has been since colour became cheap. People shoot TMax (or any black and white for that matter) because they want black and white, digital isn't going to change that as black and white is a very hard thing re-create properly on a colour digital camera. I really doubt this will have much impact on black and white film sales.
Huh?
T-Max films are made by Kodak
The US has a military budget that dwarfs most of EUs counrys entire budgets. They will find it no more a hardship to jam whatever the EU sends up there than they would flicking the switch on the GPS system. And the EU wouldnt know a damn thing about it, and if they did, there wouldnt be anything they could do without making it look like a threat which none of them would be willing to back up since most of the countrys dont even have a real army.
Anyone with basic physics knowledge should be able to tell when something is being jammed and add a highly directional antenna to the mix and you can tell where. Having a large investment in the military really isn't all that relevant in a technological war (don't kid yourself disabling someone's infrastructure is an act of war however to dice it) such as this as jamming technology and missiles able to shoot down sats aren't that expensive relatively speaking particularly countries with huge commercial space investments. Even the most naiive commanders should expect reciprocity from actions you describe.
They could threaten trade sanctions, but there is honestly very little in needed items that come out of europe that we couldnt get elsewhere. Most of europes trade is in luxuries.
It is very unlikely this would happen but... That is just foolish, sanctions regardless of where would drive the cost of products everywhere. However more damaging would be the lack of investment as the US economy is based heavily on outside investment.
However all this is discussion is really unnecessary since the US could/would simply place local jammers where coverage isn't wanted and would probably meet little or no resistance from the EU.
Unfortunatly Galileo can still be controled by the US. Europe more or less was told to hand over the controls, or the US would shoot the sattelites down. That kind of force is exactly why Europe should have an independant positioning-system. There is a large and blatantly obvious gap between shutting down (the accuracy) of a free service and committing acts of war. Actions like that are likely to be met with reciprocity which really is to no one benefit.
No, you would likely have died young because no private enterprise would have had the financial incentive to develop vaccines to protect you from childhood diseases.
You might try some basic research before bringing up polio as an example. It was developed by a medical school lab and never patented.