If software patents aren't legal in India, would a company over there be able to fearlessly provide web services/applications that infringe on US patents?
e.g. could a company over there build a search engine using Google's patented page rank algorithm with out having to pay an licensing fee?
If so, it would seem that India would be an ideal place for most such companies, as they can operate over there with out fear of patent litigation. Also, hopefully something like this would put pressure on the US to reform our current system in order for local companies to be more competitive.
I'm not sure if this will make problems with script kiddies better or worse (script kiddies being one of the major subpopulations out there that would be attracted to a unit like this).
On the one hand, while in the military, they will be temporarily distracted from trying to "0wn" every Windows 98 box on the net.
However, afterwards, after their service to the military is completed, they might be better trained to cause more substantial damage.
Yeah, that's a great argument. Since it's not impossible to be falsely accused and convicted, let's give them all the rights to watch cable tv....
</Stevyn>
In my original post, I never said prisoners should have the *right* to surf the web little less watch cable television. Rather, I was talking about prisoners having a public form to voice their concerns. Such concerns could involve everything from a false conviction, to conditions within the prison system.
For example, the article talks the ACLU setting up websites for death row inmates. It then goes onto describes an Arizona law that prohibited helping inmates to access the Internet and punished those who transmitted items to someone for posting on the web.
So, it sounds like were not just talking about the rights of prisoners to surf the web (which you could argue that prisoners don't have), but rather their right to give material to organizations like the ACLU that will then be published on the web.
Do you see some compelling reason to oppose this? If so, do you also think that prisoners shouldn't be able to speak to newspaper reporters, in a further effort to silence them?
Yeah, I'm sure after spending 5 years in a place like that for illegally downloading some crummy movie like "Alone in the Dark", a person will come out ready to be a sane, well adjusted, and productive member of society.
But, what about somebody falsely accused of raping/murdering someone; someone that has been convinced on very flimsy evidence? I mean a few too many people are executed only to have evidence come out later that clears their name (heck, one is probably too many, but I digress.....).
Shouldn't people like this have the right to have a public form for their story and to appeal for help (e.g. witness who might be able to clear their name)?
Bad reasoning for not capturing SSNs......
on
Tracking Your Taxes
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
From the article: But he said Omniture doesn't do this. The reason, he said, is that client companies don't authorize Omniture to do it.
So, is he saying that given the opportunity to capture this information, his company would? Semi-distrubing. What about not caputuring this information since it would be wrong to do so? Particulary with recent problems with identity theft.
Unfortunately, elections are kind of like a survey. That is, a bunch of people are asked to pick who will make the laws that individuals in a community will have to live by. So, in that way, survey like results can causes changes in the law. Including stuff that disregards or modify the constitution and it's current set of amendments (e.g. the bill of rights).
In principle, the judiciary should catch all cases of disregard, but since the folks on the supreme-court are selected by other elected officials, getting the wrong people elected long enough can effectively neutralize this check & balance of power.
ISP has problems with boxes infected with malware. ISP identifies and blocks said boxes. Block is only temporary, and will be lifted when customers disinfect their boxes.....
It seems interesting that there's not already more competition for this kind of service. It's not like we're dealing with a particularly complicated web, just something a small handleful of hackers probably could piece together in a weekend.
Does anybody know of any alternatives? Well known or otherwise?
Hrm....taking a look at the imdb, it looks like it takes place one the planet 'Olduvai'. My mistake (#@$! online rumors).
Anyhow, I think the point still stands: Hell demons + Mars == Doom. "Mutant beings" + Olduvai == ???, possibly another hollywood 'B' movie like "Ghosts of Mars?" (which I'd like to point out takes place *on* Mars, unlike the movie version of Doom).
Reminds me of the upcoming "Doom" movie, that I heard neither takes place on mars, nor features hell demons. That is, the movie is suppose to take place in a secret lab on earth and feature a virus that mutates people into horrible monsters - so think another 'resident evil' like movie.
Anyhow, there were only 2 things they needed to get right to make the "Doom" movie "Doom", and the folks over in hollywood just couldn't handle it. Does it surprize anyone that they couldn't get it right for something more sophisticated like this?
Sometimes, we get lucky with something like 'Lord of the Rings', but I think that's probably the exception and not the rule.
I wonder how the 'social ethics' warfare will be effected by using autonomous robotic soldiers.
On one hand the people of a country using such robots could become less apposed to using military force against another country. That is, no longer will your son/daughter/friends be put in harms way.
However, for the people in the country being attacked, such machines would probably be seen as monstrous cold killing machines. Something that accidentally below away your 6 year old since it confused him/her for an enemy combatant.
Lets see. Since this "never happens". You mean no company has ever monopolized a market? Either by what can be considered a natural monopoliy, i.e. they are just the best out there, or otherwise? Economics some magically prevents this from ever happening?
I want to live in the world you live in. It sounds like a nice place.
So these local aggregators are being 'sold' to non-tech savv people who don't know about google news? Seems like a weird business model...since your kind of counting on no know telling them about a better service available at a different URL.
Or, alternatively, they could eventually sell the new drives at a price thats relatively close to that of their competitors and thus drive everyone else out of the hard drive market.
I mean just think if you could buy one drive that has 50gb of space from Maxtor, or you could pay something like 10% to 15% more and get a 500gb from Hitachi. I think most people would go for the bigger drive, even if they didn't need the space (the logic behind this is the same that causes people to by 3Ghz machines that are used just for word processing and web surfing)
I don't know, they could also make a killing just licensing the tech to other companies. Either way, it's Hitachi's call.....
I could be wrong, but I thought Microsoft claimed that they loved "open source" and just hated FSF/GNU.
Coincidently, wasn't one of the points of the offical "open source" movement to offer a less political alternative to work being done by the free software foundation. One of the benefits of this being that companies/business like Microsoft would have fewer issues with the movement.
Using computer programs to prove theorems in mathematics is as old as the field of artifical intelligence itself. In fact, some of the initial excitement around AI originated from the existence of such programs as Newell and Simon's Logical Theorist and it's sucessor the General Problem Solver .
IIRC - back in the early days of AI (1960s), some people in the field thought that in relatively short order computers would be a major soucre of such mathematical proofs. It hasn't happened yet, but that doesn't mean that it won't eventually.
One problem with that is that often the customer will confuse the prototype with the final product. That is, from the customer's perspective (or the perspective of a clueless manager running the project), once they have a prototype that seems to roughtly do what they want, they think "Why would I pay much more to develop a final version of the product? Just polish, package, and deliver the prototype."
This isn't so much of a problem unless you're the one stuck maintaining/bug-fixing such code in the future. This kind of scenario has actually happened to me three times to me, twice my own prototype was used as the final deliverable and a once I inherited code that seemed like really prototype-ish (e.g. alot of functionality wasn't really implemented so I kept on getting bug reports that were caused by various semi-critical section parts of the code just being implemented by stubs). Anyhow, all three times it maintainace was just nightmare.
This is not to critize prototypes. Rather it's just to say that if you use them, be sure to practice good "management" of your client/manager, try to always frame things in a way so that they won't be tempted to confuse the prototype with the finished product. One way to do this involves simply being careful about your word choice when describing things. For example, try to use the word "demo" rather than "prototype".
Slashdot Mirror
If software patents aren't legal in India, would a company over there be able to fearlessly provide web services/applications that infringe on US patents?
e.g. could a company over there build a search engine using Google's patented page rank algorithm with out having to pay an licensing fee?
If so, it would seem that India would be an ideal place for most such companies, as they can operate over there with out fear of patent litigation. Also, hopefully something like this would put pressure on the US to reform our current system in order for local companies to be more competitive.
I'm not sure if this will make problems with script kiddies better or worse (script kiddies being one of the major subpopulations out there that would be attracted to a unit like this).
On the one hand, while in the military, they will be temporarily distracted from trying to "0wn" every Windows 98 box on the net.
However, afterwards, after their service to the military is completed, they might be better trained to cause more substantial damage.
Yeah, that's a great argument. Since it's not impossible to be falsely accused and convicted, let's give them all the rights to watch cable tv.... </Stevyn>
In my original post, I never said prisoners should have the *right* to surf the web little less watch cable television. Rather, I was talking about prisoners having a public form to voice their concerns. Such concerns could involve everything from a false conviction, to conditions within the prison system.
For example, the article talks the ACLU setting up websites for death row inmates. It then goes onto describes an Arizona law that prohibited helping inmates to access the Internet and punished those who transmitted items to someone for posting on the web.
So, it sounds like were not just talking about the rights of prisoners to surf the web (which you could argue that prisoners don't have), but rather their right to give material to organizations like the ACLU that will then be published on the web.
Do you see some compelling reason to oppose this? If so, do you also think that prisoners shouldn't be able to speak to newspaper reporters, in a further effort to silence them?
CEO of company that would lose customers is city wifi is deployed makes argument against wi-fi.
More at news 11....
Yeah, I'm sure after spending 5 years in a place like that for illegally downloading some crummy movie like "Alone in the Dark", a person will come out ready to be a sane, well adjusted, and productive member of society.
But, what about somebody falsely accused of raping/murdering someone; someone that has been convinced on very flimsy evidence? I mean a few too many people are executed only to have evidence come out later that clears their name (heck, one is probably too many, but I digress.....).
Shouldn't people like this have the right to have a public form for their story and to appeal for help (e.g. witness who might be able to clear their name)?
From the article: But he said Omniture doesn't do this. The reason, he said, is that client companies don't authorize Omniture to do it.
So, is he saying that given the opportunity to capture this information, his company would? Semi-distrubing. What about not caputuring this information since it would be wrong to do so? Particulary with recent problems with identity theft.
-
Unfortunately, elections are kind of like a survey. That is, a bunch of people are asked to pick who will make the laws that individuals in a community will have to live by. So, in that way, survey like results can causes changes in the law. Including stuff that disregards or modify the constitution and it's current set of amendments (e.g. the bill of rights).
In principle, the judiciary should catch all cases of disregard, but since the folks on the supreme-court are selected by other elected officials, getting the wrong people elected long enough can effectively neutralize this check & balance of power.
ISP has problems with boxes infected with malware. ISP identifies and blocks said boxes. Block is only temporary, and will be lifted when customers disinfect their boxes.....
Where's the story?
It seems interesting that there's not already more competition for this kind of service. It's not like we're dealing with a particularly complicated web, just something a small handleful of hackers probably could piece together in a weekend.
Does anybody know of any alternatives? Well known or otherwise?
Hrm....taking a look at the imdb, it looks like it takes place one the planet 'Olduvai'. My mistake (#@$! online rumors).
Anyhow, I think the point still stands: Hell demons + Mars == Doom. "Mutant beings" + Olduvai == ???, possibly another hollywood 'B' movie like "Ghosts of Mars?" (which I'd like to point out takes place *on* Mars, unlike the movie version of Doom).
Reminds me of the upcoming "Doom" movie, that I heard neither takes place on mars, nor features hell demons. That is, the movie is suppose to take place in a secret lab on earth and feature a virus that mutates people into horrible monsters - so think another 'resident evil' like movie.
Anyhow, there were only 2 things they needed to get right to make the "Doom" movie "Doom", and the folks over in hollywood just couldn't handle it. Does it surprize anyone that they couldn't get it right for something more sophisticated like this?
Sometimes, we get lucky with something like 'Lord of the Rings', but I think that's probably the exception and not the rule.
I wonder how the 'social ethics' warfare will be effected by using autonomous robotic soldiers.
On one hand the people of a country using such robots could become less apposed to using military force against another country. That is, no longer will your son/daughter/friends be put in harms way.
However, for the people in the country being attacked, such machines would probably be seen as monstrous cold killing machines. Something that accidentally below away your 6 year old since it confused him/her for an enemy combatant.
Lets see. Since this "never happens". You mean no company has ever monopolized a market? Either by what can be considered a natural monopoliy, i.e. they are just the best out there, or otherwise? Economics some magically prevents this from ever happening?
I want to live in the world you live in. It sounds like a nice place.
So these local aggregators are being 'sold' to non-tech savv people who don't know about google news? Seems like a weird business model...since your kind of counting on no know telling them about a better service available at a different URL.
Or, alternatively, they could eventually sell the new drives at a price thats relatively close to that of their competitors and thus drive everyone else out of the hard drive market.
I mean just think if you could buy one drive that has 50gb of space from Maxtor, or you could pay something like 10% to 15% more and get a 500gb from Hitachi. I think most people would go for the bigger drive, even if they didn't need the space (the logic behind this is the same that causes people to by 3Ghz machines that are used just for word processing and web surfing)
I don't know, they could also make a killing just licensing the tech to other companies. Either way, it's Hitachi's call.....
I could be wrong, but I thought Microsoft claimed that they loved "open source" and just hated FSF/GNU.
Coincidently, wasn't one of the points of the offical "open source" movement to offer a less political alternative to work being done by the free software foundation. One of the benefits of this being that companies/business like Microsoft would have fewer issues with the movement.
Using computer programs to prove theorems in mathematics is as old as the field of artifical intelligence itself. In fact, some of the initial excitement around AI originated from the existence of such programs as Newell and Simon's Logical Theorist and it's sucessor the General Problem Solver .
IIRC - back in the early days of AI (1960s), some people in the field thought that in relatively short order computers would be a major soucre of such mathematical proofs. It hasn't happened yet, but that doesn't mean that it won't eventually.
Yeah, in theory this should work great,
However....
One problem with that is that often the customer will confuse the prototype with the final product. That is, from the customer's perspective (or the perspective of a clueless manager running the project), once they have a prototype that seems to roughtly do what they want, they think "Why would I pay much more to develop a final version of the product? Just polish, package, and deliver the prototype."
This isn't so much of a problem unless you're the one stuck maintaining/bug-fixing such code in the future. This kind of scenario has actually happened to me three times to me, twice my own prototype was used as the final deliverable and a once I inherited code that seemed like really prototype-ish (e.g. alot of functionality wasn't really implemented so I kept on getting bug reports that were caused by various semi-critical section parts of the code just being implemented by stubs). Anyhow, all three times it maintainace was just nightmare.
This is not to critize prototypes. Rather it's just to say that if you use them, be sure to practice good "management" of your client/manager, try to always frame things in a way so that they won't be tempted to confuse the prototype with the finished product. One way to do this involves simply being careful about your word choice when describing things. For example, try to use the word "demo" rather than "prototype".