I hope ATT turns all of you terrorists in. It makes me sick to read..
Wait, i've got a knock on the door
Re:Patents were never supposed to make money
on
Patents Don't Pay
·
· Score: 1
Yes, the whole arguement starts off wrong. Bessen's empirical work is valuable, but property rights theory is extremely limited in addressing the value of patents.
So more specifically, orginal English letters patents were used to master artisans claims against apprectices. The problem was, for example of blacksmiths or chefs, that masters would invest in apprentices only to have the apprentices take off and compete with their masters (i.e. the current big American co. in China problem).
The original patent length was 14 years, one 7 year apprenticeship + 7 years of productive work to pay back for the apprenticeship. Reference is Granstrand 2000.
I understand this to be the same here, and the same with many publishers. It's why amazon was supposed to be much more profitable than bricks and mortar stores (consolidated inventory, less transaction costs). Still newspaper stands are on the hook for invetory, either in money or in an obligation to return inventory.
But to extend the analogy to google, its not like the newspaper stands drive to the publishers, rip out some sections from a bunch of news papers, drive back to their stands and say "There's more at the news paper place!"
You're an idiot, and most likely french. Plus you aren't funny, even though you think you are. I addressing definitions, not being funny. Want references you anonymous fuckwad?
And I'm not French. Don't post if you have nothing to say.
true innovators are not made but born First, we are all made. - i.e. nice language you were born with
Isn't the whole point of innovation to come up with some new idea. No, specifically an 'innovation' requires making money in new ways. An 'idea' by itself isn't even an 'invention' unless it is novel and reduced to practice.
It's important that Intel not 'undercut a not-for-profit'. See Negroponte had the brilliance of extrapolating laptop cost curves, while at the same time diverting massive funds from retarded developing government agencies under the guise of "needing more scale economies". Worse, I bet intel isn't even going to have requirements for bulk purchases!
Your commentis totally off. It's not that your average manager see's the rich guy as a fountain of wisdom.
Instead, statements by Gates and other CEOs offer the 'average' manager some insight into investments into new technologies, and some expectations for medium term infrastructure. Sure this is competitively positioned, but when Bill Gates says he's going to be making $100M commitment on something, it's far more important that if I were to say "x will be big in 5 years, start saving"
The MSRP of an explorer is $26,100. The Prius MSRP is $22,175 with $2K potential bonus.
So what are you talking about?
BTW, I would never buy an Explorer. Too many AWFUL re-calls - spontaneous combusion and exploding tires several years back. Buy a Honda Pilot. Seats 8 and you can get into it at $24K.
"I just got a bug up my arse about the "You volunteered."
You're right to have, it wasn't a careful comment. I should have clarified that many of the problems come with the job. I didn't mean to suggest that they deserved to be shit on.
I take much about this war personally too and I'm deeply sorry for your loses. I was furious when we went to war. And you're obviously right about the President as literally having the final authority to go to Iraq. But the President found tremendous support from many top commanders in the early stages, for what many have argued unconstitutional war. When you say 'duty', is it to the Army, the President, the citizens, family, God? Becuase those things conflict.
Volunteerism does not dismiss the concern of the soldier but puts it in context. In this country, when a citizen chooses to become a soldier, that person makes a decision about what duty means to them. The consequences of the decision to become a soldier, known to everyone, is an increased likelihood of death, serious injury, heartbreak, and down the list.
I hate war. I really hate this war/occupation. And I hate the fact that Army is getting increasingly between the soldier and the citizen (not just through regulation but through censorship). In my view, tidying up the suffering, through information control, does nothing to help the future of this country, its citizens, or its solider.
1. Lack of rumor control can damage any family. So does lack of communication. But fair enough on the greiving comment, I was just referring to the families at home.
2. Name me one job in the world where your email to your wife is deleted by your boss.
3. Soldiers should not get shit on period. But they do. And to a large degree much of the shit is predictable because it's in their terms of service (see your no. 2).
I don't see how having soldiers' email and blogs censored makes any of this better for soldiers.
I'm sorry I took so long to see and respond to this. Your comments really attacks things I don't say or defend. I simply argue soldiers right to have at least the same rights to communicate as any other citizen. If there is sensitive communication it should be covered by regulation, not an infrastructure for information control. We have a should society based on law, not on control.
It's beyond obvious that information leaking out can be damanging to families, but regulations and punishments can address that. And communication can have many positive effects, like saving marriages, or helping decision makers better understand the war. What I don't get is why you trust the same army that took us into Iraq, and extended all these tours, to suddenly become benevolent with soldiers communications?
NDAs are used to enable information sharing. This only serves to prevent it.
There's also a big difference between rules and implementation. The army already has regulations around the conduct of sharing information (i.e. NDA). Now it is implementing infrastructure to control the information channel (i.e. department of information).
She should not have been given the opportunity to resign. She should have been fired, her pension stripped. Unfortunaetly, MIT hardly has any specific policies to police corrupt faculty so they are probably lucky she resigned.
The students of MIT are it's great resource, but MIT doesn't protect them at all. Apparently that now applies to applicant pool.
Slashdot Mirror
100% agree with rtechie. What google is doing is totally different than MS. And serving one email is completely different from profiling an account.
I hope ATT turns all of you terrorists in. It makes me sick to read..
Wait, i've got a knock on the door
So more specifically, orginal English letters patents were used to master artisans claims against apprectices. The problem was, for example of blacksmiths or chefs, that masters would invest in apprentices only to have the apprentices take off and compete with their masters (i.e. the current big American co. in China problem).
The original patent length was 14 years, one 7 year apprenticeship + 7 years of productive work to pay back for the apprenticeship. Reference is Granstrand 2000.
Idea #6 is: a better list
I'd write it but I'm too busy building 22m by 16m screen in my basement.
But to extend the analogy to google, its not like the newspaper stands drive to the publishers, rip out some sections from a bunch of news papers, drive back to their stands and say "There's more at the news paper place!"
I don't see why google shouldn't do the same.
And I'm not French. Don't post if you have nothing to say.
Are you seriously using the 'just because they make the cigarettes, doesn't mean that they're forcing people to smoke them' arguement???
Pay attention fanboys!
http://www86.forddirect.fordvehicles.com/
Base $35,365
Options $7,450
Manuf. Delv, Proc & Hndlg $735
Subtotal $43,550
Dealer Fees $500 EST
Total $44,050
It's important that Intel not 'undercut a not-for-profit'. See Negroponte had the brilliance of extrapolating laptop cost curves, while at the same time diverting massive funds from retarded developing government agencies under the guise of "needing more scale economies". Worse, I bet intel isn't even going to have requirements for bulk purchases!
Damn you Intel!
Instead, statements by Gates and other CEOs offer the 'average' manager some insight into investments into new technologies, and some expectations for medium term infrastructure. Sure this is competitively positioned, but when Bill Gates says he's going to be making $100M commitment on something, it's far more important that if I were to say "x will be big in 5 years, start saving"
The MSRP of an explorer is $26,100. The Prius MSRP is $22,175 with $2K potential bonus. So what are you talking about? BTW, I would never buy an Explorer. Too many AWFUL re-calls - spontaneous combusion and exploding tires several years back. Buy a Honda Pilot. Seats 8 and you can get into it at $24K.
I call bullshit. Microsoft could always hold harmless any customer and enjoin any suit.
Security reduces the costs of lack of security. That's all it does.
So there's a point where increasing investments security becomes more costly than loss of security. Current system seems like a good balamce to me.
But how do we know that your finger isn't a bomb?
"I just got a bug up my arse about the "You volunteered." You're right to have, it wasn't a careful comment. I should have clarified that many of the problems come with the job. I didn't mean to suggest that they deserved to be shit on.
Volunteerism does not dismiss the concern of the soldier but puts it in context. In this country, when a citizen chooses to become a soldier, that person makes a decision about what duty means to them. The consequences of the decision to become a soldier, known to everyone, is an increased likelihood of death, serious injury, heartbreak, and down the list.
I hate war. I really hate this war/occupation. And I hate the fact that Army is getting increasingly between the soldier and the citizen (not just through regulation but through censorship). In my view, tidying up the suffering, through information control, does nothing to help the future of this country, its citizens, or its solider.
2. Name me one job in the world where your email to your wife is deleted by your boss.
3. Soldiers should not get shit on period. But they do. And to a large degree much of the shit is predictable because it's in their terms of service (see your no. 2).
I don't see how having soldiers' email and blogs censored makes any of this better for soldiers.
I'm sorry I took so long to see and respond to this. Your comments really attacks things I don't say or defend. I simply argue soldiers right to have at least the same rights to communicate as any other citizen. If there is sensitive communication it should be covered by regulation, not an infrastructure for information control. We have a should society based on law, not on control. It's beyond obvious that information leaking out can be damanging to families, but regulations and punishments can address that. And communication can have many positive effects, like saving marriages, or helping decision makers better understand the war. What I don't get is why you trust the same army that took us into Iraq, and extended all these tours, to suddenly become benevolent with soldiers communications?
They'll be blowing them up soon... I've been putting them in strategic locations all over Boston.
17,000 on the new official page. Near 160,000 on the old page. http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=us er.viewprofile&friendID=5173909
NDAs are used to enable information sharing. This only serves to prevent it. There's also a big difference between rules and implementation. The army already has regulations around the conduct of sharing information (i.e. NDA). Now it is implementing infrastructure to control the information channel (i.e. department of information).
I didn't realize that the army was charged with regulating greiving, affiars, and marriages...
All of this could happen to ANY BLOGGER.
And while soldies on leave have problems in these areas, so does anyone who may need to travel for extended periods to work. It is a volunteer army.
She should not have been given the opportunity to resign. She should have been fired, her pension stripped. Unfortunaetly, MIT hardly has any specific policies to police corrupt faculty so they are probably lucky she resigned.
The students of MIT are it's great resource, but MIT doesn't protect them at all. Apparently that now applies to applicant pool.