Seriously this is how the elderly get things done.
The elderly get things done?? . . . Wait...was that what they were doing during the election?;)
But seriously, this might be a good idea, though I don't know that it would have much effect, since in this case (unlike, say, RIM/NTP), the congresspeople probably don't have much of a vested interest to care. And the number of people that care about this issue are probably a relatively small percentage of a constituency. Ignorance, and whatnot.
It's called genericization, or "genericide." If a word becomes used often enough by the public regardless of branding, the courts can declare a trademark a generic word. Heroin, Allen wrenches, and I think Spandex (Hence the new name Lycra) are all examples of this. There are many more, and there are plenty of companies that have trademarks that would appear to be in danger of "genericide" (the apparent legal term).
Xerox actually was in danger of this, and started a campaign against "xeroxing", strongly suggesting that people instead "photocopy" documents.
Re:The e-mail I sent to the editor was ignored.
on
No Time Travel, Sorry
·
· Score: 1
Pleasepleaseplease, be very careful to note that I didn't say anything about my desires when it comes to adult film. I'm just saying that the industry has an AWFUL lot of money to throw around, and an awful lot of behind-the-scenes clout. I'm sure that the high-res format poses some interesting challenges for the adult film industry, too. But those are challenges that will likely have to be overcome at some point. And that's what makeup, digital processing, lighting, camerawork, other tricks that haven't been thought of yet, and yonger models are all about.
And on the other side of the coin, don't you think there are people who'll want to watch their favorite stars in as excruciating detail as possible? Especially the younger, prettier ones? Even if they're not perfect? If there's one (non-chemical) industry that lends itself to obsession, it's the adult film industry (much like, I don't know, the gaming industry?).
Plus, I don't know if any of you have noticed, but in my experience, a lot of people aren't particularly picky when it comes to pr0n, especially when it comes to their particular fetish.
It may mean that standards in the adult film industry get raised. It may mean that people will see things they don't want to see. It may mean that there'll be a bigger divide between professional and amateur/budget quality. There are a lot of potentialities. But there'll be a demand for HD adult film. And it's a big money industry. In fact, if I've heard correctly, they had, I don't know, some influence when it came to the VHS/Beta fight?
When I was scanning by this, I misread "Bigger disks cost less than smaller?" I was gonna ask you where, praytell, you shop.
I think the news of the determined wholesale price is useful, however. It gives us info with which we'll be able to compare.
I mean, there are predicted, apparently, 40-50 titles for Blu-Ray this year, and I think there were like, 86 announced for HD-DVD at CES. I haven't heard any price estimates for HD-DVD yet.
And of course it's going to cost more for Blu-Ray than DVDs. However, the steep divide in price, with a potential doubling of price between a DVD copy and a Blu-Ray copy of a movie, is notable. I'm not sure how many people will think it's worth it.
Judging from the wholesale price, I can only imagine that the retail price will be minimum of $30, depending on how high demand ends up. More likely $40-45, at least for new releases. Store cost for most DVDs when I worked at Circuit City was around $1-3 below retail, and it's been 10 years since DVD spec v1.0.
I don't have an HD-TV quite yet, since I haven't had to buy a TV in years, but I'm not sure I'll be willing to buy these movies at these prices, had I one. Especially not until there's a much bigger library than the 50ish that are apparently expected this year.
The real measure of success for the nextgen optical media will likely be the adult film industry (in addition to video game consoles). Everyone talks about gaming, but it would appear that there's going to be a pretty deep divide in consoles.
The adult film maker Digital Playground, which claims to control 40 percent of the US adult DVD market and is reported to have sales of $12.6bn in 2005, today told Adult Video News (AVN) that they've decided to support the Blu-ray format and release movies as soon as hardware becomes available.
I love the irony of the calls for violence against political cartoons, several of which, ya know...imply things about Islam and violence...
So far, said Mr Preatoni, there was little evidence that western hacker groups were taking any action in retaliation for the Islamic attacks. Zombie Tron has risen from the dead to wreak vengence on those using his name, and retaliate for the attacks...
You could comment about how the the ToGR describes gravity as the curvature of spacetime caused by the mass-energy content therein rather than a traditional force, and the fact that our picture of gravity isn't 100% complete. Especially as we still don't have a handle on the whole dark matter/energy phenomenon, which either exists the predominant type of mass/energy in the universe, or possibly that gravity functions slightly differently than we think, as evidenced by the motion of galaxies. Not to mention there are also other theories that attempt to explain gravity. Like the Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory, or the Rosen bimetric theory.
You could also point out that a law that merely describes how something acts--while useful, necessarily should be considered only part of the picture. How and/or why should be considered important questions. And if you can get them to admit that, then you might be able to leverage that.
you don't think that maybe it would/does employ materials such as aramids? you know, like kevlar? high tensile strength, lightweight fibers that tend to make bullets work rather less well? i don't expect that farmer bob (or farmer abdul) will have much that LM wouldn't have thought of, and at least tried to account for.
How many of your books have been read by three or more other people? Probably none, right?
Well, this isn't the case for me or most of my friends. A LOT of my books--especially the really good ones-- have been passed around my group of friends, until it's been read by most of them. Same with a lot of my friends' books. I mean, I think my copy of Hitchhiker's Guide has had some 2 dozen readers, over the years.
The caveat to this is that when my friends or I like a book enough, we buy it. That's how this sort of thing works. Hell, it's the premise behind the Baen Free Library. Not all publishers are stupid. One reason that I like Baen right about now.
I've known a couple of librarians in my day. Heck, I was even a volunteer librarian for a year, back in the day, at my little local library. And you're right, I've noticed that most of them tend to give a big damn about many of the things that we here at/., and other geeks around the world hold dear. It may sound a bit silly, but most of the ones I've known really do care about preserving things for the future generations in a very Seldonic way. It's kinda neat, really.
Ohhh, you know what just occurred to me? Duct/gaff tape has to be the answer to this. That, or paperclips.
With Bic pens unshackling bicycles, and sharpies defeating copy protection on CDs, it's gotta be just a matter of time before the other Most Useful Thing Ever items are used to fight against tyranny!
Those damn hobbyists are the entire problem! Those bastards! Er...this has nothing to do with tromping the little guys...
The intention is to reduce the number of licensors to a manageable level, to lock out "hobbyists" and other entities that Microsoft doesn't want to have to trouble itself with.
Is it just me, or does anyone else think that Microsoft has the resources to "manage" nearly any number of "hobbyists"? I mean, laziness is one thing, but sheesh... I wonder if there are any backroom deals being made here?
Just for the record, sounds don't have to be loud enough to hurt in order to cause hearing loss. Sounds ~85dB (around the level of a busy street or a factory) or higher are enough to cause permanent damage to hearing. Now, obviously, exposure time necessary for significant damage are inversely proportionate to the volume of the noise.
And I totally agree that Mr. Patterson is a fruitloop. There's a volume control for a reason. And if I want to ruin my hearing, or say, I don't know, use an iPod for something other than earbuds, like, maybe unpowered speakers, or multiple set of headphones, that's my right! I might need the power that the iPod can put out. Just 'cause some people lose their hearing 'cause they're dumb or not careful enough to protect themselves by turning the volume down a bit, doesn't mean everyone else should suffer. Think of it as evolution in action.
I did a little reading in some of my old textbooks and online, and what I come away with is that the Sapir-Whorf view is comprised of two things:
Linguistic determinism:
* strong: language is thought; equal to von Humboldt's world-view/Weltanschauung hypothesis, which predated the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis
* weak: language determines/influences thought; more in line with the Boas/Sapir/Whorf view; this was opposed by what Whorf called the "natural logic" view that language was used to express nonlinguistic thought: "thought does not depend on grammar but on laws of logic or reason which are supposed to be the same for all observers of the universe"
Linguistic relativity:
* distinctions encoded in one language are unique to that language; "We cut nature up, organise it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language" (Whorf)
None of the (limited) writings of Whorf's that I've read imply that our thoughts are bounded solely by the words we have, let alone those that we choose to speak (as would be the case in the example where if we say something, we believe it).
And the barrel story you point out sounds like something I came across on wikipedia: "Some of Whorf's early work on linguistics and particularly on linguistic relativity was inspired by the reports he wrote on insurance losses, where misunderstanding had been a cause. In one famous example, an employee who was not a native speaker of English had placed drums of liquid near a heater, believing that as a 'flammable' liquid would burn then a 'highly inflammable' one would not."
Now, I haven't read all of the works of Sapir and Whorf, so I could be wrong here, but I think you've been misinformed about the nature of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.
Something like this was in the novella Gulf, by Robert Heinlein. Not to spoil anything, but superintelligent people were learned and used a language that was much more compact, expressive, nuanced, and abstract than previously, so they could communicate faster and with more precision, as well as think more quickly and more abstractly.
There's no way that Sapir Whorf can be true. If it were, that means that, just off the top of my head, we couldn't lie, entertain theoretical possibilities, hear two sides of the same event, understand that we were misinformed earlier but have correct information now, tell a fictional story, etc.
Why?
IANANL, but as I understand the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, on a basic level, it essentially stipulated that thought and language were interdependant. That language helps shape how we think, and that thought (and thus perception) is often a linguistic process, rather than language being the mere expression of abstract, non-linguistic thought. Furthermore, that culture helps shape language, which is, in turn, affected by how we think and perceive our environment.
It seems reasonable, to me, and my experience bears out the fact that often at least a pseudolinguistic process. To me, the fact that meanings of words are extrinsic to the words, and that they're intrinsic to the people using the words lends some creedence to this. I am also not a Doctor of Semiotics, so my opinion may not be worth much.
However, I don't see how the interdependance of languange and thought are exclusive to the possibility of fiction or theory. If you're referring to something like the 'prisonhouse' interpretation of the principle of linguistic relativity, where thought and perception is entirely defined by language, my experience/information indicates you're misinterpreting Sapir and Whorf's works.
As a by the by, I do know a bit about Inuit postbases and such, and am aware of the faults in the 'classic example,' but don't those refer more to strong linguistic determinism, rather than the Saphir-Whorf hypothesis (which is related, but as far as I can tell, not congruent).
I'm as concerned about my civil liberties as the next guy. Actually, probably more than the next guy. Or more than the next 51% of guys.
I tend to agree with Mr. Franklin, in point of fact.
And I, too, applaud Ms. Glick-Weil; the FBI should damn well have relented in this situation, IMNSHO. More quickly than they probably did, in fact.
One thing I see, however, is a lot of/.ers appearing to believe that a warrant should be required to be issued in all cases, without exception. I just want to remind them that if it's my [damn] house, and I want to let 'em search without a warrant, that's my right, too (of course assuming that there's no coercion, etc). I think that still counts as "secure in [my] persons, houses, papers, and effects..."
Now, mind you, I'm not saying that that's necessarily the sort of thing I'm likely to do. I think I'm likely to stand with Ms. Glick-Weil, depending on the circumstances, especially given the atmosphere of national security of late. On the other hand, I don't tend to have anything to hide, and I do believe in citizens helping out law enforcement to a reasonable extent. Balance, I think, is the key.
Well, I'm not sure what would qualify one as a "researcher." Since research often has some sort of financial aspect, this leads me to wonder where the breakpoint would be, and how effective it would be.
I mean, I can see how patent infringement shielding would be useful in teaching (if not already present), but research is often done with end-result: profit in mind. And if certain (synergistic, for example) technologies were developed using research that was protected by the shielding, where would that patent fall? Improvements on a patented idea?
I guess I don't know enough about what sort of research is affected by patent infringement litigation.
I mean, the patent system is a mess. We all know that. And I somehow feel that this is a Good Thing(TM). I hope there'll be improvements. But I still wonder...
Just to play a little bit of Devil's Advocate here, I want to point out that with the continuing advancements in surgical and genetic science, changing certain biometric....keys is possible in the future.
In fact, changing fingerprints, at least in a rudimentary way, is possible now, what with skin grafts and whatnot. DNA as a key may present slightly more of a problem, without causing some major physiological changes;)
However, I do agree that biometrics presents something of a sticky wicket in that arena, since the more irreplaceable the 'lock/key,' the more problematic a security breach becomes.
It is noteworthy, moreover, that those same advancements do offer potentialities for more sophisticated ways of key theft/duplication/etc so the situation looks to me like build a better mousetrap, build a better mouse.
Re:Fuzzing and Obfuscation
on
Mitnick on OSS
·
· Score: 3, Funny
It would take a pretty crappy admin to have "./" in his default path
I feel there has to be a/. joke to be made from that somehow...
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously this is how the elderly get things done.
;)
The elderly get things done??
.
.
.
Wait...was that what they were doing during the election?
But seriously, this might be a good idea, though I don't know that it would have much effect, since in this case (unlike, say, RIM/NTP), the congresspeople probably don't have much of a vested interest to care. And the number of people that care about this issue are probably a relatively small percentage of a constituency. Ignorance, and whatnot.
It's called genericization, or "genericide." If a word becomes used often enough by the public regardless of branding, the courts can declare a trademark a generic word.
Heroin, Allen wrenches, and I think Spandex (Hence the new name Lycra) are all examples of this. There are many more, and there are plenty of companies that have trademarks that would appear to be in danger of "genericide" (the apparent legal term).
Xerox actually was in danger of this, and started a campaign against "xeroxing", strongly suggesting that people instead "photocopy" documents.
he also seems to be a vulgar and angry person
random googling
I'm not a physicist, but to me, it seems that his objections stem from a rather rigid definition of motion.
Pleasepleaseplease, be very careful to note that I didn't say anything about my desires when it comes to adult film. I'm just saying that the industry has an AWFUL lot of money to throw around, and an awful lot of behind-the-scenes clout.
I'm sure that the high-res format poses some interesting challenges for the adult film industry, too. But those are challenges that will likely have to be overcome at some point. And that's what makeup, digital processing, lighting, camerawork, other tricks that haven't been thought of yet, and yonger models are all about.
And on the other side of the coin, don't you think there are people who'll want to watch their favorite stars in as excruciating detail as possible? Especially the younger, prettier ones? Even if they're not perfect? If there's one (non-chemical) industry that lends itself to obsession, it's the adult film industry (much like, I don't know, the gaming industry?).
Plus, I don't know if any of you have noticed, but in my experience, a lot of people aren't particularly picky when it comes to pr0n, especially when it comes to their particular fetish.
It may mean that standards in the adult film industry get raised. It may mean that people will see things they don't want to see. It may mean that there'll be a bigger divide between professional and amateur/budget quality. There are a lot of potentialities. But there'll be a demand for HD adult film. And it's a big money industry. In fact, if I've heard correctly, they had, I don't know, some influence when it came to the VHS/Beta fight?
When I was scanning by this, I misread "Bigger disks cost less than smaller?"
I was gonna ask you where, praytell, you shop.
I think the news of the determined wholesale price is useful, however. It gives us info with which we'll be able to compare.
I mean, there are predicted, apparently, 40-50 titles for Blu-Ray this year, and I think there were like, 86 announced for HD-DVD at CES. I haven't heard any price estimates for HD-DVD yet.
And of course it's going to cost more for Blu-Ray than DVDs. However, the steep divide in price, with a potential doubling of price between a DVD copy and a Blu-Ray copy of a movie, is notable. I'm not sure how many people will think it's worth it.
Judging from the wholesale price, I can only imagine that the retail price will be minimum of $30, depending on how high demand ends up. More likely $40-45, at least for new releases. Store cost for most DVDs when I worked at Circuit City was around $1-3 below retail, and it's been 10 years since DVD spec v1.0.
I don't have an HD-TV quite yet, since I haven't had to buy a TV in years, but I'm not sure I'll be willing to buy these movies at these prices, had I one. Especially not until there's a much bigger library than the 50ish that are apparently expected this year.
The real measure of success for the nextgen optical media will likely be the adult film industry (in addition to video game consoles). Everyone talks about gaming, but it would appear that there's going to be a pretty deep divide in consoles.
And Blu-Ray very well may be the winner in the adult film realm.
The adult film maker Digital Playground, which claims to control 40 percent of the US adult DVD market and is reported to have sales of $12.6bn in 2005, today told Adult Video News (AVN) that they've decided to support the Blu-ray format and release movies as soon as hardware becomes available.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/698
for the cartoons
I love the irony of the calls for violence against political cartoons, several of which, ya know...imply things about Islam and violence...
So far, said Mr Preatoni, there was little evidence that western hacker groups were taking any action in retaliation for the Islamic attacks.
Zombie Tron has risen from the dead to wreak vengence on those using his name, and retaliate for the attacks...
I certainly hope not, considering who the halftime show is!
How disturbing...
You could comment about how the the ToGR describes gravity as the curvature of spacetime caused by the mass-energy content therein rather than a traditional force, and the fact that our picture of gravity isn't 100% complete. Especially as we still don't have a handle on the whole dark matter/energy phenomenon, which either exists the predominant type of mass/energy in the universe, or possibly that gravity functions slightly differently than we think, as evidenced by the motion of galaxies.
Not to mention there are also other theories that attempt to explain gravity. Like the Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory, or the Rosen bimetric theory.
You could also point out that a law that merely describes how something acts--while useful, necessarily should be considered only part of the picture. How and/or why should be considered important questions. And if you can get them to admit that, then you might be able to leverage that.
you don't think that maybe it would/does employ materials such as aramids? you know, like kevlar? high tensile strength, lightweight fibers that tend to make bullets work rather less well? i don't expect that farmer bob (or farmer abdul) will have much that LM wouldn't have thought of, and at least tried to account for.
How many of your books have been read by three or more other people? Probably none, right?
Well, this isn't the case for me or most of my friends. A LOT of my books--especially the really good ones-- have been passed around my group of friends, until it's been read by most of them. Same with a lot of my friends' books. I mean, I think my copy of Hitchhiker's Guide has had some 2 dozen readers, over the years.
The caveat to this is that when my friends or I like a book enough, we buy it. That's how this sort of thing works. Hell, it's the premise behind the Baen Free Library. Not all publishers are stupid. One reason that I like Baen right about now.
I hear the Open Briefs movement is really picking up steam these days.
What does the Catholic church have to do with the RIAA?
.
.
.
Actually...
I've known a couple of librarians in my day. Heck, I was even a volunteer librarian for a year, back in the day, at my little local library. And you're right, I've noticed that most of them tend to give a big damn about many of the things that we here at /., and other geeks around the world hold dear. It may sound a bit silly, but most of the ones I've known really do care about preserving things for the future generations in a very Seldonic way. It's kinda neat, really.
Plus, librarianism is hot.
Oh, and what's with librarians in the news? I mean, just yesterday, we have a librarian put the FBI in a chokehold and flick its nose until it said 'uncle'.
Ohhh, you know what just occurred to me? Duct/gaff tape has to be the answer to this. That, or paperclips.
With Bic pens unshackling bicycles, and sharpies defeating copy protection on CDs, it's gotta be just a matter of time before the other Most Useful Thing Ever items are used to fight against tyranny!
Those damn hobbyists are the entire problem! Those bastards! Er...this has nothing to do with tromping the little guys...
The intention is to reduce the number of licensors to a manageable level, to lock out "hobbyists" and other entities that Microsoft doesn't want to have to trouble itself with.
Is it just me, or does anyone else think that Microsoft has the resources to "manage" nearly any number of "hobbyists"? I mean, laziness is one thing, but sheesh...
I wonder if there are any backroom deals being made here?
And I think the threshold of pain is supposed to be somewhere around 120-140 dB.
Just for the record, sounds don't have to be loud enough to hurt in order to cause hearing loss. Sounds ~85dB (around the level of a busy street or a factory) or higher are enough to cause permanent damage to hearing. Now, obviously, exposure time necessary for significant damage are inversely proportionate to the volume of the noise.
And I totally agree that Mr. Patterson is a fruitloop. There's a volume control for a reason. And if I want to ruin my hearing, or say, I don't know, use an iPod for something other than earbuds, like, maybe unpowered speakers, or multiple set of headphones, that's my right! I might need the power that the iPod can put out. Just 'cause some people lose their hearing 'cause they're dumb or not careful enough to protect themselves by turning the volume down a bit, doesn't mean everyone else should suffer. Think of it as evolution in action.
2034
After it merges with Jello, and Bill Cosby's brain takes over as CEO (chief enforcement officer?).
I did a little reading in some of my old textbooks and online, and what I come away with is that the Sapir-Whorf view is comprised of two things:
Linguistic determinism:
* strong: language is thought; equal to von Humboldt's world-view/Weltanschauung hypothesis, which predated the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis
* weak: language determines/influences thought; more in line with the Boas/Sapir/Whorf view; this was opposed by what Whorf called the "natural logic" view that language was used to express nonlinguistic thought: "thought does not depend on grammar but on laws of logic or reason which are supposed to be the same for all observers of the universe"
Linguistic relativity:
* distinctions encoded in one language are unique to that language; "We cut nature up, organise it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language" (Whorf)
None of the (limited) writings of Whorf's that I've read imply that our thoughts are bounded solely by the words we have, let alone those that we choose to speak (as would be the case in the example where if we say something, we believe it).
And the barrel story you point out sounds like something I came across on wikipedia: "Some of Whorf's early work on linguistics and particularly on linguistic relativity was inspired by the reports he wrote on insurance losses, where misunderstanding had been a cause. In one famous example, an employee who was not a native speaker of English had placed drums of liquid near a heater, believing that as a 'flammable' liquid would burn then a 'highly inflammable' one would not."
Now, I haven't read all of the works of Sapir and Whorf, so I could be wrong here, but I think you've been misinformed about the nature of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.
Something like this was in the novella Gulf, by Robert Heinlein.
Not to spoil anything, but superintelligent people were learned and used a language that was much more compact, expressive, nuanced, and abstract than previously, so they could communicate faster and with more precision, as well as think more quickly and more abstractly.
Wait, wait, wait...
There's no way that Sapir Whorf can be true. If it were, that means that, just off the top of my head, we couldn't lie, entertain theoretical possibilities, hear two sides of the same event, understand that we were misinformed earlier but have correct information now, tell a fictional story, etc.
Why?
IANANL, but as I understand the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, on a basic level, it essentially stipulated that thought and language were interdependant. That language helps shape how we think, and that thought (and thus perception) is often a linguistic process, rather than language being the mere expression of abstract, non-linguistic thought. Furthermore, that culture helps shape language, which is, in turn, affected by how we think and perceive our environment.
It seems reasonable, to me, and my experience bears out the fact that often at least a pseudolinguistic process. To me, the fact that meanings of words are extrinsic to the words, and that they're intrinsic to the people using the words lends some creedence to this. I am also not a Doctor of Semiotics, so my opinion may not be worth much.
However, I don't see how the interdependance of languange and thought are exclusive to the possibility of fiction or theory. If you're referring to something like the 'prisonhouse' interpretation of the principle of linguistic relativity, where thought and perception is entirely defined by language, my experience/information indicates you're misinterpreting Sapir and Whorf's works.
As a by the by, I do know a bit about Inuit postbases and such, and am aware of the faults in the 'classic example,' but don't those refer more to strong linguistic determinism, rather than the Saphir-Whorf hypothesis (which is related, but as far as I can tell, not congruent).
I'm as concerned about my civil liberties as the next guy.
/.ers appearing to believe that a warrant should be required to be issued in all cases, without exception. I just want to remind them that if it's my [damn] house, and I want to let 'em search without a warrant, that's my right, too (of course assuming that there's no coercion, etc). I think that still counts as "secure in [my] persons, houses, papers, and effects..."
Actually, probably more than the next guy. Or more than the next 51% of guys.
I tend to agree with Mr. Franklin, in point of fact.
And I, too, applaud Ms. Glick-Weil; the FBI should damn well have relented in this situation, IMNSHO. More quickly than they probably did, in fact.
One thing I see, however, is a lot of
Now, mind you, I'm not saying that that's necessarily the sort of thing I'm likely to do. I think I'm likely to stand with Ms. Glick-Weil, depending on the circumstances, especially given the atmosphere of national security of late. On the other hand, I don't tend to have anything to hide, and I do believe in citizens helping out law enforcement to a reasonable extent. Balance, I think, is the key.
Well, I'm not sure what would qualify one as a "researcher."
Since research often has some sort of financial aspect, this leads me to wonder where the breakpoint would be, and how effective it would be.
I mean, I can see how patent infringement shielding would be useful in teaching (if not already present), but research is often done with end-result: profit in mind. And if certain (synergistic, for example) technologies were developed using research that was protected by the shielding, where would that patent fall? Improvements on a patented idea?
I guess I don't know enough about what sort of research is affected by patent infringement litigation.
I mean, the patent system is a mess. We all know that. And I somehow feel that this is a Good Thing(TM). I hope there'll be improvements. But I still wonder...
Just to play a little bit of Devil's Advocate here, I want to point out that with the continuing advancements in surgical and genetic science, changing certain biometric....keys is possible in the future.
;)
In fact, changing fingerprints, at least in a rudimentary way, is possible now, what with skin grafts and whatnot.
DNA as a key may present slightly more of a problem, without causing some major physiological changes
However, I do agree that biometrics presents something of a sticky wicket in that arena, since the more irreplaceable the 'lock/key,' the more problematic a security breach becomes.
It is noteworthy, moreover, that those same advancements do offer potentialities for more sophisticated ways of key theft/duplication/etc so the situation looks to me like build a better mousetrap, build a better mouse.
It would take a pretty crappy admin to have "./" in his default path
/. joke to be made from that somehow...
I feel there has to be a