We grew up (Rather I did [I'm 22]) without the internet I'd hate to have grown up where you did then. I'm 27, have had a computer for as long as I can remember (Commodore 64 when I was 4 or so, and even an Atari 2600 before that), and had Internet access (well, AOL, but my family didn't know any better) by the time I was a teenager.
I just spent about $800 a few months ago overhauling my system. New motherboard, AMD dual core CPU, 2 GB of memory, GeForce 7900 video, case, power supply, and an SATA DVD burner (only about $35, and it has LightScribe, which is pretty neat). The only thing inside my computer that wasn't new was my hard drive.
Which is why it was made quite clear (at least to me) that genetically modified foods should be extensively tested. You claim that saying genetic engineering and artificial selection are effectively equivalent is "pure bunk", but then say that the only difference is time. So if genetically modified foods were tested for several years, the time difference would be eliminated.
changes to legislation is the only thing that can fix the problem of frivolous patents. Wouldn't following the existing laws fix the problem of frivolous patents? Almost by definition, a "frivolous patent" covers something that shouldn't be patentable in the first place.
tell me one decent bit of software that has been out 5 years I dunno, maybe you should ask a few server administrators who have systems with uptimes of several years.
I wonder if I'd be able to use the fact that the music industry is so interested in extending copyright on music from the 60's and 70's in my argument that new music sucks. If new music was any good, they might not care so much about squeezing the last couple dollars from old music (there wouldn't be the millions of dollars still left).
2. a written offer to provide the source code (section 3b). A URL to the source code does not suffice when the work is distributed physically. Would a notice saying "go to this URL to download the source code" not be considered a written offer to provide the source code?
Not everyone has access to the internet. Had they included a written offer to send the source code by post for a reasonable shipping charge they'd probably have been fine. That leads to the potential problem of what's considered good enough. How many different ways would they need to offer? Can they put a generic "contact us at this address/phone number/e-mail address for arrangements" notice? I wouldn't be surprised if this was more of a mistake on the part of people at Skype than a malicious and deliberate attempt to violate the GPL.
Suggesting that the war must have been solely motivated by greed is a circumstantial ad hom. Of course it is. It's not like there have ever been any wars in human history that were started by some greedy bastard that wanted land/animals/wives.
I still wonder if they're really making any money on all of this. I suppose now that they're mass-producing settlement letters, but I'd imagine they're paying their lawyers enough that it would take hundreds of settlements to break even. I think it's more likely to be about fear and power. They just want to frighten everyone away from downloading music, going on the assumption that everyone that would otherwise download music will go out and buy CD's instead. The power rush of being able to create new laws whenever they want probably also contributes a bit.
The problem may also be their own fear. Like politicians, if they appear to be doing nothing about a problem, they'll lose their jobs. Enough (important) people would rather see them do the wrong thing than nothing.
Actually, last time I visited Japan each Mobile Phone had a real EMail Address, so at least in Japan it doesn't really matter. I believe carriers in the US are the same way. I think the e-mail address is usually number@carrier.tld.
the kind of accidental profanity that occurs, say, during the (live broadcast) evening news That's not really a great example. Most of the stuff already on the evening news is probably more psychologically damaging to a child than hearing the word "fuck" one or two extra times a year.
2. Work on a new bill that is easy to understand, and doesn't provide for loopholes. Have no exceptions. You must be new here. Let me be the first to welcome you to the American legal system.
At least the razor is a physical object that might have some amount of research (probably in the materials used) to it. I hear ads on the radio from a bank that rounds all debit card purchases up to the next dollar and transfers the difference into your savings account. At the end of the ad, they say "patent pending". They have actually applied for a patent that covers the combination of basic arithmetic and transferring money between accounts (which most people have been able to do for years, even online or on an automatic schedule). I'm all for a patent system that does what ours was intended to do, but it's getting just a bit ridiculous now.
Does this mean that prior art can no longer invalidate a patent if the creator of the prior art never filed for one? The way I read the statement is that prior art wouldn't invalidate a patent if the prior art was by the person filing for the patent. If you're the first person to invent something, you can still patent it even if you make it public before applying for the patent.
So, yes, I'm all in favour that the person that made the new algorithm, goes to the patent office and deposits his source code (a.k.a. implementation) That implementation may not be used by anyone else, but if anybody else can come up with another implementation that accomplishes exactly the same, then by all means he should be able to do it. With physical things you need to deposit your blueprints after all... Agreed. The only way I would support software patents is if they follow all the other rules, including prior art, obviousness, and full disclosure. A compression algorithm probably isn't the best example (and of course patenting "compression" would not be allowed, only a specific method), but it was the first thing I could think of that would require significant work to develop and actually be new and useful.
I would hope that all of your examples would be rejected for patents based on the vast amount of prior art. Personally, I'm still fairly undecided about software patents. If someone spends a year doing research and development on something like a compression algorithm that is superior (in compression ratio and/or compression/decompression speed) to anything else available, I'd have no objections to that person being able to make some money from their work. The biggest problem I see with trying to handle software patents is how to appropriately apply the obviousness test.
There are dozens of Cities in California who have voted on similar regulations. There are also several states that have done it. Fortunately for my home state, the federal government doesn't care enough about Maine to notice.
I think this is the only time I'll ever say anything even remotely good about Vista, when people keep trying to use the too-many-variants argument. For most people (home consumers), the business variants can be eliminated. That cuts the options down to three, with Ultimate also not a serious option for the average home user. Compare that with Ubuntu, which has several only-slightly-different versions (Kubuntu, Xubuntu, etc.), each one with a normal CD, an Alternate CD, and a DVD, and each one of those coming in x86 and amd64. Personally, I think having several choices is a good thing (more so in the case of Ubuntu where none of the versions of intentionally crippled; I'm looking at you, Remote-Desktop-is-only-in-Vista-business-versions) .
Slashdot Mirror
I just spent about $800 a few months ago overhauling my system. New motherboard, AMD dual core CPU, 2 GB of memory, GeForce 7900 video, case, power supply, and an SATA DVD burner (only about $35, and it has LightScribe, which is pretty neat). The only thing inside my computer that wasn't new was my hard drive.
Which is why it was made quite clear (at least to me) that genetically modified foods should be extensively tested. You claim that saying genetic engineering and artificial selection are effectively equivalent is "pure bunk", but then say that the only difference is time. So if genetically modified foods were tested for several years, the time difference would be eliminated.
I wonder if I'd be able to use the fact that the music industry is so interested in extending copyright on music from the 60's and 70's in my argument that new music sucks. If new music was any good, they might not care so much about squeezing the last couple dollars from old music (there wouldn't be the millions of dollars still left).
You better believe we're keeping custody of the kids.
The US owns the patent on having a slime bag Attorney General. We'll see you in court.
I still wonder if they're really making any money on all of this. I suppose now that they're mass-producing settlement letters, but I'd imagine they're paying their lawyers enough that it would take hundreds of settlements to break even. I think it's more likely to be about fear and power. They just want to frighten everyone away from downloading music, going on the assumption that everyone that would otherwise download music will go out and buy CD's instead. The power rush of being able to create new laws whenever they want probably also contributes a bit.
The problem may also be their own fear. Like politicians, if they appear to be doing nothing about a problem, they'll lose their jobs. Enough (important) people would rather see them do the wrong thing than nothing.
Obviously you have something to hide. Namely C and D.
At least the razor is a physical object that might have some amount of research (probably in the materials used) to it. I hear ads on the radio from a bank that rounds all debit card purchases up to the next dollar and transfers the difference into your savings account. At the end of the ad, they say "patent pending". They have actually applied for a patent that covers the combination of basic arithmetic and transferring money between accounts (which most people have been able to do for years, even online or on an automatic schedule). I'm all for a patent system that does what ours was intended to do, but it's getting just a bit ridiculous now.
I would hope that all of your examples would be rejected for patents based on the vast amount of prior art. Personally, I'm still fairly undecided about software patents. If someone spends a year doing research and development on something like a compression algorithm that is superior (in compression ratio and/or compression/decompression speed) to anything else available, I'd have no objections to that person being able to make some money from their work. The biggest problem I see with trying to handle software patents is how to appropriately apply the obviousness test.
I think this is the only time I'll ever say anything even remotely good about Vista, when people keep trying to use the too-many-variants argument. For most people (home consumers), the business variants can be eliminated. That cuts the options down to three, with Ultimate also not a serious option for the average home user. Compare that with Ubuntu, which has several only-slightly-different versions (Kubuntu, Xubuntu, etc.), each one with a normal CD, an Alternate CD, and a DVD, and each one of those coming in x86 and amd64. Personally, I think having several choices is a good thing (more so in the case of Ubuntu where none of the versions of intentionally crippled; I'm looking at you, Remote-Desktop-is-only-in-Vista-business-versions) .
...the first two hundred times Don't you mean three hundred times? I mean, come on, it's right in the summary.We already know the most important spoilers, namely that Hermione's a dude and Voldemort is the ghost of Harry's father that has a sled named Rosebud.