Reading a comment some time ago here on slashdot, (sorry, no link here), I was curious as to whether the news was reliable. See, someone commented on that the fact that the New York Times did a story, that's no guarantee that it is accurate. Fortunately, I was able to confirm for all/.'ers that the story is indeed true: the government is already sued over patent infringement:
Obviously it is this one: http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bllas er.htm For the lazy ones of us an exerpt of that webpage: Ray Gun A patent for the "Portable Beam Generator" also known as a hand-held laser ray gun was granted to the inventor, Frederick R. Schollhammer on July 9, 1968. It was patent #3,392,261.
Well, obviously open source is going to help terrorits: imagine all the extra time they need not spend on system administration: obviously they would have more time actually planning terroristic attacks!
Would be a thought though: give all the Al Quaida's of this world the newest of newest of computers with all the newest propriotory software, just to see them fail as a terroristic club seeing that they spend all their time actually getting their systems up and running. We would see newsitems like: ThisJustIn: Bin Laden proclaims next suicide hit to occur moments after Vista finally released.
This is a known problem indeed. (Someone modd parent up, I haven't gotten modpoints right now).
I remember a case at a client in which we had to mail a very sensitive, very important document very quickly.
Turned out we couldn't mail it using the clients own mailsystem, as... it didn't allow Word-attachments (or Zip or...) to be sent along...
In the end we ended up taking the document on a floppy (yes, this was some years ago), to a 'learning centre' computer which was attached to the internet, and we ended up mailing it with... hotmail...
Roel
The argument 'we do it ==> natural' can be used in a number of situations:
For instance, the term "biological meat" (?bad translation from Dutch?:
http://www.druidnetwork.org/ethical/food/organic-m eat.html)
is (still) insane:
meat is most circumstances grown on an animal;-0
And even if it weren't, it should still (be definition) consist of "organic" molecules
(whatever organic means in that sentence).
And how about 'chemical weapons'?
All thing we handle are made from chemical materials (indeed, every molecule and atom is
a chemical 'thing').
In a Darwinistic view of the world, "evertything" is natural...
That doesn't make it a SENSIBLE thing to do...
(Ie while evolutiontheory tells us that 'sensible' things pay off,
that doesn't mean that non-sensible things are never done)
So while the term 'natural' may seem inapropiate, it IS a common use of the word?
Well, we europeans then start with an I, then let the computer do the rest... (Warning: inside joke)
Roel
Re:Don't they know anything about SHARING?
on
On Apple vs Apple
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Sorry to reply to my own post, but as I've just been marked 'troll' for the first time (after remarking that I was glad that April 2nd was near), I meant of course 'a great logo for someone who wanted to take a bite of the marketshare of iTunes;-) I have nothing against iTunes myself...
Roel
Re:Don't they know anything about SHARING?
on
On Apple vs Apple
·
· Score: 1
Makes one think af a great logo: someone with a piece of apple in his/her mouth;-0
Roel
Re:Glad only few "GMT time" before it's April 2nd
on
China Buys Google
·
· Score: 1
Wow, actually scoring a 'Troll' for a posting... (see parent).
Well, wondered whether 'Good Karma' would last...
Roel
Glad only few "GMT time" before it's April 2nd
on
China Buys Google
·
· Score: 1, Troll
I'm glad that within a few hours, life will return to normal.
Roel
To be completely accurate; the supermarket-chain (Albert Hein) subpoena'ed the 'cake'-maker after the latter declined to deliver its 'cakes' to the former.
How the law is in particular I don't know (IANAL); in this case the two had done business with each other for many years; there might have been an ongoing contract for delivery. (To get an idea what it was all about: the 'cake' in question was part of a commonly used "basket" used for comparison of prices in different supermarket-chains. In this case, the 'cake'-maker felt that the supermarket-chain sold their product for a price under the cost price (and placed the product at a "low visibility" place) so that it... didn't cost too much while seeming to be cheaper at the "basket" comparison...)
A similar thing happened a year ago in the Netherlands, where a Dutch 'cake'-maker* (for those who know Dutch: ontbijtkoek)
actually went to court so that they wouldn't be obliged to sell to a certain supermarket** anymore... (By the way, they won!)
Original dutch text:
"Brussel eist kale opvolger van Windows
Softwarebedrijf Microsoft mag Vista, de opvolger van het besturingsprogramma Windows, niet in Europa verkopen als daar allerlei andere producten van Microsoft aan gekoppeld zijn."
In an earlier post (someone to provide the link?) someone stated that Vista was NOT build on.Net technology...
I am wondering whether Office 2007 will be...
Roel
P.S. Will Microsoft rename the product Office 2008 so that they can still ship early;-0
I'm working in the IT industry myself, and one of the well-known problems with bug-counting is...
well, counting bugs.
I have seen IT managers getting upset because there were 100's og bugs*.
Turned out all of them were because of ONE faulty thing.
I have seen bug reports of the form
1. pressing button A and then pressing button Y gets critical error.
2. pressing button B and then pressing button Y gets critical error.
3. pressing button C and then pressing button Y gets critical error.
etc etc
In other situations a manager was not upset, "there were only a few bugs*".
Later, this same manager became upset at a time that there were on the order of 50 or so "bugs*".
Turned out fixing those few bugs took more than o month, while those 50 were 'fixed'
within a week.
So my professional view is that bug-counting doesn't count, the correct question is:
how sick did you get? (Compare getting bitten by a tsetse fly to getting bitten by a red ant...)
* To be honest: I am referring to a non-English term which is NOT equivalent to a bug,
but more to 'a problem'.
Still not convinced. True, in physics there are many things which the layperson can see for him/herself.
So you can tell something about it.
But the same is true about mathematics.
You argue yourself that the mathematical problem mentioned above is easy to understand...
The proof is not.
But you could easily give people an idea by substituting '1' and '2' for a and b; giving 1^3 + 2^3 = c^3 where c is an irrational number... And that there are many more irrational numbers than natural numbers, and that it is in fact quite special that a^2 + b^2 = c^2 has so many solutions for a,b,c natural numbers...
You could explain something about the number of degrees of freedom. And then conjecture something about solutions to a^3+b^3+c^3=d^3...
Proving IS something quite different...
In physics, it is quite diffucult to PROVE to a layperson why 'general relativity theory' and 'quantum theory' is so difficult to combine.
Or tell people about why dissipation and quantum mechanics are hard to combine, at least in a non-phenominological description.
(It is possible, I know, my own PhD thesis is about that combination; it is just not straightforward).
About your 'building blocks' of physics: molecules are more like building blocks of chemistry than of physics.
Physics is on every scale: from supernovae to quarks inside protons inside atoms inside molecules.
No way a layperson would have a general idea about those.
In mathematics, natural numbers is one of the big areas of study. So in a sense natural numbers are part of the building blocks of mathematics...
Do you really believe natural numbers are difficult to understand for laypersons;-)
If I haven't convinced you now, I'll probably not convince you in a further post.
So no more postings from me on this subject;-)
Sorry, don't buy it.
Sure, telling people what a Hilbert Space is, is quite hard. But try explaining to a layperson (is that a politically correct term;-)) that an electron is actually, well, you know, like a wave and a particle at the same time isn't that easy either. Wasn't it Bohr himself who said that either you didn't understand quantum mechanics, or you were insane?
Or try to explain to a layperson how quarks react...
Even special relativity, mathematically a quite simple theory, is hard to explain to a layperson...
So it all depends on what you want to achieve.
If all you need to do is scratch the surface, well, for a layperson you could use something like the jpeg file format: explaining that a picture can be represented in a series of 'functions' etc...
Or compare it do a euclidian space...
Slashdot Mirror
Reading a comment some time ago here on slashdot, (sorry, no link here), /.'ers that the story is indeed true:
s er.htm
I was curious as to whether the news was reliable.
See, someone commented on that the fact that the New York Times did a story, that's no guarantee that it is accurate.
Fortunately, I was able to confirm for all
the government is already sued over patent infringement:
Obviously it is this one:
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blla
For the lazy ones of us an exerpt of that webpage:
Ray Gun
A patent for the "Portable Beam Generator" also known as a hand-held laser ray gun was granted to the inventor, Frederick R. Schollhammer on July 9, 1968. It was patent #3,392,261.
--
Oh and YES, this is a joke...
Yep, consider the 'fingerprint is your key' story about someone losing a finger...
Or they could be spending more money on patents
Or they could be spending more money on developing Vista
Or they don't really think they have a chance in their feud with the European union after all...
There are more options than "prepping up for war"...
You know, the one that verifies whether a comment is from a 'real person' or from a 'offworlder', also known as 'troll'.
i /fsi.cgi thinks most comments are too short...
Too bad the prototype at http://montana.informatics.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/fs
Roel
Well, obviously open source is going to help terrorits:
imagine all the extra time they need not spend on system administration:
obviously they would have more time actually planning terroristic attacks!
Would be a thought though: give all the Al Quaida's of this world the newest of newest of computers
with all the newest propriotory software, just to see them fail as a terroristic
club seeing that they spend all their time actually getting their systems up and running.
We would see newsitems like:
ThisJustIn: Bin Laden proclaims next suicide hit to occur moments after Vista finally released.
Roel
And there are even more benefits to the new bill: not only it is good against terrorism,
it also helps against child pornography.
Oh, and against overweight.
Roel
This is a known problem indeed. (Someone modd parent up, I haven't gotten modpoints right now). ...) to be sent along...
I remember a case at a client in which we had to mail a very sensitive, very important document very quickly.
Turned out we couldn't mail it using the clients own mailsystem, as... it didn't allow Word-attachments (or Zip or
In the end we ended up taking the document on a floppy (yes, this was some years ago), to a 'learning centre' computer which was attached to the internet, and we ended up mailing it with... hotmail...
Roel
How else to spread sensitive information?
At least this way, no president needs to leak anything himself
No wonder this (NovoClub) treatment isn't used anymore; it was and probably still is patented ;-0
Roel
The argument 'we do it ==> natural' can be used in a number of situations:
m eat.html)
is (still) insane:
meat is most circumstances grown on an animal ;-0
For instance, the term "biological meat" (?bad translation from Dutch?: http://www.druidnetwork.org/ethical/food/organic-
And even if it weren't, it should still (be definition) consist of "organic" molecules (whatever organic means in that sentence).
And how about 'chemical weapons'? All thing we handle are made from chemical materials (indeed, every molecule and atom is a chemical 'thing').
In a Darwinistic view of the world, "evertything" is natural... That doesn't make it a SENSIBLE thing to do...
(Ie while evolutiontheory tells us that 'sensible' things pay off, that doesn't mean that non-sensible things are never done)
So while the term 'natural' may seem inapropiate, it IS a common use of the word?
Roel
Nope, we will say: and we thougth that THAT was anywhere near good enough
to actually make any chance of beeting a 12 year old in the game of Go
Roel
Well, we europeans then start with an I, then let the computer do the rest...
(Warning: inside joke)
Roel
Sorry to reply to my own post, but as I've just been marked 'troll' for the first time (after remarking that I was glad that April 2nd was near), ;-)
I meant of course 'a great logo for someone who wanted to take a bite of the marketshare of iTunes
I have nothing against iTunes myself...
Roel
Makes one think af a great logo: ;-0
someone with a piece of apple in his/her mouth
Roel
Wow, actually scoring a 'Troll' for a posting... (see parent). Well, wondered whether 'Good Karma' would last...
Roel
I'm glad that within a few hours, life will return to normal.
Roel
To be completely accurate; the supermarket-chain (Albert Hein) subpoena'ed the 'cake'-maker after the latter declined to deliver its 'cakes' to the former.
How the law is in particular I don't know (IANAL); in this case the two had done business with each other for many years; there might have been an ongoing contract for delivery.
(To get an idea what it was all about: the 'cake' in question was part of a commonly used "basket" used for comparison of prices
in different supermarket-chains. In this case, the 'cake'-maker felt that the supermarket-chain sold their product for a price
under the cost price (and placed the product at a "low visibility" place) so that it...
didn't cost too much while seeming to be cheaper at the "basket" comparison...)
A similar thing happened a year ago in the Netherlands, where a Dutch 'cake'-maker* (for those who know Dutch: ontbijtkoek)
n ents/financien/rtlz/2005/02_februari/02-peijnenbur g_albert_heijn_supermarktoorlog_koek_uit_schap.xml
actually went to court so that they wouldn't be obliged to sell to a certain supermarket** anymore... (By the way, they won!)
Roel
* Peijnenburg was the 'cake'-maker;
** Albert Hein was the supermarket store.
Link in dutch:
http://www.rtl.nl/(/financien/rtlz/nieuws/)/compo
Well, newest line is that Vista might not be sold in Europe% 7C6bdf77b30c4aeeb5%7CN%7C0&src=redactie&newsPanel= uitgelicht&id=2060),
;-0
(dutch link: http://www.bnr.nl/ShowNieuwsArtikel.asp?Context=S
so what will Balmers kids use when in Europe
Original dutch text:
"Brussel eist kale opvolger van Windows
Softwarebedrijf Microsoft mag Vista, de opvolger van het besturingsprogramma Windows, niet in Europa verkopen als daar allerlei andere producten van Microsoft aan gekoppeld zijn."
This makes one wonder...
;-0
Is [insert software company here] hiring Boxing champions just in case someone decides to pirate their software
Bet a lot of 'open software' writers are happy that pirating GPL software isn't a serious option...
Roel
In an earlier post (someone to provide the link?) someone stated that Vista was NOT build on .Net technology...
I am wondering whether Office 2007 will be...
;-0
Roel
P.S. Will Microsoft rename the product Office 2008 so that they can still ship early
I'm working in the IT industry myself, and one of the well-known problems with bug-counting is... well, counting bugs.
I have seen IT managers getting upset because there were 100's og bugs*.
Turned out all of them were because of ONE faulty thing.
I have seen bug reports of the form
1. pressing button A and then pressing button Y gets critical error.
2. pressing button B and then pressing button Y gets critical error.
3. pressing button C and then pressing button Y gets critical error.
etc etc
In other situations a manager was not upset, "there were only a few bugs*".
Later, this same manager became upset at a time that there were on the order of 50 or so "bugs*".
Turned out fixing those few bugs took more than o month, while those 50 were 'fixed' within a week.
So my professional view is that bug-counting doesn't count, the correct question is:
how sick did you get? (Compare getting bitten by a tsetse fly to getting bitten by a red ant...)
* To be honest: I am referring to a non-English term which is NOT equivalent to a bug, but more to 'a problem'.
Interesting system in het States: no valid patents, but stil possible infringement... But then, hey, I'm a stupid European ;-0
Still not convinced. True, in physics there are many things which the layperson can see for him/herself. ;-)
;-)
So you can tell something about it. But the same is true about mathematics.
You argue yourself that the mathematical problem mentioned above is easy to understand... The proof is not.
But you could easily give people an idea by substituting '1' and '2' for a and b; giving 1^3 + 2^3 = c^3 where c is an irrational number...
And that there are many more irrational numbers than natural numbers, and that it is in fact quite special that a^2 + b^2 = c^2 has so many solutions for a,b,c natural numbers... You could explain something about the number of degrees of freedom. And then conjecture something about solutions to a^3+b^3+c^3=d^3...
Proving IS something quite different... In physics, it is quite diffucult to PROVE to a layperson why 'general relativity theory' and 'quantum theory' is so difficult to combine. Or tell people about why dissipation and quantum mechanics are hard to combine, at least in a non-phenominological description. (It is possible, I know, my own PhD thesis is about that combination; it is just not straightforward).
About your 'building blocks' of physics: molecules are more like building blocks of chemistry than of physics. Physics is on every scale: from supernovae to quarks inside protons inside atoms inside molecules. No way a layperson would have a general idea about those.
In mathematics, natural numbers is one of the big areas of study. So in a sense natural numbers are part of the building blocks of mathematics...
Do you really believe natural numbers are difficult to understand for laypersons
If I haven't convinced you now, I'll probably not convince you in a further post. So no more postings from me on this subject
Sorry, don't buy it. Sure, telling people what a Hilbert Space is, is quite hard. But try explaining to a layperson (is that a politically correct term ;-)) that an electron is actually, well, you know, like a wave and a particle at the same time isn't that easy either. Wasn't it Bohr himself who said that either you didn't understand quantum mechanics, or you were insane?
Or try to explain to a layperson how quarks react...
Even special relativity, mathematically a quite simple theory, is hard to explain to a layperson... So it all depends on what you want to achieve. If all you need to do is scratch the surface, well, for a layperson you could use something like the jpeg file format: explaining that a picture can be represented in a series of 'functions' etc...
Or compare it do a euclidian space...