I have a business to run and sorry but vote for people who wont scare us away from US investments.
If only we could. The only people who are allowed to run for government are vetted by the very interests that are scaring people like you (and companies and jobs) away. And they do a fantastic job of classic divide and conquer. They have everyone so focused on democrat versus republican, left versus right, conservative versus liberal, red versus blue that the vast majority don't realize that red or blue they're turning the constitution into toilet paper and the government into the power base for a group of interests with the money to control it. And at the expense of "We The People" the government is supposed to be representing basically turning us into plebeians who's only purpose is to serve they're interests where and when they deem we're needed.
While driving, it's not possible to predict anything more than a few seconds into the future
Bullshit. I've been riding a bike on the roads with all you morons in cages for 30+ years. Up until maybe 5 or ten years ago I had ridden bikes more miles than I had driven a car. Despite the fact that bikes are invisible to the point that most of you morons look right at a bike and still change lanes right into it I've had exactly one accident on a bike. You want to know why? Because I know what you idiots are going to do before you do. I watch every car. I see the moron 4 car lengths up and 2 lanes over yakking on their phone and immediately start making sure I have an out when they randomly drift out of their lane. I'm watching 100 yards in front of me and behind me. I select my lane and my lane position based on on my predictions of what the cars up there are going to do. Idiocy is usually predictable. You see the tailgater and you know there's a high probability of a rapid random lane change and direct your actions appropriately. I know where every vehicle is and where every out is. The vast majority of accidents are avoidable if you actually pay attention to what's going on and practice a little forethought. And I dare say that would apply to pretty much all of them if everyone drove that way, the main exception being mechanical failures.
I'll never understand what it is about getting in a car that turns even the brightest people into complete idiots. Nearly 40,000 people are slaughtered every year on our roads and this hasn't improved much despite safety features that have improved collision survivability orders of magnitude in the last 10 or 20 years. No one cares. Every day they get in their cars and drive like idiots. 5000 are killed in 9 years of fucking war and everyone is concerned about that. 50,000 were killed in 10 years in Vietnam and that nearly started a revolution. 40,000 are killed in one year on the highways and no one cares.
And attitudes like your's are the primary reason why. It's no ones fault. We just have to live with it. If instead people actually took responsibility for their actions especially when those actions kill more people every year than were killed in 10 years of war our roads wouldn't be a slaughterhouse.
You want a solution. Put data recorders in every car. Set them to only record the last 10 minutes of data so there's no privacy issues. You get 3 strikes every ten years. The first is a freebie. Your first ticket, proven by the data recorder, in ten years is a $1000 fine (or even better adjusted for income). Your second, you lose your license for a week. Your third, you lose it for 10 years. You get caught driving without a license you go to jail. No exceptions. Accidents and deaths would drop by 5 nines in a year or 2. People would have to drive like they were controlling a vastly deadly machine and actually be responsible for their actions. The cost of the data recorders wouldn't even come close of the cost of the carnage on our roads so that's not a factor.
They go in expecting to overreact to a threat - that doesn't actually exist. None of these cops, who have violently arrested, maced without provocation, and beaten hard with clubs now thousands of people were actually threatened. If they felt threatened, it's because they refused to accept the reality happening to them. We have now had many second times, both in the same place and just across the country, for weeks and months.
Have you ever been in a riot? I have. There's a palpable energy generated that's pretty damn scary. I have no idea what it is but it exists. I'll give you that in most of the current situations the police have been the instigators of creating a situation where they had to fear that energy.
It's a no huge step going from macing some trouble making punk kids (mindset of the police, mind you, not my opinion of them) to shooting them in the head.
For anyone but a complete sociopath it is. Killing people (and living with it) isn't easy.
Big enough to find plenty of thugs already in the armed forces ready to kill other Americans, especially ones they see as "spoiled, lazy rich kids".
I think you need to poll the actual grunts on this one. I think you'll find you're way off base here. Yeah, they do exists but they are a small minority and US Army doesn't do anywhere near a good enough job of brainwashing it's recruits to override their moral compasses. The moral ones are more likely to just shoot the idiots. Hell, I got in trouble for telling a Sergeant to fuck off when he tried to get a cruit to empty the garbage in the Sergeant's room. What do you think I'd do if he told me to start shooting civilians? Mind you, I got in trouble for telling him to fuck off not for telling the Sergeant and cruit that he didn't have to and wasn't supposed to do it. Actually I was told I was right about that but was wrong about the way I handled it. In the US military you're told you have an obligation NOT to follow illegal orders. And shooting civilians is WAY over on the illegal order side of things.
And to my original point, it was perfectly clear that this would happen when the gun fetishists spent years voting for Republicans and Democrats who enable them who created this police state in waiting.
At least you're not blaming one political party because the Obama administration has taking Bush's oppressive policies quite a but further towards the wrong end of the scale. But if you think the pro-second amendment people are the primary cause, or even a major one, of the current movement towards a police state you need to broaden your viewpoint. I really don't think it's a big factor at all. The main one is the revolution in communications brought on by the advance of technology. Information is a far more potent weapon against oppression than any number of guns are. The US government is finding that the historical control they've had over information is rapidly eroding and in the process their myriad of sins are more and more coming to light.
You're never going to use your guns to fight the government. All your actions have proven otherwise, every time.
Hmmm...me thinks you vastly underestimate the free thinking mindset in this country. Somehow I think (or at least hope) if it got to the point police or military units were ordered to deploy under conditions where they knew they be required to start shooting civilians there would be some disciplinary issues...at the very least. Lets hope and pray (ramen) it never reaches the point that is tested. Either way knowing they might also be shot back at while out slaughtering civilian friends and neighbors can't be anything but a further deterrence.
Yeah, I know you're gonna bring up things like Kent State and the numerous current actions by the jack booted thugs against civilians. There's 2 things to consider here though. First it's one thing to deploy someplace where your expected to control a situation and suddenly find yourself in a situation where you feel threatened and over react to that threat. It's completely different to be order to deploy to an area where you KNOW your are going to be required to shoot civilains. Especially the second time. Second, it's a HUGE step going from macing some trouble making punk kids (mindset of the police, mind you, not my opinion of them) to shooting them in the head.
Don't you love it when a bill has bi partisan support. How else would we get fantastic bills like this one, the patriot act, and SOPA?
When is everyone gonna wake up to the fact that there are no parties anymore. Elephant or Donkey is irrelevant. The only thing that influences our government representatives, Republican or Democrat, is who happens to be paying them the best on a given issue.
I keep thinking of a scene from the movie Moon Over Parador. 2 guys are discussing who they're going to vote for where the choices are blue or red. One says, "Vote for whoever you want. It's a free dictatorship." The government of the United States no longer represents the people. It represents the corporate interests that pay them the best. The constitution has been trampled so bad it's pretty much immaterial at this point. The fact that a blatant censorship bill like SOPA/PROTECT IP can even be considered is proof of that.
The ASR standard unit of suckiness is the Lovelace (Ll).
This is defined as: One Lovelace is the amount of force (measured in dynes)
it takes to draw a round ball weighing e Troy Ounces down a tube it fits
exactly (in air) at a speed of pi attoparsecs/microfortnight.
Like Farads, this is a rather large measurement. Thus, Plan 9 sucks a few
mLl, for instance, while your average Microsoft product achieves many Ll.
Bottom line, taking notes is a valuable part of learning.
I'd say the opposite is true, at least for me. If I'm taking notes I'm focused on writing crap down rather than focused on what the hell they're talking about. This was especially the case in really complex classes such as language theory, theoretical calculus or physics. I never took notes but instead focused on understanding the concepts of what was being taught. If you catch on to the overall concept notes about the details are really useless.
And at the heart of it, the article offers no causative argument that litigation spurred on file sharing.
I'm confused as to why you think there needs to be definitive causative evidence that the lawsuits increased file sharing. The object of the lawsuits was to reduce or eliminate file sharing. Whether they directly caused an increase is more an aside to the fact that there was a tremendous increase despite them. Thus they failed miserable in their objective while having very large other negative side effects.
gee, science changes conclusion based on new data?
Science is supposed to make conclusions based on testable hypothesis and then test the results. Making conclusions based on something so complex that one has only a VERY rudimentary understanding of it is called religion.
I can't imagine how horrid that must be for people as simple as you.
Huh. I'm the one who thinks some things are too complex to make rational conclusions about them while your telling me doing that is science. I'm the simpleton?
Climate science is considerably more complex than rocket engines, ballistics, and even the fluid dynamics of re-entry.
I'd say several orders of magnitude more complex at least. But they have no problem generating accurate models of it. Well, accurate until they're wrong. Then there's a whole bunch of excuses why there wrong. And of course the excuses are always accurate...until they're wrong..."
Wait...so you're saying the models are wrong? So are they still wrong or are they right now?
because up until 2009/2010-ish were actually experiencing a natural cooling trend
So let me see if I understand this...ummm...so the models don't include "natural" trends? So it's a model of human effect on the natural planetary climate that doesn't include "natural" trends.
Hell, might make more sense to just jump to convenient conclusions given a tiny dataset.
To think, that we have no clue what we are doing is pretty scary if you think about it.
I think it's even scarier that we have arrogant supposedly very smart people who claim they have a real understanding of something as complex as a planetary system and, really terrifying, think they can make accurate models of it on a computer.
In general TPM's allow fully disconnected trust relationships.
The government drone quoted in the article clearly states this has nothing to do with security and everything to do with DRM and controlling what is on your system.
From the fine article:
Owen Pengelly, deputy director of policy at the Office for Cyber Security and Information Assurance in the Cabinet Office..."Building the most resilient cyber defences in the world will not help if you are suffering from intellectual property theft," he said.
The first time around, privacy advocates were concerned that TPM would be used by the big corps to lock in the sofware more efficiently than any dongle, and create a DRM hell. But it didn't, because the vast majority of users aren't interested in paying extra for such a feature. But those who are haven't changed the playing field.
You, my friend, are either blindly naive or an idiot. The article blatantly and clearly states that primary purpose of this is to create DRM hell. The only reason it hasn't so far is that any products that use this are FAR less useful than products that don't use it and thus worth much less to the market. A nice government mandate will eliminate any ability of the market to make choices about such things. This has NOTHING to do with security. It has everything to do with control and the governments and established elite are finding that they are losing it. Wake up. Please.
From the fine article:
Owen Pengelly, deputy director of policy at the Office for Cyber Security..."Building the most resilient cyber defences in the world will not help if you are suffering from intellectual property theft,"
Now, for sitting in my recliner, or in an airplane, or a hotel room and essentially just noodling around, my iPad is pretty much exactly something I've always wanted. I'm not writing code on it, or tuning databases... I'm playing games, watching videos, surfing the web. And in a way a netbook would never be appealing to me.
The difference is modern Linux distros offer both. As much as deniers to want state otherwise, Linux is as easy if not easier to use that any other OS out there while still allowing you to muck around any way you want to. And yes I have dump Linux on my mother's and numerous other peoples computers and the only thing they miss is expensive software and viruses.
That tells me that the legal system is rather broken...
Not at all. The problem is ridiculous patents being approved combined with laws that assume patents are valid once approved and require a preponderance of evidence to invalidate along with having the outcomes determined by judges and juries that have no understanding of the technical complexities involved in most patents.
Of course; most that are confronted with a lawsuit would rather pay the racketeer.
I think "would rather" is a bad phrase here. More like: most that are confronted with a lawsuit find very little choice between spending massive amounts of money on lawyers and suffering the distractions and stress associated with a lawsuit vs. paying off the racketeer.
The solution that works for the deep fryer is not necessarily the right solution or the best solution for every superficially similiar problem.
I think his point was that simple making minor changes to adapt something for a slightly different use case doesn't justify getting a 21 year monopoly.
I'm not sure that's the issue. I'd be more willing to bet it is more to do with perceived future control of the platform.
No, no, no. You're missing the point entirely. Google makes money by having eyes on the internet. Doesn't matter how those eyes get there. Windows, Lunix, iOS, Android? They don't care. All of these increase the number of eyes on the internet at any given time. Google loves a competitive smart phone industry. That competitiveness drives innovation, again increasing the number of people accessing the interenet. The danger that Android averts is a locked down system like iOS. Steve Jobs controls who can access what. That gives them the potential to keep all those smartphone eyes away from Google. Android headed off that problem because with viable competition it pretty much reduces the ability of Apple to lock down iOS. If it gets too locked down there are alternatives.
Unless Google gets taken over by a Jobs/Ballmer/Ellison'esque type I think you'll continue to see Google giving away the things that most companies view as things to patent and lock up.
I'm very surprised that Google would spend so much money on defensive patents for Android. Android can't be generating that much revenue, can it?
This lack of understanding is exactly why we're in this patent mess in the first place. Google makes money by having eyes on the internet. Anything they do that increases the number of eyes on the internet makes Google money. Google makes money despite giving SO MUCH of what they have created (innovated) for free. Actually they pay money for people to use what they have created, bandwidth, servers, support systems, etc... Google is the perfect example of using the free market to make money rather than relying on government granted monopolies.
If so, where do I sign on to the lawsuit for fraud?
Too late. The "Open Government" Obama administration has already granted them immunity, including retroactive immunity, for any illegal spying. The one big thing I was hoping for from Obama was to roll back some of the grosser programs put in place in violation of 1st and 4th amendments by the Bush administration. Instead his administration has taken them WAY farther. It's getting to the point of approaching gross violations of the Constitution by Lincoln during the American Civil War. But at least Lincoln had the excuse of a civil war to contend with. Obama and the morons in Congress are doing primarily to line there pockets with money from corporate interest.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a business to run and sorry but vote for people who wont scare us away from US investments.
If only we could. The only people who are allowed to run for government are vetted by the very interests that are scaring people like you (and companies and jobs) away. And they do a fantastic job of classic divide and conquer. They have everyone so focused on democrat versus republican, left versus right, conservative versus liberal, red versus blue that the vast majority don't realize that red or blue they're turning the constitution into toilet paper and the government into the power base for a group of interests with the money to control it. And at the expense of "We The People" the government is supposed to be representing basically turning us into plebeians who's only purpose is to serve they're interests where and when they deem we're needed.
While driving, it's not possible to predict anything more than a few seconds into the future
Bullshit. I've been riding a bike on the roads with all you morons in cages for 30+ years. Up until maybe 5 or ten years ago I had ridden bikes more miles than I had driven a car. Despite the fact that bikes are invisible to the point that most of you morons look right at a bike and still change lanes right into it I've had exactly one accident on a bike. You want to know why? Because I know what you idiots are going to do before you do. I watch every car. I see the moron 4 car lengths up and 2 lanes over yakking on their phone and immediately start making sure I have an out when they randomly drift out of their lane. I'm watching 100 yards in front of me and behind me. I select my lane and my lane position based on on my predictions of what the cars up there are going to do. Idiocy is usually predictable. You see the tailgater and you know there's a high probability of a rapid random lane change and direct your actions appropriately. I know where every vehicle is and where every out is. The vast majority of accidents are avoidable if you actually pay attention to what's going on and practice a little forethought. And I dare say that would apply to pretty much all of them if everyone drove that way, the main exception being mechanical failures.
I'll never understand what it is about getting in a car that turns even the brightest people into complete idiots. Nearly 40,000 people are slaughtered every year on our roads and this hasn't improved much despite safety features that have improved collision survivability orders of magnitude in the last 10 or 20 years. No one cares. Every day they get in their cars and drive like idiots. 5000 are killed in 9 years of fucking war and everyone is concerned about that. 50,000 were killed in 10 years in Vietnam and that nearly started a revolution. 40,000 are killed in one year on the highways and no one cares.
And attitudes like your's are the primary reason why. It's no ones fault. We just have to live with it. If instead people actually took responsibility for their actions especially when those actions kill more people every year than were killed in 10 years of war our roads wouldn't be a slaughterhouse.
You want a solution. Put data recorders in every car. Set them to only record the last 10 minutes of data so there's no privacy issues. You get 3 strikes every ten years. The first is a freebie. Your first ticket, proven by the data recorder, in ten years is a $1000 fine (or even better adjusted for income). Your second, you lose your license for a week. Your third, you lose it for 10 years. You get caught driving without a license you go to jail. No exceptions. Accidents and deaths would drop by 5 nines in a year or 2. People would have to drive like they were controlling a vastly deadly machine and actually be responsible for their actions. The cost of the data recorders wouldn't even come close of the cost of the carnage on our roads so that's not a factor.
It will only stop when somebody attempts to apply the same strategy to the legal profession.
Are you kidding? The lawyers would LOVE this. You'd have lawyers billing massive hours for lawsuits over strategies on how to sue someone.
They go in expecting to overreact to a threat - that doesn't actually exist. None of these cops, who have violently arrested, maced without provocation, and beaten hard with clubs now thousands of people were actually threatened. If they felt threatened, it's because they refused to accept the reality happening to them. We have now had many second times, both in the same place and just across the country, for weeks and months.
Have you ever been in a riot? I have. There's a palpable energy generated that's pretty damn scary. I have no idea what it is but it exists. I'll give you that in most of the current situations the police have been the instigators of creating a situation where they had to fear that energy.
It's a no huge step going from macing some trouble making punk kids (mindset of the police, mind you, not my opinion of them) to shooting them in the head.
For anyone but a complete sociopath it is. Killing people (and living with it) isn't easy.
Big enough to find plenty of thugs already in the armed forces ready to kill other Americans, especially ones they see as "spoiled, lazy rich kids".
I think you need to poll the actual grunts on this one. I think you'll find you're way off base here. Yeah, they do exists but they are a small minority and US Army doesn't do anywhere near a good enough job of brainwashing it's recruits to override their moral compasses. The moral ones are more likely to just shoot the idiots. Hell, I got in trouble for telling a Sergeant to fuck off when he tried to get a cruit to empty the garbage in the Sergeant's room. What do you think I'd do if he told me to start shooting civilians? Mind you, I got in trouble for telling him to fuck off not for telling the Sergeant and cruit that he didn't have to and wasn't supposed to do it. Actually I was told I was right about that but was wrong about the way I handled it. In the US military you're told you have an obligation NOT to follow illegal orders. And shooting civilians is WAY over on the illegal order side of things.
And to my original point, it was perfectly clear that this would happen when the gun fetishists spent years voting for Republicans and Democrats who enable them who created this police state in waiting.
At least you're not blaming one political party because the Obama administration has taking Bush's oppressive policies quite a but further towards the wrong end of the scale. But if you think the pro-second amendment people are the primary cause, or even a major one, of the current movement towards a police state you need to broaden your viewpoint. I really don't think it's a big factor at all. The main one is the revolution in communications brought on by the advance of technology. Information is a far more potent weapon against oppression than any number of guns are. The US government is finding that the historical control they've had over information is rapidly eroding and in the process their myriad of sins are more and more coming to light.
You're never going to use your guns to fight the government. All your actions have proven otherwise, every time.
Hmmm...me thinks you vastly underestimate the free thinking mindset in this country. Somehow I think (or at least hope) if it got to the point police or military units were ordered to deploy under conditions where they knew they be required to start shooting civilians there would be some disciplinary issues...at the very least. Lets hope and pray (ramen) it never reaches the point that is tested. Either way knowing they might also be shot back at while out slaughtering civilian friends and neighbors can't be anything but a further deterrence.
Yeah, I know you're gonna bring up things like Kent State and the numerous current actions by the jack booted thugs against civilians. There's 2 things to consider here though. First it's one thing to deploy someplace where your expected to control a situation and suddenly find yourself in a situation where you feel threatened and over react to that threat. It's completely different to be order to deploy to an area where you KNOW your are going to be required to shoot civilains. Especially the second time. Second, it's a HUGE step going from macing some trouble making punk kids (mindset of the police, mind you, not my opinion of them) to shooting them in the head.
Don't you love it when a bill has bi partisan support. How else would we get fantastic bills like this one, the patriot act, and SOPA?
When is everyone gonna wake up to the fact that there are no parties anymore. Elephant or Donkey is irrelevant. The only thing that influences our government representatives, Republican or Democrat, is who happens to be paying them the best on a given issue.
I keep thinking of a scene from the movie Moon Over Parador. 2 guys are discussing who they're going to vote for where the choices are blue or red. One says, "Vote for whoever you want. It's a free dictatorship." The government of the United States no longer represents the people. It represents the corporate interests that pay them the best. The constitution has been trampled so bad it's pretty much immaterial at this point. The fact that a blatant censorship bill like SOPA/PROTECT IP can even be considered is proof of that.
No, Windows suck as much as people think (if not more).
There's a unit of measure for suckiness:
3.3) Just HOW MUCH does this system suck?
The ASR standard unit of suckiness is the Lovelace (Ll).
This is defined as: One Lovelace is the amount of force (measured in dynes)
it takes to draw a round ball weighing e Troy Ounces down a tube it fits
exactly (in air) at a speed of pi attoparsecs/microfortnight.
Like Farads, this is a rather large measurement. Thus, Plan 9 sucks a few
mLl, for instance, while your average Microsoft product achieves many Ll.
Bottom line, taking notes is a valuable part of learning.
I'd say the opposite is true, at least for me. If I'm taking notes I'm focused on writing crap down rather than focused on what the hell they're talking about. This was especially the case in really complex classes such as language theory, theoretical calculus or physics. I never took notes but instead focused on understanding the concepts of what was being taught. If you catch on to the overall concept notes about the details are really useless.
And at the heart of it, the article offers no causative argument that litigation spurred on file sharing.
I'm confused as to why you think there needs to be definitive causative evidence that the lawsuits increased file sharing. The object of the lawsuits was to reduce or eliminate file sharing. Whether they directly caused an increase is more an aside to the fact that there was a tremendous increase despite them. Thus they failed miserable in their objective while having very large other negative side effects.
gee, science changes conclusion based on new data?
Science is supposed to make conclusions based on testable hypothesis and then test the results. Making conclusions based on something so complex that one has only a VERY rudimentary understanding of it is called religion.
I can't imagine how horrid that must be for people as simple as you.
Huh. I'm the one who thinks some things are too complex to make rational conclusions about them while your telling me doing that is science. I'm the simpleton?
Climate science is considerably more complex than rocket engines, ballistics, and even the fluid dynamics of re-entry.
I'd say several orders of magnitude more complex at least. But they have no problem generating accurate models of it. Well, accurate until they're wrong. Then there's a whole bunch of excuses why there wrong. And of course the excuses are always accurate...until they're wrong..."
The models are off
Wait...so you're saying the models are wrong? So are they still wrong or are they right now?
because up until 2009/2010-ish were actually experiencing a natural cooling trend
So let me see if I understand this...ummm...so the models don't include " natural " trends? So it's a model of human effect on the natural planetary climate that doesn't include " natural " trends.
Hell, might make more sense to just jump to convenient conclusions given a tiny dataset.
To think, that we have no clue what we are doing is pretty scary if you think about it.
I think it's even scarier that we have arrogant supposedly very smart people who claim they have a real understanding of something as complex as a planetary system and, really terrifying, think they can make accurate models of it on a computer.
In general TPM's allow fully disconnected trust relationships.
The government drone quoted in the article clearly states this has nothing to do with security and everything to do with DRM and controlling what is on your system.
From the fine article:
Owen Pengelly, deputy director of policy at the Office for Cyber Security and Information Assurance in the Cabinet Office..."Building the most resilient cyber defences in the world will not help if you are suffering from intellectual property theft," he said.
The first time around, privacy advocates were concerned that TPM would be used by the big corps to lock in the sofware more efficiently than any dongle, and create a DRM hell. But it didn't, because the vast majority of users aren't interested in paying extra for such a feature. But those who are haven't changed the playing field.
You, my friend, are either blindly naive or an idiot. The article blatantly and clearly states that primary purpose of this is to create DRM hell. The only reason it hasn't so far is that any products that use this are FAR less useful than products that don't use it and thus worth much less to the market. A nice government mandate will eliminate any ability of the market to make choices about such things. This has NOTHING to do with security. It has everything to do with control and the governments and established elite are finding that they are losing it. Wake up. Please.
From the fine article:
Owen Pengelly, deputy director of policy at the Office for Cyber Security..."Building the most resilient cyber defences in the world will not help if you are suffering from intellectual property theft,"
None of them ever tried to control me.
You're the perfect example of his genius. You have no clue of the level you were controlled and wander on in an ignorant bliss.
Good thing I have some karma to burn cause the applebots will mod this to purgatory.
Now, for sitting in my recliner, or in an airplane, or a hotel room and essentially just noodling around, my iPad is pretty much exactly something I've always wanted. I'm not writing code on it, or tuning databases ... I'm playing games, watching videos, surfing the web. And in a way a netbook would never be appealing to me.
The difference is modern Linux distros offer both. As much as deniers to want state otherwise, Linux is as easy if not easier to use that any other OS out there while still allowing you to muck around any way you want to. And yes I have dump Linux on my mother's and numerous other peoples computers and the only thing they miss is expensive software and viruses.
Meanwhile, we will have to see some serious consequences to the US economy before that happens... and it will happen.
*looks through headlines of worldwide economic doom* Wow, more serious than what pray tell?
That tells me that the legal system is rather broken...
Not at all. The problem is ridiculous patents being approved combined with laws that assume patents are valid once approved and require a preponderance of evidence to invalidate along with having the outcomes determined by judges and juries that have no understanding of the technical complexities involved in most patents.
Of course; most that are confronted with a lawsuit would rather pay the racketeer.
I think "would rather" is a bad phrase here. More like: most that are confronted with a lawsuit find very little choice between spending massive amounts of money on lawyers and suffering the distractions and stress associated with a lawsuit vs. paying off the racketeer.
The solution that works for the deep fryer is not necessarily the right solution or the best solution for every superficially similiar problem.
I think his point was that simple making minor changes to adapt something for a slightly different use case doesn't justify getting a 21 year monopoly.
I'm not sure that's the issue. I'd be more willing to bet it is more to do with perceived future control of the platform.
No, no, no. You're missing the point entirely. Google makes money by having eyes on the internet. Doesn't matter how those eyes get there. Windows, Lunix, iOS, Android? They don't care. All of these increase the number of eyes on the internet at any given time. Google loves a competitive smart phone industry. That competitiveness drives innovation, again increasing the number of people accessing the interenet. The danger that Android averts is a locked down system like iOS. Steve Jobs controls who can access what. That gives them the potential to keep all those smartphone eyes away from Google. Android headed off that problem because with viable competition it pretty much reduces the ability of Apple to lock down iOS. If it gets too locked down there are alternatives.
Unless Google gets taken over by a Jobs/Ballmer/Ellison'esque type I think you'll continue to see Google giving away the things that most companies view as things to patent and lock up.
I'm very surprised that Google would spend so much money on defensive patents for Android. Android can't be generating that much revenue, can it?
This lack of understanding is exactly why we're in this patent mess in the first place. Google makes money by having eyes on the internet. Anything they do that increases the number of eyes on the internet makes Google money. Google makes money despite giving SO MUCH of what they have created (innovated) for free. Actually they pay money for people to use what they have created, bandwidth, servers, support systems, etc... Google is the perfect example of using the free market to make money rather than relying on government granted monopolies.
Might as well be a new meme for the crazies such as yourself who just toss the name around and don't even know what you're whining about.
Yeah, I know. Crazies like me never know what they're talking about.
If so, where do I sign on to the lawsuit for fraud?
Too late. The "Open Government" Obama administration has already granted them immunity, including retroactive immunity, for any illegal spying. The one big thing I was hoping for from Obama was to roll back some of the grosser programs put in place in violation of 1st and 4th amendments by the Bush administration. Instead his administration has taken them WAY farther. It's getting to the point of approaching gross violations of the Constitution by Lincoln during the American Civil War. But at least Lincoln had the excuse of a civil war to contend with. Obama and the morons in Congress are doing primarily to line there pockets with money from corporate interest.