Using negative gravity would blow off the Atmosphere from the planet, resulting in a slow loss of it. This is because it would affect everything, not just the launched vehicle. Moreover its effect dilutes with the square of the distance, just like gravity.
I was all with you, till you said "To infringe a patent, one has to infringe on all claims". That is actually not true. It depends on how the patent is structured and how nice the court is when the patent is tried there (Hello Texas!).
For example, typically claim one says "Claimed is the same thing you all are used to, but with an improvement".
Then claim 2 says "The object of claim one, with yet another improvement", then claim 3 either says "The object of claim 2, with yet another improvement" or "The object of claim one, with yet another improvement".
Most of the time if you infringe on claim one, infringing is what you do.
Suppose claim one is bad. When tried in court, for some strange reason courts sometimes allow e.g. claim 2 to stand by itself, even if claim one is found to be obvious. So you can be found infringing on claim 2 even if claim one is a bad claim.
Finding the Higgs is not worth anything, if the planet goes bust, especially since there is no plan B, say a Mars colony or transmitting the find or our genome to aliens(like in Species: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_(film) ).
Read up on the term "money as debt" on the internet and it should be clear that there needs to be either a major debtor or an issuer of currency. The Europeans have constructed their ECB such that it is not supposed to issue too much currency, as not to cause inflation. As a result, they now face a state debt crisis in their weakest countries.
I fully agree that state debts should be kept as low as possible, but switching from printing tons of money to printing nothing would strangle the US economy.
It is sad that the republican party has encouraged "teabaggers" such that now these people form the base for their attempt to overly cut state debt and embarras Obama.
- the demo plant lost some of its nuclear fuel through the fuel balls getting crushed and disintegrating
- Germany banned the building of new reactors even before Fukushima. This means that new reactors were not an option in Germany for a long time. It is therefore reasonable to shut down old reactors. Consider that the Fukushima Daiichi plants are among the oldest, and would have been shut down before the disaster had there not been life time extensions.
In my opinion, emails can be legally binding, if it is an established communication channel, or if both parties act in accordance with the agreement described in the emails.
If you really want to have it your way, what do you think about EULAs being binding?
It apparently wasn't sold by NASA, so it was stolen, in a way, even if it probably only involved sneaking out the duct tape to which the dust was attached. Case closed.
And no, I didn't read the article. Are you new to slashdot?
C garbage collection is awful because double deallocation for example does not cause an immediate error, but can produce an error much later.
Of course you can try to work around that using debug allocation libraries, which make your program run 0.01 as fast, and which probably are not the first idea of a newcomer to the language.
Of maybe 4 a bit larger C++ projects I had, 3 had major problems which might have been related to this behaviour, and I was able to solve the issue only in my last project out of these 3.
Thanks, I didn't figure that out from the summary.
I still think he cannot force them to release their code under the GPL. They can just say "no", and then he has the right to sue them and will win, making them pay damages and making them stop distributing their product.
Of course, the threat of this might convince them, as it usually does in GPL cases.
I think the case hinges on the right to sue of the parties.
A contributor to the GPL'ed software would have the right to sue.
The defendant, Mr. Welte, might not have the right to sue AVM to put their code under the GPL, but luckily he is the defendant.
AVM is the plaintiff. They have admitted that their released work is a mix of their original work and GPL'ed work. In my opinion they still may assert their copyright for their contributions, but do not actually have the right to distribute their work.
That is why I think the defendants primary cause, although I'm sympathetic to the defendant, is lost.
However as a countermove, (I'm assuming the defendant owns an AVM router), I suggest he countersues AVM for damages, since they set him up with a router that cannot be operated legally since they don't own the rights to the software, and for wasting his time he spent coding in good faith that AVM actually intends to secure the rights to the software, which is hard to do without GPL'ing the software.
In addition, a compilation is a derived work and the author needs to secure the copyrights to the parts. Of course, often a compilation is made from parts that have lost their copyright status, or are to small to be considered a work, but that does not mean that creating a compilation magically waives the rights of the creators of the parts.
Currently a continuation or divisional application will enjoy the filing date of the application of which it is a continuation or divisional. This means any tiny improvement enjoys the protection of the original.
Xiph.org suggests that a continuation has as its own filing date. This means that there also is more prior art available, which potentially invalidates the patent.
You could argue that the proposed way to handle continuations still allows the filing party to extend a patent, but you forget that the filing party has the choice of filing a new patent anyway, which would just cite the previous patent, and would start the patent timer anew.
I'll just make that my homepage to put load on their servers instead of ecosia and never ever using ecosia anymore;-)
Seriously, there is probably some merit to the patents in some of the claims, but the practice of filing a broad claim 1 that basically describes not an implementation, but a wish list, makes me throw up.
Slashdot Mirror
The last time I checked out ReactOS, they had a nice software download app. A bit like you would update a linux system with additional software.
Looks like a good idea to me.
Obviously, these are names fit for medicine:
Cutwail - a pain blocker
Festi - makes soft muscles hard again
Asprox - makes your bowels work faster
Using negative gravity would blow off the Atmosphere from the planet, resulting in a slow loss of it. This is because it would affect everything, not just the launched vehicle. Moreover its effect dilutes with the square of the distance, just like gravity.
Better to use a space elevator:
http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/08/14/0114242/Space-Elevator-Conference-Prompts-Lofty-Questions
I was all with you, till you said "To infringe a patent, one has to infringe on all claims". That is actually not true.
It depends on how the patent is structured and how nice the court is when the patent is tried there (Hello Texas!).
For example, typically claim one says "Claimed is the same thing you all are used to, but with an improvement".
Then claim 2 says "The object of claim one, with yet another improvement", then claim 3 either says "The object of claim 2, with yet another improvement" or "The object of claim one, with yet another improvement".
Most of the time if you infringe on claim one, infringing is what you do.
Suppose claim one is bad. When tried in court, for some strange reason courts sometimes allow e.g. claim 2 to stand by itself, even if claim one is found to be obvious. So you can be found infringing on claim 2 even if claim one is a bad claim.
Scientists like you should be locked up.
Finding the Higgs is not worth anything, if the planet goes bust, especially since there is no plan B, say a Mars colony or transmitting the find or our genome to aliens(like in Species: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_(film) ).
Finally a topic where the goatse link is on topic.
Read up on the term "money as debt" on the internet and it should be clear that there needs to be either a major debtor or an issuer of currency. The Europeans have constructed their ECB such that it is not supposed to issue too much currency, as not to cause inflation. As a result, they now face a state debt crisis in their weakest countries.
I fully agree that state debts should be kept as low as possible, but switching from printing tons of money to printing nothing would strangle the US economy.
It is sad that the republican party has encouraged "teabaggers" such that now these people form the base for their attempt to overly cut state debt and embarras Obama.
Just goes to show that non-bankers use the wrong units to measure how much money was lent.
And on page 1 the paper speaks about Civilization II.
Can't blame the editors this time, at least not much.
I guess Firefox stable releases will now be numbered in Fibonacci numbers, 3, 5 and now the next one 8. Next "stable release" after that will be 13 ;-)
It all makes sense, the more complex the software gets, the more hidden releases you need to improve it ;-)
I think it took two months for the following news to leak out and it appears it still hasn't reached you:
Some of the reactor cores melted even before the tsunami shut down the backup power systems.
In my opinion, emails can be legally binding, if it is an established communication channel, or if both parties act in accordance with the agreement described in the emails.
If you really want to have it your way, what do you think about EULAs being binding?
Yea, it is always nice to see reactors being built close to other countries borders to minimize risk.
It apparently wasn't sold by NASA, so it was stolen, in a way, even if it probably only involved sneaking out the duct tape to which the dust was attached.
Case closed.
And no, I didn't read the article. Are you new to slashdot?
You can't own stolen goods, at least in my state, since the owner who it was stolen from still is the legal owner.
From the SWGEmu site ..
Q. Has SWGEmu ever seen Sony Online Entertainment's code?
A. Absolutely not. In fact, Sony Online Entertainment persists that they have lost the code entirely. ...
C++ still is C compatible.
C garbage collection is awful because double deallocation for example does not cause an immediate error, but can produce an error much later.
Of course you can try to work around that using debug allocation libraries, which make your program run 0.01 as fast, and which probably are not the first idea of a newcomer to the language.
Of maybe 4 a bit larger C++ projects I had, 3 had major problems which might have been related to this behaviour, and I was able to solve the issue only in my last project out of these 3.
Thanks, I didn't figure that out from the summary.
I still think he cannot force them to release their code under the GPL. They can just say "no", and then he has the right to sue them and will win, making them pay damages and making them stop distributing their product.
Of course, the threat of this might convince them, as it usually does in GPL cases.
IANAL, and not yours.
Thanks, I didn't know that.
I recall that firefox detects this, so using firefox + firebug and checking the console might tell you if a site is vulnerable.
I think the case hinges on the right to sue of the parties.
A contributor to the GPL'ed software would have the right to sue.
The defendant, Mr. Welte, might not have the right to sue AVM to put their code under the GPL, but luckily he is the defendant.
AVM is the plaintiff. They have admitted that their released work is a mix of their original work and GPL'ed work. In my opinion they still may assert their copyright for their contributions, but do not actually have the right to distribute their work.
That is why I think the defendants primary cause, although I'm sympathetic to the defendant, is lost.
However as a countermove, (I'm assuming the defendant owns an AVM router), I suggest he countersues AVM for damages, since they set him up with a router that cannot be operated legally since they don't own the rights to the software, and for wasting his time he spent coding in good faith that AVM actually intends to secure the rights to the software, which is hard to do without GPL'ing the software.
IANAL, and not yours.
In addition, a compilation is a derived work and the author needs to secure the copyrights to the parts. Of course, often a compilation is made from parts that have lost their copyright status, or are to small to be considered a work, but that does not mean that creating a compilation magically waives the rights of the creators of the parts.
IANAL, and also not yours.
Currently a continuation or divisional application will enjoy the filing date of the application of which it is a continuation or divisional. This means any tiny improvement enjoys the protection of the original.
Xiph.org suggests that a continuation has as its own filing date. This means that there also is more prior art available, which potentially invalidates the patent.
You could argue that the proposed way to handle continuations still allows the filing party to extend a patent, but you forget that the filing party has the choice of filing a new patent anyway, which would just cite the previous patent, and would start the patent timer anew.
I'll just make that my homepage to put load on their servers instead of ecosia and never ever using ecosia anymore ;-)
Seriously, there is probably some merit to the patents in some of the claims, but the practice of filing a broad claim 1 that basically describes not an implementation, but a wish list, makes me throw up.