Very few patents are for actual original innovations that warrant a 21 year monopoly. Let me give you an example.. the concept of a magnetic breakaway safety mechanism for power cords was invented in the 1990's for deep fryers (though it may actually have a longer history than that). In the early 2000s, Apple got a patent for the same concept when applied to electronic devices. Now surely does Apple deserve a 21 year monopoly for copying an idea that someone else came up with.. just because they added the word "electronics devices" ?
OK, now there's that.. now here is something scarier.. the America Invents Act.. which is very shortly due to become law (its in the reconciliation process). The new law redefines what an inventor is (in order to get around the US Constitution which says only inventors can have patents).. by defining inventor to be anyong who independently comes up with an idea. So that means that if you come with an idea before me, and can even prove it.. say you posted in online (somewhere which doesn't count as printed publication).. I can still get the patent for your idea.. as long as I 1) File for the and pay the patent fee first and 2) state that I came up with the idea independently (though after you).
Not only that think about all the stuff out there that has not been patented.. for example.. In computer science.. the Bubble sort (to be honest I am not sure if it's patented.. but there are other algorithms out there of equal value that haven't).. today maybe many apps on mobile phones may be implementing bubble sort in mobile phones applications.. but nobody got the patent on it.. I can file for a patent on "using the bubble sort patent in a mobile phone app".. similarly I can go through all the computer science books and start patenting all the various algorithms by appending "on a mobile device" to it. The pay off will be huge and it will all be legal. Heck maybe I can patent the Bubble sort itself.. by claiming that I independently came up with it!
Of course, I sound ridiculous right ? How could they really be making such a dumb law? And why (it's to take away the burden from the patent office for having to google for prior art because a lot of patents were being overturned in lawsuits when it turned out that a simple google search would have brought up prior art.. thus humiliating the patent office).
Holy shit, everyone is resigning.. I'll tell you what's happening.. they are quitting and going underground filling up a great Ark that will be blasted out to space. When the Texas sized meteor hits the best of our species will survive.
I am not sure of his choice of Tim Cook to be CEO. You know what, Steve Jobs has consistently managed to attract, find, and choose the best scientists, creatives, and imaginative people in the world to design products for Apple. The only time Steve Jobs has made a mistake in this regard has been in finding a good CEO. So, I wonder.. is Tim Cook going to be as great a CEO.. is he going to have the same kind of vision, love of technology, focus on quality, and ease of use that Steve Jobs has had? It sort of worries me that Tim Cook never started a business.. and are his names on any Apple patents? You'll find Steve Jobs name on the iPhone's design patent as well as a bunch of other stuff.. but is Tim Cook's name there?
If your code is to be maintained by junior programmers, then choose a managed code environment. If you organization's primary business is not software production, then choose a managed code environment. If your application is mainly implementing business logic, then choose a managed come environment. If you are implementing a UI, then choose a dynamic language.
Only if none of the above apply should you choose native code.
If Australia can actually pull off building its national broadband megaproject then I'll be impressed enough with them to think they can do anything.
MAybe, but we generate more ideas I think
on
The Post-Idea World
·
· Score: 1
I think we generate more ideas.. I mean there are like decades that used to go by without a single new idea.. like say 2500 BC to 2900 BC.. how many new ideas? Writing was invented... Pyramids.. the concept had been thought of.. maybe a mathematical concept or an improvement to writing happening but can we say new ideas in comparison to what we see nowadays over the past few years (faster CPUs, better phone user interfaces, social networking, etc) ? Doubtful.
It should be legal to record criminal activity if you're an eyewitness. Anyway, laws don't have to be enforced if it's not in the public's interest. Would the people who made phone calls on airplanes during 9/11 have been charged with the federal offense of disobeying FAA rules? It's called prosecutorial discretion -- look it up, if a law is broken for the sake of clear public interest, the person doesn't have to be charged.
Or maybe the DOJ should arrest you for trying to force Intel to make and sell you a product.. Intel is not your slave. You are making the choice to buy their products.
What is dishonest about it? There is nothing dishonest in making a profit.. as long as you are honest about the features of the product.
Second, you realize that this actually benefits the low end consumer? For one thing Intel can charge them a cost barely at the manufacturing price while charging a premium from the customers who are willing to pay for the extra power.
Alright, then they should hire 5,000 people instead of 100.
Keep in mind, Google has 40 billion in cash assets. And more importantly that losing even one patent claim will cost about $500 million.. so imagine what 20 to thirty would cost.. $10 billion?
So, I reckon they have a budget of $1 billion to scrub their source of patent claims.
$1 billion is enough to hire more than 6,500 contractors for 4 months with a pay of $150,000. How many of the hundreds of thousands of computer science unemployed wouldn't jump at getting $150,000 for 4 months work? Granted not all will qualify.. but it's not exactly rocket science for a college graduate to be able to read and understand patent claims while erring not he side of caution following a two week course on patents -- remember they will be able to get intelligent candidates since there are a large amount of unemployed.
It's not that hard -- the underlying OS Linux is already somewhat vetted. Second they just need to get the Android feature list from their database and hire a small team to search each feature in the patent database. The team may be about 100 people.. each person can be assigned on average 100 features to research -- at 1 day per feature (average).. they can finish it in 4 months. Now that covers about 10,000 features. You may think "Android has more than 10,000 features".. is that really the case? I doubt it.
The new version of Mac OS only has 250 new features over its predecessor. The original iPhone is protected by only 200 patents. The entire LTE technology is covered by only 62 essential patents.
I think the next version of Android... Ice Cream Sandwich is going to be fully vetted for patent claims.
That's their strategy.. I think. So far, all the patent claims against Google that I have seen have simple workarounds -- so it's logical that Google is stripping it all out of Ice Cream Sandwich.
The Lodsys patent workaround is a pain in the ass.. not to mention totally bogus.. so they need to invalidate it.
Nobody has patents on the fundamental technologies which were developed in academia and not patented (for example pinch to zoom or touchscreen scrolling/panning or zoomable UIs).
Re:It'll never make it through FDA trials
on
Cancer Cured By HIV
·
· Score: 1
No, because they can charge 5 years worth of chemo fees for that one shot !!
The insurance companies and cancer patients would gladly take the loans and pay up.
Think about it.. hundreds of millions of people have cancer.. that means whoever finds a one shot cure will instantly be a trillionaire.. they can take their money and buy and island and retire. Or invest in a one shot cure for AIDS.
You know what, some people gave their LIVES for the first amendment.. and you jerks want to get rid of it because of some ugly crybaby bitch, and yes she IS an ugly crybaby bitch by every definition of the phrase and I'm NOT sorry if that offends.
I can't believe this is happening I'm in total shock. How can there even be such an asinine law? 2005.. Bush, GOP Congress.. oh, no wonder.
Shouldn't every person who voted for this law, and also the prosecutor who persecuted under it be prosecuted for treason?
Computer marriage is what's wrong with America and is leading to the very breakdown of social structure. Computer marriage, may appear harmless. But what happens when your kids have to see a guy walking down the street kissing his laptop? That's disgusting.
Pretty soon they'll want computers in the military... and we all know how that movie ends.
Slashdot Mirror
Very few patents are for actual original innovations that warrant a 21 year monopoly. Let me give you an example .. the concept of a magnetic breakaway safety mechanism for power cords was invented in the 1990's for deep fryers (though it may actually have a longer history than that). In the early 2000s, Apple got a patent for the same concept when applied to electronic devices. Now surely does Apple deserve a 21 year monopoly for copying an idea that someone else came up with .. just because they added the word "electronics devices" ?
OK, now there's that .. now here is something scarier .. the America Invents Act .. which is very shortly due to become law (its in the reconciliation process). The new law redefines what an inventor is (in order to get around the US Constitution which says only inventors can have patents) .. by defining inventor to be anyong who independently comes up with an idea. So that means that if you come with an idea before me, and can even prove it .. say you posted in online (somewhere which doesn't count as printed publication) .. I can still get the patent for your idea .. as long as I 1) File for the and pay the patent fee first and 2) state that I came up with the idea independently (though after you).
Not only that think about all the stuff out there that has not been patented .. for example .. In computer science .. the Bubble sort (to be honest I am not sure if it's patented .. but there are other algorithms out there of equal value that haven't) .. today maybe many apps on mobile phones may be implementing bubble sort in mobile phones applications .. but nobody got the patent on it .. I can file for a patent on "using the bubble sort patent in a mobile phone app" .. similarly I can go through all the computer science books and start patenting all the various algorithms by appending "on a mobile device" to it. The pay off will be huge and it will all be legal. Heck maybe I can patent the Bubble sort itself .. by claiming that I independently came up with it!
Of course, I sound ridiculous right ? How could they really be making such a dumb law? And why (it's to take away the burden from the patent office for having to google for prior art because a lot of patents were being overturned in lawsuits when it turned out that a simple google search would have brought up prior art .. thus humiliating the patent office).
Anyway .. dont believe me .. read it and weep:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_Invents_Act
If they keep having disagreements they are going to have to sort it with a mediator. Like maybe a neutral Z boson.
That guy must be thankful that Bill Gates isn't ill so he doesn't have to die trying to create the Microsoft logo.
The quote from Nolan Bushnell at the end pretty much sums up the truth.
“Where is Apple’s inspiration going to come from? Is Apple going to have all the romance of a new brand of Pepsi?”
LOL
Wow that is pretty cool. Do you know slashdot staff from IRC (or personally)? How did you hear about the site so early?
Holy shit, everyone is resigning .. I'll tell you what's happening .. they are quitting and going underground filling up a great Ark that will be blasted out to space. When the Texas sized meteor hits the best of our species will survive.
The rest of us are fucked.
I am not sure of his choice of Tim Cook to be CEO. You know what, Steve Jobs has consistently managed to attract, find, and choose the best scientists, creatives, and imaginative people in the world to design products for Apple. The only time Steve Jobs has made a mistake in this regard has been in finding a good CEO. So, I wonder .. is Tim Cook going to be as great a CEO .. is he going to have the same kind of vision, love of technology, focus on quality, and ease of use that Steve Jobs has had? It sort of worries me that Tim Cook never started a business .. and are his names on any Apple patents? You'll find Steve Jobs name on the iPhone's design patent as well as a bunch of other stuff .. but is Tim Cook's name there?
http://www.reghardware.com/2011/02/07/apple_ipad_tomorrow_people/
Looks EXACTLY like an iPad.
Is that sarcasm? I can't tell. Textbooks are not really required, and many of the course notes are available online.
General rule to be followed but not strictly:
If your code is to be maintained by junior programmers, then choose a managed code environment.
If you organization's primary business is not software production, then choose a managed code environment.
If your application is mainly implementing business logic, then choose a managed come environment.
If you are implementing a UI, then choose a dynamic language.
Only if none of the above apply should you choose native code.
you have a citation for this? Also what about using something like Amazon Ec2 to compile the maps?
If Australia can actually pull off building its national broadband megaproject then I'll be impressed enough with them to think they can do anything.
I think we generate more ideas .. I mean there are like decades that used to go by without a single new idea .. like say 2500 BC to 2900 BC .. how many new ideas? Writing was invented ... Pyramids .. the concept had been thought of .. maybe a mathematical concept or an improvement to writing happening but can we say new ideas in comparison to what we see nowadays over the past few years (faster CPUs, better phone user interfaces, social networking, etc) ? Doubtful.
It should be legal to record criminal activity if you're an eyewitness. Anyway, laws don't have to be enforced if it's not in the public's interest. Would the people who made phone calls on airplanes during 9/11 have been charged with the federal offense of disobeying FAA rules? It's called prosecutorial discretion -- look it up, if a law is broken for the sake of clear public interest, the person doesn't have to be charged.
He should have waited for Ice Cream Sandwich before going public with his claims. Now he risks Android being killed before its most crucial update.
Or maybe the DOJ should arrest you for trying to force Intel to make and sell you a product .. Intel is not your slave. You are making the choice to buy their products.
What is dishonest about it? There is nothing dishonest in making a profit .. as long as you are honest about the features of the product.
Second, you realize that this actually benefits the low end consumer? For one thing Intel can charge them a cost barely at the manufacturing price while charging a premium from the customers who are willing to pay for the extra power.
Alright, then they should hire 5,000 people instead of 100.
Keep in mind, Google has 40 billion in cash assets. And more importantly that losing even one patent claim will cost about $500 million .. so imagine what 20 to thirty would cost .. $10 billion?
So, I reckon they have a budget of $1 billion to scrub their source of patent claims.
$1 billion is enough to hire more than 6,500 contractors for 4 months with a pay of $150,000. How many of the hundreds of thousands of computer science unemployed wouldn't jump at getting $150,000 for 4 months work? Granted not all will qualify .. but it's not exactly rocket science for a college graduate to be able to read and understand patent claims while erring not he side of caution following a two week course on patents -- remember they will be able to get intelligent candidates since there are a large amount of unemployed.
It's not that hard -- the underlying OS Linux is already somewhat vetted. Second they just need to get the Android feature list from their database and hire a small team to search each feature in the patent database. The team may be about 100 people .. each person can be assigned on average 100 features to research -- at 1 day per feature (average) .. they can finish it in 4 months. Now that covers about 10,000 features. You may think "Android has more than 10,000 features" .. is that really the case? I doubt it.
The new version of Mac OS only has 250 new features over its predecessor. The original iPhone is protected by only 200 patents. The entire LTE technology is covered by only 62 essential patents.
I think the next version of Android ... Ice Cream Sandwich is going to be fully vetted for patent claims.
That's their strategy .. I think. So far, all the patent claims against Google that I have seen have simple workarounds -- so it's logical that Google is stripping it all out of Ice Cream Sandwich.
The Lodsys patent workaround is a pain in the ass.. not to mention totally bogus .. so they need to invalidate it.
Nobody has patents on the fundamental technologies which were developed in academia and not patented (for example pinch to zoom or touchscreen scrolling/panning or zoomable UIs).
No, because they can charge 5 years worth of chemo fees for that one shot !!
The insurance companies and cancer patients would gladly take the loans and pay up.
Think about it .. hundreds of millions of people have cancer .. that means whoever finds a one shot cure will instantly be a trillionaire .. they can take their money and buy and island and retire. Or invest in a one shot cure for AIDS.
I am not a lawyer, but I think you can have it in front of you to make sure you aren't writing any code that looks similar.
The idea is no longer patented so I think all he has to do is to make sure his implementation doesn't lift chunks of code verbatim.
You know what, some people gave their LIVES for the first amendment .. and you jerks want to get rid of it because of some ugly crybaby bitch, and yes she IS an ugly crybaby bitch by every definition of the phrase and I'm NOT sorry if that offends.
I can't believe this is happening I'm in total shock. How can there even be such an asinine law? 2005 .. Bush, GOP Congress .. oh, no wonder.
Shouldn't every person who voted for this law, and also the prosecutor who persecuted under it be prosecuted for treason?
If a guy married his blender, the honeymoon will end on the first night.
Computer marriage is what's wrong with America and is leading to the very breakdown of social structure. Computer marriage, may appear harmless. But what happens when your kids have to see a guy walking down the street kissing his laptop? That's disgusting.
Pretty soon they'll want computers in the military ... and we all know how that movie ends.