"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers." -Thomas Pynchon
Once again, they've got us arguing about the implementation of a stupid idea (patents, i.e., state-enforced monopoly), rather than the stupid idea itself.
This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say "Its a trap". When people are actually debating HOW best to implement stupid laws and not the stupid laws themselves (age restrictions on alcohol consumption), it means they've already been pwned.
As Pynchon said, "If you get them asking the wrong questions...
All this hullabaloo about privacy with regard to ID checking at bars, and no one thinks it's weird that the state is PROHIBITING the sale of alcohol to people under 21?
Seriously, how many notes do I have to miss or how much do I have to vary other parameters such as tempo, phrasing, arrangement, words, etc. for my performace NOT to be considered a performance of some (ill-defined) "work"?
Speaking of voting and making stupidity more painful, I propose that people who vote should put their money where their mouth is by signing a binding pledge to pay their proportional share (out of total number of voters) of the spending of whatever government body they are voting people into. Non-voters get a free pass.
Ya, my thoughts exactly a while ago when I heard about a guy making lots of money for playing games. Like Tsquared this guy had a nickname too, A-Rod or something...
actually 100 micrometers, which is just about the thickness of bond paper, which in turn prompts one to ask the question: why WAFER-thin?
Silicon wafers are about 1mm thick, wafers that you eat are even thicker. So why not describe it as "paper-thin"?
Well what would be better was if the Constitution just specified that all legislation on a bill had to contribute to a single core purpose, and that the purpose couldn't be overly vague
A Constitutional amendment stipulating that all legislation must "contribute to a single core purpose" and that such purpose must "not be overly vague" would itself:
1) violate the stipulation of "contributing to a single core purpose"; and
2) be "overly vague"
As long as we're sharing anecdotes, my wife was rejected as a candidate in the LASIK trials at Stanford (circa 1994 i think) as she had -12.00 myopia, which fell outside the trial parameters. She finally got the operation in August 1996 (prior to FDA approval in the US)in the Philippines, and now has minimal residual myopia (-0.50/-0.75) and zero complications. Pretty miraculous, now that I think about it.
AIDS diagnosis as it is practiced today assumes HIV-AIDS causation. In fact, two persons could have the exact set of symptoms, but if only one of them tests positive for HIV antibodies (even ignoring the fact that viral load cannot be determined accurately using current methods), only that person has AIDS.
Conversely, you have two distinct "AIDS" populations in Africa and North America/Europe, with totally different symptom sets and epidemiological characteristics.
I need a reasonable expectation that I will not get fleeced by offering it on a marketplace
Definition of "to fleece" (Webster):
to charge excessively for goods or services
I think you meant: "I need a reasonable expectation that I will be able to fleece everyone else when I offer it on the marketplace."
Or do you think that although, in general, monopolies must be prevented "to make a market work properly", sometimes a monopoly must be created in order to "make markets work properly", and that Congress knows when to do one and when to do the other?
A few choice excerpts:
In the language of the statute, any person who "invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent,"
The terms are then defined:
The word "process" is defined by law as a process, act or method, and primarily includes industrial or technical processes.
So "process" really means processes, and "acts" and "methods" as well.
The term "machine" used in the statute needs no explanation. Gee, thanks for that "explanation".
Some more gems: The term "manufacture" refers to articles which are made, and includes all manufactured articles.
These classes of subject matter taken together include practically everything which is made by man and the processes for making the products.
The term "useful" in this connection refers to the condition that the subject matter has a useful purpose
These guys really need a primer on "circular definitions".
I'll be happy to start them off: Circular definitions are definitions that are, ya know, circular.
If it applies to all digital media, then this law will effectively end all digital rights management!
Yes, this is more far-reaching than many people (possibly the legislators themselves) realize. The problem is the concepts of "content", "format", "work", are very weak.
For example, would it make it legal to "convert" an encrypted MPEG-2 DVB-S stream into a different "format", say, a rasterized array of photons emanating from a CRT?
I am happy to advocate "-1 Troll" for your posting, however.
See, you can't even recognize reasoned debate when it bites you in the ass.
Sorry, but Canadians by-and-large don't believe in capital punishment. It's not legal here.
That's exactly the point. The example is tantamount to "death to pedophiles" ("genocide" (ooops, weasel word) for an "identifiable group" ("sexual orientation" (even less rigorously defined than "race")).
Slashdot Mirror
Labradoodle
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers." -Thomas Pynchon
Once again, they've got us arguing about the implementation of a stupid idea (patents, i.e., state-enforced monopoly), rather than the stupid idea itself.
ITSATRAP
Still using it by the way.
This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say "Its a trap". When people are actually debating HOW best to implement stupid laws and not the stupid laws themselves (age restrictions on alcohol consumption), it means they've already been pwned.
As Pynchon said, "If you get them asking the wrong questions...
All this hullabaloo about privacy with regard to ID checking at bars, and no one thinks it's weird that the state is PROHIBITING the sale of alcohol to people under 21?
Bull Gores YOU! and in Dyslexic Russia, Bore Gulls YOU!
Seriously, how many notes do I have to miss or how much do I have to vary other parameters such as tempo, phrasing, arrangement, words, etc. for my performace NOT to be considered a performance of some (ill-defined) "work"?
Speaking of voting and making stupidity more painful, I propose that people who vote should put their money where their mouth is by signing a binding pledge to pay their proportional share (out of total number of voters) of the spending of whatever government body they are voting people into. Non-voters get a free pass.
which is supposed to be the unlucky day (at least here in Spain, which is in Europe BTW)
Ya, my thoughts exactly a while ago when I heard about a guy making lots of money for playing games. Like Tsquared this guy had a nickname too, A-Rod or something...
actually 100 micrometers, which is just about the thickness of bond paper, which in turn prompts one to ask the question: why WAFER-thin?
Silicon wafers are about 1mm thick, wafers that you eat are even thicker. So why not describe it as "paper-thin"?
This is what happens when state-enforced monopoly (copyright) and state-enforced competition (anti-trust laws) collide.
Well what would be better was if the Constitution just specified that all legislation on a bill had to contribute to a single core purpose, and that the purpose couldn't be overly vague
A Constitutional amendment stipulating that all legislation must "contribute to a single core purpose" and that such purpose must "not be overly vague" would itself:
1) violate the stipulation of "contributing to a single core purpose"; and
2) be "overly vague"
As long as we're sharing anecdotes, my wife was rejected as a candidate in the LASIK trials at Stanford (circa 1994 i think) as she had -12.00 myopia, which fell outside the trial parameters. She finally got the operation in August 1996 (prior to FDA approval in the US)in the Philippines, and now has minimal residual myopia (-0.50/-0.75) and zero complications. Pretty miraculous, now that I think about it.
No, but I can go 15.5km on a bike without drinking a drop. (Ah, lies, damned lies, statistics, and EXTRAPOLATION).
Just abolish them.
Quirks & Quarks interview with NASA guy
Actually, the punishment for such an offence is getting you liver eaten by an eagle.
See the Wikipedia entry on fire-sharing
AIDS diagnosis as it is practiced today assumes HIV-AIDS causation. In fact, two persons could have the exact set of symptoms, but if only one of them tests positive for HIV antibodies (even ignoring the fact that viral load cannot be determined accurately using current methods), only that person has AIDS.
Conversely, you have two distinct "AIDS" populations in Africa and North America/Europe, with totally different symptom sets and epidemiological characteristics.
I need a reasonable expectation that I will not get fleeced by offering it on a marketplace
Definition of "to fleece" (Webster): to charge excessively for goods or services
I think you meant: "I need a reasonable expectation that I will be able to fleece everyone else when I offer it on the marketplace."
Or do you think that although, in general, monopolies must be prevented "to make a market work properly", sometimes a monopoly must be created in order to "make markets work properly", and that Congress knows when to do one and when to do the other?
Actually, joga="rack" in Tagalog, as in "Gisele has a nice rack." (keeping with the Brazilian theme).
The USPTO has a page clearly explaining what can be patented:
A few choice excerpts:
In the language of the statute, any person who "invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent,"
The terms are then defined:
The word "process" is defined by law as a process, act or method, and primarily includes industrial or technical processes.
So "process" really means processes, and "acts" and "methods" as well.
The term "machine" used in the statute needs no explanation.
Gee, thanks for that "explanation".
Some more gems:
The term "manufacture" refers to articles which are made, and includes all manufactured articles.
These classes of subject matter taken together include practically everything which is made by man and the processes for making the products.
The term "useful" in this connection refers to the condition that the subject matter has a useful purpose
These guys really need a primer on "circular definitions".
I'll be happy to start them off: Circular definitions are definitions that are, ya know, circular.
If it applies to all digital media, then this law will effectively end all digital rights management!
Yes, this is more far-reaching than many people (possibly the legislators themselves) realize. The problem is the concepts of "content", "format", "work", are very weak.
For example, would it make it legal to "convert" an encrypted MPEG-2 DVB-S stream into a different "format", say, a rasterized array of photons emanating from a CRT?
I am happy to advocate "-1 Troll" for your posting, however.
See, you can't even recognize reasoned debate when it bites you in the ass.
Sorry, but Canadians by-and-large don't believe in capital punishment. It's not legal here.
That's exactly the point. The example is tantamount to "death to pedophiles" ("genocide" (ooops, weasel word) for an "identifiable group" ("sexual orientation" (even less rigorously defined than "race")).
Does that meet the standard for "hate speech"?