Pharmaceuticals usually take about 11-13 years to go from discovery to mainstream usage. The only reason I know this is because I'm a pharmacy technician and had to know about this in order to pass the PTCB test.
Then grant the pharmaceutical companies a patent that expires 5 years after their product comes to market, but with a maximum total lifespan. This 'after release' approach may work for the pharmaceutical industry, but not most industries. You can't have someone patent <insert technology here> and then never bring it to market. That would surely kill innovation and technological advancement.
If this comes to pass I can just see the 'splash' screen of just about every male on the planet, and it sure as *hell* ain't gonna be a 'fighting game'.
If I can offload all these 'impure thoughts' I may be able to finally get some real work done. I just hope the computer it gets offloaded to isn't a prude;-)
Facebook has over 800 million users, and your friends and stalkers would not know who has paid their $10 that day so why would the revenue stream stop unless they had no stalkers?
Until Facebook starts selling "who's been watching you stalk them?" information of $10 a day. The best position for an arms dealer is squarely between both sides of a conflict.
I'm not sure anyone affected negatively by software patents could not have an emotional response to this issue.
'If you care most about promoting innovation, offering carve-outs from the patent system to certain industries and technologies looks like a pragmatic solution to a serious problem.'
These special considerations for industries - such as software patents - may be viewed as a solution for the problems with the patent system but they are not a pragmatic solution to the real problems caused by software patents. If you want a select few to innovate, such as those who are rich enough to defend their software patents, then you've got your wish. If you want everyone in the software industry to innovate then software patents are a bad idea.
Then why don't you write an email to Reuters then?
Because it's the first sentence of the story
Just because the submitter copied & pasted the first sentence of the story doesn't let the editor (and I use that term generously) off the hook. If the editors are volunteers then you get what you pay for. If they are compensated then they should put in more effort than the posters or submitters. They should read the article, they should proof the summary, they should provide additional links when necessary, etc.
I get one for an equivalent of a tenner. It comes as an extra with my fixed 24/1 ADSL landline.
Of course, I'm from a different continent.
Oh sure, a magical place where you're not locked into carrier, where plans are reasonably priced and your providers aren't buying special consideration and favors from the government. Actually, that does sound pretty magical.
They either are or they're not. You're claiming that a group not paid by them will find that they're not using it efficiently, and then your'e saying they are. That's a bit of a contradiction, assuming the group is sufficiently honest.
That post was just a rough draft of a marketing campaign. By the time the wireless company's marketing department is done with it we'll see something along the lines of: Independent studies show that the wireless spectrum isn't distributed efficiently by the government. But here at Soulless Wireless we're squeezing everything we can out of the limited spectrum that we have.
Sounds a lot like the Mono vs.NET debacle. There's absolutely nothing that says that Apple won't just come around and sue everybody elses buts off for unlicensed use of Objective-C and Apple's copyrighted APIs.
Oh, come on, Apple isn't going to sue you for using Objective-C. They send you a sympathy card and a case of aspirin.
Oh, come on. I'm a Mac user, but I don't see this as a 'great move' or any indication that Apples cares about anything but profit. This is a cheaper way to address the PR issues associated to the FoxConn problems.
Go post your crap to dev\null.
I would like to see all the other Fortune 500 companies that FoxConn manufactures goods for make the same kind of effort as Apple is in this case, but it certainly isn't a river bullet for the problems Foxconn workers face.
I think a notification/warning would be nice prior to purging it from the system. Maybe it does, I don't know. But at least let the owner of the computer know that...
A: This version of flash will be uninstalled because yadda yadda yadda.
and
B: Accept or Decline, BTW here's a link to obtain the latest version after this Apple update has been completed.
It disables Flash. It doesn't uninstall or delete it.
Apple releases an update that disables third party software, less than a month after their inability to put a dent into bd.Flashback.
They disabled Flash in Safari only. If they take drastic actions they are vilified, but if they don't do anything they are vilified as well. The new Flash updater on Windows will perform automatic & silent updates. They don't offer this as an option for OS X.
TPB has come under increased scrutiny and attack by ISP's & governments lately. They want to distance themselves from these attacks by Anonymous to try to save any face they may have left.
Many of the browser vendors are to blame. I'd love to point the finger at Microsoft, but they aren't the only one who isn't compliant with the supposed standards (CSS, DOM, Javascript, etc).
It's easy to say "never", but we all could come up with scenarios where it might save lives to cut off service. The big question is "will they ever know about a threat far enough in advance to stop it by cutting cell service?" Probably not.
Slashdot Mirror
Pharmaceuticals usually take about 11-13 years to go from discovery to mainstream usage. The only reason I know this is because I'm a pharmacy technician and had to know about this in order to pass the PTCB test.
Then grant the pharmaceutical companies a patent that expires 5 years after their product comes to market, but with a maximum total lifespan. This 'after release' approach may work for the pharmaceutical industry, but not most industries. You can't have someone patent <insert technology here> and then never bring it to market. That would surely kill innovation and technological advancement.
As the sole owner of 3 patents, I do not mind if all my patents expire tomorrow
I sure wish you'd enforce your patens on MyCleanPC and GameMaker posts. That would stop those posts for sure ;-)
If this comes to pass I can just see the 'splash' screen of just about every male on the planet, and it sure as *hell* ain't gonna be a 'fighting game'.
If I can offload all these 'impure thoughts' I may be able to finally get some real work done. I just hope the computer it gets offloaded to isn't a prude ;-)
I could imagine giving Facebook users the ability to earn money too. Allow them to advertise for corporate sponsors.
You mean like spammers? Astroturf'ers? Shills?
Facebook has over 800 million users, and your friends and stalkers would not know who has paid their $10 that day so why would the revenue stream stop unless they had no stalkers?
Until Facebook starts selling "who's been watching you stalk them?" information of $10 a day. The best position for an arms dealer is squarely between both sides of a conflict.
I have a bridge to sell you!
captcha: income
Until you are able to sell your bridge, I can sell you premium advertisers who will be willing to place ads on your bridge.
A T T E N T I O N ! ! ! !
Regarding your post about Craig's List. Your account has been suspended
To make corrective actions you M U S T login to your account for not to be continued suspended.
If your think this is an error contact us to not you're account continue to be suspend.
'If you care most about promoting innovation, offering carve-outs from the patent system to certain industries and technologies looks like a pragmatic solution to a serious problem.'
These special considerations for industries - such as software patents - may be viewed as a solution for the problems with the patent system but they are not a pragmatic solution to the real problems caused by software patents. If you want a select few to innovate, such as those who are rich enough to defend their software patents, then you've got your wish. If you want everyone in the software industry to innovate then software patents are a bad idea.
Then why don't you write an email to Reuters then? Because it's the first sentence of the story
Just because the submitter copied & pasted the first sentence of the story doesn't let the editor (and I use that term generously) off the hook. If the editors are volunteers then you get what you pay for. If they are compensated then they should put in more effort than the posters or submitters. They should read the article, they should proof the summary, they should provide additional links when necessary, etc.
There's a Slashdot show?
Yup ... right between the posts by the anti <inert name of large tech company here> shills and the Gamemaker posts.
Theres plenty of unused spectrum higher up, UV, X-ray, gamma ray...
If we started to use those spectrums then the TSA would take advantage of it and make us put their app on our phones so they could scan us 24/7.
I get one for an equivalent of a tenner. It comes as an extra with my fixed 24/1 ADSL landline.
Of course, I'm from a different continent.
Oh sure, a magical place where you're not locked into carrier, where plans are reasonably priced and your providers aren't buying special consideration and favors from the government. Actually, that does sound pretty magical.
They either are or they're not. You're claiming that a group not paid by them will find that they're not using it efficiently, and then your'e saying they are. That's a bit of a contradiction, assuming the group is sufficiently honest.
That post was just a rough draft of a marketing campaign. By the time the wireless company's marketing department is done with it we'll see something along the lines of:
Independent studies show that the wireless spectrum isn't distributed efficiently by the government. But here at Soulless Wireless we're squeezing everything we can out of the limited spectrum that we have.
Sounds a lot like the Mono vs .NET debacle. There's absolutely nothing that says that Apple won't just come around and sue everybody elses buts off for unlicensed use of Objective-C and Apple's copyrighted APIs.
Oh, come on, Apple isn't going to sue you for using Objective-C. They send you a sympathy card and a case of aspirin.
Fox to help hens improve hen house. Farmers think everything will turn out just swell.
Consumers worried safer hens will result in higher egg prices.
but it certainly isn't a river bullet for the problems Foxconn workers face.
That should be silver bullet. Damn you auto correct!
Oh, come on. I'm a Mac user, but I don't see this as a 'great move' or any indication that Apples cares about anything but profit. This is a cheaper way to address the PR issues associated to the FoxConn problems.
Go post your crap to dev\null.
I would like to see all the other Fortune 500 companies that FoxConn manufactures goods for make the same kind of effort as Apple is in this case, but it certainly isn't a river bullet for the problems Foxconn workers face.
I think a notification/warning would be nice prior to purging it from the system. Maybe it does, I don't know. But at least let the owner of the computer know that...
A: This version of flash will be uninstalled because yadda yadda yadda.
and
B: Accept or Decline, BTW here's a link to obtain the latest version after this Apple update has been completed.
It disables Flash. It doesn't uninstall or delete it.
Apple releases an update that disables third party software, less than a month after their inability to put a dent into bd.Flashback.
They disabled Flash in Safari only. If they take drastic actions they are vilified, but if they don't do anything they are vilified as well. The new Flash updater on Windows will perform automatic & silent updates. They don't offer this as an option for OS X.
TPB has come under increased scrutiny and attack by ISP's & governments lately. They want to distance themselves from these attacks by Anonymous to try to save any face they may have left.
Yes, they should just use the standard.
Stupid microsoft.
Many of the browser vendors are to blame. I'd love to point the finger at Microsoft, but they aren't the only one who isn't compliant with the supposed standards (CSS, DOM, Javascript, etc).
Why are you trying to bring a well reasoned and nuanced ideas into Slashdot?
I apologize. I started drinking early today and it appears to have affected my posts ;-)
It's easy to say "never", but we all could come up with scenarios where it might save lives to cut off service. The big question is "will they ever know about a threat far enough in advance to stop it by cutting cell service?" Probably not.
I think you missed this one It compares those who believe in climate change to terrorists.
Why is my dog barking at my laptop?
Barking may not be as big a problem as wagging his tail, scratching an itch, etc.