No, that isn't what the patent is doing at all. It allows you to show different avatars to different people. To your friends you'd be O422, to your parents you'd show up as "Billy Bob"
That patent isn't as simple as you would expect. It isn't novel enough to really suggest a patent, but it isn't exactly straight forward either. As far as I know, know one is doing anything like it.
As I understand that patent, it allows you to have a different avatar for different social groups.
Don't confuse trademark with copyright.
The issues you brought up are related to trademark issues. And you can most definitely use white cursive lettering on a red background, as long as someone won't mistake it for Coca-Cola.
Microsoft was trying to use the power that it would be charged for.
Microsoft said, listen, we can waste some energy and not pay the fine... Or we can not waste the energy and not pay the fine.
The issue wasn't really with the fine, but the issue was with the amount. IF Microsoft used up $70K of energy they wouldn't be fined. So Microsoft started using it up. Fortunately smarter heads prevailed. The wastage was stopped, and Microsoft was essentially fined the difference, and paid $60K.
I understand what you are saying. The Power Company needed to reserve the power, and thus should be paid for it, even if it wasn't used. But the way the contract was set up, there was only a fine if more than a certain percentage wasn't used. So Microsoft was going to try to use up the difference.
Couldn't they just teach people to create documents, etc., and let them use any office software, like Libre Office?
In a word, not really. They COULD teach you to create documents in Libre Office. Or they could teach you to create them in Word, in Notepad, in vi, or any other random product. BUT I would expect they don't really have time to teach you how to "create documents, etc" and then let you use ANYTHING. Because you know, all those different products work differently.
The teacher needs to take something, and teach you how to use that. The teacher doesn't have time to teach you the same thing in other products. Teaching one of the most widely used pieces of software in an "Intro" course seems like a pretty good thing to do.
Can you ask them to change it? Sure. But you need to be much more descriptive on how they can change it, and make sure you understand what the average person, who doesn't know anything about computers, should learn.
Also keep in mind that Office is the currently the #1 word processing software out there. Most people will end up using that in the workforce. But if they don't they'll use a product that copies Office.
The closest you can come with many software packages to explicitly leave the door ajar (since you can't disable the password screen completely) is to set the password to 123456 or ftp.
Setting the password to blank is probably a tad bit closer.
The rather lightweight description in TFA (stupid sound-bite TV journalism) makes it sound like the order to "delete" her FB account was at her first court appearance (arraignment?).
From TFA:
When Asher initially appeared in court
It did more than make it sound like it was her first court appearance, it came right out and said it was her first court appearance.
Presumably, even its continued existence on the Internet was not a problem as long as she wasn't communicating with it.
You need to read it again.
Accord TFA she made the LOL comment after the accident, the family told the courd
When she initially appeared in court, the Judge told her to delete her account.
She didn't. She was found in contempt and sentenced to 48 hours in jail.
She posted LOL before being told to delete it. She left the account alone, and its continued existence got her thrown in jail for 2 days.
It was a condition of her release. If she did not wish to comply with the conditions, her jail time would have been higher and/or she would have had greater fines.
Its hard to tell from the article (it was apparently a "condition"), but apparently the only jail time she served was BECAUSE of the comment.
So what you are suggesting is, if I let you into my house, I HAVE to let you take pictures?
Just because something doesn't have a copyright on it, doesn't mean you can copy it. If the owner won't let you make a copy, then you can't make a copy.
It can't be a breach of contract. I didn't agree to anything when I paid them money for the ticket.
Usually things like "No Photography" are actually posted, and you can see that BEFORE you buy the ticket.
While the artwork is in public domain, the people who own the art don't have to let you take a picture of it.
Here's my problem with this philosophy: there is no fundamental difference between the TSA and the myriad of private companies that handled airport security for decades prior to 9/11.
There is a fundamental difference. Now it is the government doing it. It is easier to sue a private party than it is to sue the government.
I ALWAYS hated the security checks. Never made sense to me, now it is worse. "Sir, please place your water bottle full of suspected explosives, in the container with the other suspected explosives"
Most of the things don't make sense. "Take out your computer...cause you know, we can't see through your hard drive, and no one would ever hide something IN the harddrive"
"Here let me swab your skin, cause, while you are smart enough to build explosives, you are too stupid to wear protective gear."
"Hmmm you have something in this bag, I think it might be an explosive, so let me punch it hard" (This actually happened to me, as the TSA agent proceeded to beat the shit out of my pumpkin bread, while it was still in my back pack.
Prior to 9/11 security was stupid, and inane. After 9/11 it was worse.
I'm not sure embedding a display that can distract you is necessarily a great idea...
It is just as distracting as the edge of your goggle frame, your hand as it moves into view, the hot skier chick who skied by.
How distracting is your speedometer when you are driving? That is about how distracting the Recon device is
I think you're stretching the truth to just call this speech anyway. There is no significant communication in the entire bit. It is just a call to violence.
IF it was just a call to violence, and there is no significant communication, then the call will go unheeded.
Considering the video has generated a lot of discussion, it sounds to me like there is significant communication in there. There doesn't have to be a lot of spoken words to get a meaning across.
Manned spaceflight as a whole seems like a bust too me. Way too expensive for far too little gain.
Do you know how big or little the gain from the space program was?
Things from NASA: LEDs, better prosthetics, scratch resistan lenses, anti icing systems for aircraft, better tires, fire resistant stuff, temper foam found in tempurpedic beds, freeze drying food, water purification, among other things. Could we have got the same gains for less money? Perhaps, it is difficult to say. But the space race wasn't just about getting to the moon.
I recently purchased a new radio for my car. While doing research I was AMAZED at the number of radios that offered an Apple only cable. Of course I immediately crossed those off my list. But USB devices seemed to be in the minority!
Of course, the new phone won't work with the old radio. I guess you can purchase another adapter...
You know what I get anxious about? Standing in the security line, for a half an hour next to a barrel full of suspected explosives. And they claim it is for our safety.
Slashdot Mirror
No, that isn't what the patent is doing at all. It allows you to show different avatars to different people. To your friends you'd be O422, to your parents you'd show up as "Billy Bob"
That patent isn't as simple as you would expect. It isn't novel enough to really suggest a patent, but it isn't exactly straight forward either. As far as I know, know one is doing anything like it.
As I understand that patent, it allows you to have a different avatar for different social groups.
Don't confuse trademark with copyright.
The issues you brought up are related to trademark issues. And you can most definitely use white cursive lettering on a red background, as long as someone won't mistake it for Coca-Cola.
You aren't allowed to dump your trash out the car window while you are driving down the highway, no matter how convenient that may seem.
That is because it is illegal and carries high fines. What does that have to do with consequences for people other than yourself?
Microsoft was trying to use the power that it would be charged for.
Microsoft said, listen, we can waste some energy and not pay the fine... Or we can not waste the energy and not pay the fine.
The issue wasn't really with the fine, but the issue was with the amount. IF Microsoft used up $70K of energy they wouldn't be fined. So Microsoft started using it up. Fortunately smarter heads prevailed. The wastage was stopped, and Microsoft was essentially fined the difference, and paid $60K.
I understand what you are saying. The Power Company needed to reserve the power, and thus should be paid for it, even if it wasn't used. But the way the contract was set up, there was only a fine if more than a certain percentage wasn't used. So Microsoft was going to try to use up the difference.
Couldn't they just teach people to create documents, etc., and let them use any office software, like Libre Office?
In a word, not really. They COULD teach you to create documents in Libre Office. Or they could teach you to create them in Word, in Notepad, in vi, or any other random product. BUT I would expect they don't really have time to teach you how to "create documents, etc" and then let you use ANYTHING. Because you know, all those different products work differently.
The teacher needs to take something, and teach you how to use that. The teacher doesn't have time to teach you the same thing in other products. Teaching one of the most widely used pieces of software in an "Intro" course seems like a pretty good thing to do.
Can you ask them to change it? Sure. But you need to be much more descriptive on how they can change it, and make sure you understand what the average person, who doesn't know anything about computers, should learn.
Also keep in mind that Office is the currently the #1 word processing software out there. Most people will end up using that in the workforce. But if they don't they'll use a product that copies Office.
He is probably correct. The lack of targeted marketed has spelled the end of television.
The closest you can come with many software packages to explicitly leave the door ajar (since you can't disable the password screen completely) is to set the password to 123456 or ftp.
Setting the password to blank is probably a tad bit closer.
The rather lightweight description in TFA (stupid sound-bite TV journalism) makes it sound like the order to "delete" her FB account was at her first court appearance (arraignment?).
From TFA:
When Asher initially appeared in court
It did more than make it sound like it was her first court appearance, it came right out and said it was her first court appearance.
Presumably, even its continued existence on the Internet was not a problem as long as she wasn't communicating with it.
You need to read it again.
Accord TFA she made the LOL comment after the accident, the family told the courd
When she initially appeared in court, the Judge told her to delete her account.
She didn't. She was found in contempt and sentenced to 48 hours in jail.
She posted LOL before being told to delete it. She left the account alone, and its continued existence got her thrown in jail for 2 days.
I think that the judge was trying to make a point to a person that simply did not understand the ramifications of the situation.
And what was the point the judge was trying to make? "You can't say whatever you want?"
It was a condition of her release. If she did not wish to comply with the conditions, her jail time would have been higher and/or she would have had greater fines.
Its hard to tell from the article (it was apparently a "condition"), but apparently the only jail time she served was BECAUSE of the comment.
It's an ugly practice and needs to be outlawed.
So what you are suggesting is, if I let you into my house, I HAVE to let you take pictures?
Just because something doesn't have a copyright on it, doesn't mean you can copy it. If the owner won't let you make a copy, then you can't make a copy.
It can't be a breach of contract. I didn't agree to anything when I paid them money for the ticket.
Usually things like "No Photography" are actually posted, and you can see that BEFORE you buy the ticket.
While the artwork is in public domain, the people who own the art don't have to let you take a picture of it.
I took a look... there were no blank white squares. I want my money back.
Yea, we could never replicate Israel.
Why do we need need to replicate Israel? Why do we need to do anything?
Here's my problem with this philosophy: there is no fundamental difference between the TSA and the myriad of private companies that handled airport security for decades prior to 9/11.
There is a fundamental difference. Now it is the government doing it. It is easier to sue a private party than it is to sue the government.
I ALWAYS hated the security checks. Never made sense to me, now it is worse. "Sir, please place your water bottle full of suspected explosives, in the container with the other suspected explosives"
Most of the things don't make sense. "Take out your computer...cause you know, we can't see through your hard drive, and no one would ever hide something IN the harddrive"
"Here let me swab your skin, cause, while you are smart enough to build explosives, you are too stupid to wear protective gear."
"Hmmm you have something in this bag, I think it might be an explosive, so let me punch it hard" (This actually happened to me, as the TSA agent proceeded to beat the shit out of my pumpkin bread, while it was still in my back pack.
Prior to 9/11 security was stupid, and inane. After 9/11 it was worse.
Call me crazy, but wouldn't a metal scanner and the cockpit doors being locked be more than good enough to prevent a new 9/11 type scenario?
It would prevent stuff like a crowbar or whatever being taken in, ...
What do you need a crowbar for? A metal object isn't the only thing that can be used as a weapon.
Get rid of the metal scanner, just lock the door.
Accessing Data In A Data Processing System
I'm not sure embedding a display that can distract you is necessarily a great idea...
It is just as distracting as the edge of your goggle frame, your hand as it moves into view, the hot skier chick who skied by.
How distracting is your speedometer when you are driving? That is about how distracting the Recon device is
Let's assume that the Sandia technique/technology results in sustained
Stop right there! The word "sustained" appears neither in the summary or the article.
Hence starting with "let us ASSUME ..."
I think you're stretching the truth to just call this speech anyway. There is no significant communication in the entire bit. It is just a call to violence.
IF it was just a call to violence, and there is no significant communication, then the call will go unheeded.
Considering the video has generated a lot of discussion, it sounds to me like there is significant communication in there. There doesn't have to be a lot of spoken words to get a meaning across.
Manned spaceflight as a whole seems like a bust too me. Way too expensive for far too little gain.
Do you know how big or little the gain from the space program was? Things from NASA: LEDs, better prosthetics, scratch resistan lenses, anti icing systems for aircraft, better tires, fire resistant stuff, temper foam found in tempurpedic beds, freeze drying food, water purification, among other things. Could we have got the same gains for less money? Perhaps, it is difficult to say. But the space race wasn't just about getting to the moon.
If the car has a USB port, it's not proprietary.
I recently purchased a new radio for my car. While doing research I was AMAZED at the number of radios that offered an Apple only cable. Of course I immediately crossed those off my list. But USB devices seemed to be in the minority!
Of course, the new phone won't work with the old radio. I guess you can purchase another adapter...
You know what I get anxious about? Standing in the security line, for a half an hour next to a barrel full of suspected explosives. And they claim it is for our safety.