Even better, you can shift the car into neutral while braking, or maybe even turn off the ignition and coast? I don't understand how people can't seem to think of these things. It's not like the car suddenly accelerated to 100mph in the blink of an eye; even in the more powerful cars, it still takes a few seconds to get up to speeds like that.
Well on the bright side, any patent application that is merely a regular device that is "socially enabled", filed after IBM's application, can probably be easily rejected under 35 USC 103(a) using art that reads on the regular device, combined with IBM's art on a socially enabled device.
I really don't understand how the game experience is different between LAN and battle.net.
100Mbps (or even 1Gbps) connection between all the computers directly connected to one another, as opposed to a shared 10Mbps connection (that most likely gets nowhere near that, especially if it is Comcast or some crap) for the entire group of computers, in which each computer must communicate with the Battle.net server in order to receive information that is originating from another computer that is two feet away from it.
Patent examiners need to get their heads examined.
I came for the obligatory insult to patent examiners in the comments of a story about applications that haven't even been examined yet. I did not leave disappointed.
it's going to take a long time (both in ramping up the tech and in tasking the scope to just sit there and stare at a star, waiting for something to blip by) for the "earth-sized rock in the habitable zone with an earth-length orbital period!" announcements to start rolling in.
I wouldn't think that an "earth-length" orbital period is all that important to determining if a planet can support life or not. Remember, the type of the star it orbits determines where and how large the habitable zone will be, so if we find a planet relatively the same size as Earth orbiting a star that is not as hot as our sun, the habitable zone for this planet will be much closer to the star in question; thus the orbital period could possibly be much different than our own, depending on exactly how close that planet must be in order to sustain liquid water. Likewise, if an earth sized planet is found orbiting a star that burns much hotter than our sun, the habitable zone would be much farther away from that particular star, again resulting in a different orbital period from our own.
"whats needed is to make it illegal to patent any DNA sequence found in nature (be it plant, animal or human)."
That's called a 101 rejection. Any examiner with half a brain will instantly reject anything found in nature, be it DNA or any other natural phenomenon.
From the summary: "more energy is generated from the reaction than went into creating it"...correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the definition of perpetual motion?
Well, there's two ways of looking at it: either the Earth's magnetic poles are labelled wrongly, or EVERY OTHER MAGNET IN ALL HISTORY is labelled wrongly. Take your pick.
Compasses aren't labelled incorrectly. The North side of a bar magnet in a compass is labelled North because that is the way it points, not for its magnetic pole. They aren't saying, "Hey, this is the North pole of this magnet," they are saying "Hey, this side of the magnet always points North." Those are two completely different meanings.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not prior art because it doesn't come anywhere close to reading on the actual language of the independent claim.
Even better, you can shift the car into neutral while braking, or maybe even turn off the ignition and coast? I don't understand how people can't seem to think of these things. It's not like the car suddenly accelerated to 100mph in the blink of an eye; even in the more powerful cars, it still takes a few seconds to get up to speeds like that.
That has always been the rule. A naturally occuring phenomena is what is known as a "judicial exception," and is not eligible for patent protection.
You must be new around here. /. commenters don't ever actually read the patent summary, spec, or claims.
Well on the bright side, any patent application that is merely a regular device that is "socially enabled", filed after IBM's application, can probably be easily rejected under 35 USC 103(a) using art that reads on the regular device, combined with IBM's art on a socially enabled device.
100Mbps (or even 1Gbps) connection between all the computers directly connected to one another, as opposed to a shared 10Mbps connection (that most likely gets nowhere near that, especially if it is Comcast or some crap) for the entire group of computers, in which each computer must communicate with the Battle.net server in order to receive information that is originating from another computer that is two feet away from it.
Does anybody proofread these submissions at any point?
They might want to push the last couple of those movies forward a bit. Don't they know the world is going to end in 2012?
Patent examiners need to get their heads examined.
I came for the obligatory insult to patent examiners in the comments of a story about applications that haven't even been examined yet. I did not leave disappointed.
While iTunes would be slightly bigger, Amazon is a big leap for Tunecore and I'm happy to see it even on this level.
According to their website, TuneCore already has a deal with the iTunes store, as well as most all of the other digital music services.
it's going to take a long time (both in ramping up the tech and in tasking the scope to just sit there and stare at a star, waiting for something to blip by) for the "earth-sized rock in the habitable zone with an earth-length orbital period!" announcements to start rolling in.
I wouldn't think that an "earth-length" orbital period is all that important to determining if a planet can support life or not. Remember, the type of the star it orbits determines where and how large the habitable zone will be, so if we find a planet relatively the same size as Earth orbiting a star that is not as hot as our sun, the habitable zone for this planet will be much closer to the star in question; thus the orbital period could possibly be much different than our own, depending on exactly how close that planet must be in order to sustain liquid water. Likewise, if an earth sized planet is found orbiting a star that burns much hotter than our sun, the habitable zone would be much farther away from that particular star, again resulting in a different orbital period from our own.
Sounds like you got your answer...
"whats needed is to make it illegal to patent any DNA sequence found in nature (be it plant, animal or human)."
That's called a 101 rejection. Any examiner with half a brain will instantly reject anything found in nature, be it DNA or any other natural phenomenon.
From the summary: "more energy is generated from the reaction than went into creating it" ...correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the definition of perpetual motion?
All they need now is a wedding and some rain...
Well, there's two ways of looking at it: either the Earth's magnetic poles are labelled wrongly, or EVERY OTHER MAGNET IN ALL HISTORY is labelled wrongly. Take your pick.
Compasses aren't labelled incorrectly. The North side of a bar magnet in a compass is labelled North because that is the way it points, not for its magnetic pole. They aren't saying, "Hey, this is the North pole of this magnet," they are saying "Hey, this side of the magnet always points North." Those are two completely different meanings.