You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@nc.rr.com> on 2002/01/18 14:31:10 UTC
Re: [definitely OT] LZW patent [was Re: MathML package structure?]
On Fri, 2002-01-18 at 06:30, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
<snip>
>
> I think there are just a few software patents that really deserve their
> status (the RSA encryption algorithm, for example) but there are *TONS*
> that don't. Or, at least, I would *personally* have came out with if I
> had to build a system of that sort. Almost all speech recognition
> patents are dumb, but they use very complex math so they scare the crap
> out of the patent office! like using convolutions to match signals! wow,
> that's non-obvious! NOT!
>
> good for Cauchy and Cantor that aren't here to witness the result of
> their geniality :(
>
> Patents aren't the problem: the incredible ignorance of the US patent
> office is!
>
I dunno. Personally I agree with the author of this page, that it
equates to a theorem and I don't think that mathematical laws should be
patentable. At the very least I think the patents run for way too
long. US Patent laws were base on the idea that you'd have to build a
big factory and ramp up for production in order to profit from an
invention or sell it to someone who can. This isn't necessarily the
case for software. Next, a 6-12 months cycle can be a lifetime in
software, let alone several years. I'm a bit leftist on software
patents. I think they stifle innovation. I think progress is a
community effort. We'll have to agree to disagree on the idea of
software patents.
Lastly, from a practical standpoint -- it would be very difficult to
apply them intelligently as you suggest. Maybe as the economy melts
down, it will get easier. The truth of the matter is what software guy
who is general enough to understand all of the different kinds of
software patent submissions he gets in and yet smart enough to be able
to understand the more complicated ones would want this kind of boring,
thankless, probably low paying job? I'd hate to be the guy/gal that
staffs that office.
-Andy
> --
> Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
> able to give birth to a dancing star.
> <st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
--
www.superlinksoftware.com
www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html
- fix java generics!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [definitely OT] LZW patent [was Re: MathML package structure?]
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@nc.rr.com>.
Ooops sorry I meant to just send that to stefano. eez way of topic now.
On Sat, 2002-01-19 at 09:43, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
> > >
> > > I dunno. Personally I agree with the author of this page, that it
> > > equates to a theorem and I don't think that mathematical laws should be
> > > patentable. At the very least I think the patents run for way too
> > > long. US Patent laws were base on the idea that you'd have to build a
> > > big factory and ramp up for production in order to profit from an
> > > invention or sell it to someone who can. This isn't necessarily the
> > > case for software.
> >
> > Oh, here I totally agree! Two years should be plenty to get enough
> > visibility to become big and healthy enough, without stopping everybody
> > else.
> >
>
> I guess I can buy that, enough to get compensated. Which if it was
> worth patenting anyhow shouldn't take so long.
>
> > > Next, a 6-12 months cycle can be a lifetime in
> > > software, let alone several years. I'm a bit leftist on software
> > > patents. I think they stifle innovation. I think progress is a
> > > community effort. We'll have to agree to disagree on the idea of
> > > software patents.
> >
> > I think that protection of intellectual property is not a bad thing, per
> > se. The concept that 'information wants to be free' is screwed: for the
> > first time in the history of mankind, the marginal cost of copying
> > information is *zero*, not 'low' or 'low for big numbers' but *zero*.
> > This changes the picture a lot (see napster and friends), but doesn't
> > mean that people shouldn't be rewarded for the brainwork they did.
> >
> > note that *rewarded* doesn't mean 25$ per CD or 3% of your software
> > revenue per 15 years!
> >
>
> +1. The trouble is protecting the little guy from the Microsoft and
> Suns of the world, but I believe oneupmanship and competition is the way
> to do this. Supposing we were competitors, you come up with an idea, I
> build on it and improve it. You build on my idea and improve it. This
> kind of competition causes rapid innovation. Once again the trouble is
> protecting the little guy from the sharks who can control his access to
> the marketplace. In the US we don't do this very well anymore.
>
> > I give away my software and my patents (yes, a few things in Cocoon
> > could be patentable) but I get *rewarded* with respect, fun, knowledge,
> > vibility, better code and new ideas.
> >
>
> yup thats why I started POI. The jobs I get paid for are boring work.
>
> > And most of these things you can't even buy with money!
> >
> > the people must understand that 'reward != money'... interesting enough,
> > europeans seem to appreciate this disequation much more than
> > americans... probably because wellfare give europeans benefits without
> > always having to pass thru money exchanges.
> >
>
> Hehe, yes someone jokingly told me I couldn't work on Jakarta because I
> wasn't European or from Sun. :-)
>
> I've found Europe is a lot more laid back then the US. People here have
> bought into the "Corporate culture." Its kinda scary.
>
> Of course Europe tends to be very socialist and Socialism gives me a
> nasty rash. (get a job you bum...oh wait...I don't have one either)
>
> I'm a capitalist but an anti-corporatist (before too long 3 companies
> will rule the world)
>
> > ah, well, getting too off topic, I guess :)
> >
> > > Lastly, from a practical standpoint -- it would be very difficult to
> > > apply them intelligently as you suggest. Maybe as the economy melts
> > > down, it will get easier. The truth of the matter is what software guy
> > > who is general enough to understand all of the different kinds of
> > > software patent submissions he gets in and yet smart enough to be able
> > > to understand the more complicated ones would want this kind of boring,
> > > thankless, probably low paying job? I'd hate to be the guy/gal that
> > > staffs that office.
> >
> > Yes, but I'd love to be part of an open and meritocratic community of
> > 'patent rejection'. Wound't you?
> >
>
> And work in a government building in DC. No way. (having nothing to do
> with the possibility of 747s landing on your head). I've worked in a
> government building before. Its kinda like being in jail. Secondly,
> spending all day reading patents would make me nauseous. :-)
>
>
> -Andy
> --
> www.superlinksoftware.com
> www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java
> http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html
> - fix java generics!
>
>
> The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
> vote.
> -Ambassador Kosh
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
--
www.superlinksoftware.com
www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html
- fix java generics!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
revisiting css and table-less layout
Posted by Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>.
Maybe helpful for your styles that target css compliant browsers..?
Vadim Plessky wrote:
| On Saturday 12 January 2002 16:43, Christian Wolfgang Hujer wrote:
[...]
| > > I think, for a three column layout this definitely is the best
| > > solution. And everything regarding margins, borders and paddings
| > > works
| > finest in the
| > > first and third column.
| >
| > You have me thinking in 'pure' ideals now ... :)
| >
| > Doesn't it strike you strange that the placement of columns in
| > the html page
| > affects the layout?
|
| Oh, and how it does! :(
| Really. That's annoyingly ugly (though still better than some other
| solutions).
Hello Christian, Robert,
following CSS/HTML code does the trick (3-column layout)
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>
<style type="text/css">
#left_column {
display: inline-block;
left:5px;
top:50px;
width:190px;
border:1px solid #cccccc;
background-color:#EDEDED;
}
#center_column {
display: inline-block;
/* adjust this to the width you need */
width: 50%;
margin-left: 10px;
margin-right:10px;
border:1px solid lime;
}
#right_column {
display: inline-block;
right:10px;
top:50px;
width:180px;
border:1px solid #cccccc;
background-color:#EDEDED;
}
</style>
<body>
<!-- left -->
<span id="left_column">
Left column text
</span>
<!-- center block -->
<span id="center_column">
Center column text
</span>
<!-- column on the right side -->
<span id="right_column">
Right column text
</span>
</body>
</html>
As I wrote beofre: you need either MS IE6/Win or MacIE5 to render example
above "correctly"- as other browsers do not support inline-block (yet)
But, other browsers still can ignore display: inline-block rule and display
SPAN elements as normal SPAN (display: inline) blocks. So, while formatting
degrades in this case, content remains accessible.
|
| You know we are talking about a yet unsolved quest: multicolumn layout
on
| web pages.
| So even the best currently available solution is just an interims
| solution
so, you can use {float: left} (right), {display: inline-block}, {position:
absolute} or {position: relative} to achieve multi-column layout.
I also think that if you create table with just 3 cells to put all stuff
inside (for 3 columns) - it's still ok. But if you have hundreds of <TD>
cells - - HTML becomes unreadable, and you can't count that thgis stuff will
be supported by the future versions of browsers.
| :(
|
| The final newspaper-style solution already is on the way:
| http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-multicol/
|
| Though as far as I see the CSS3 Multicol module really covers only
| newspaper-style.
| But that's what's currently missing, and everything else is already
| solved (though it needs improvement).
|
| I am really looking forward to see the CSS Level 3 Recommendation :)
| (I am not so much looking forward to see the first CSS Level 3
| implementations, I believe there again will be much trouble as with CSS
2
As it was mentioned on www-style list some time ago, it's unlikely that
someone will implement completed CSS2 specification.
Note: CSS3 has modular structure.
So, with CSS3 Core implemented - you can claim CSS3 conformance.
But, this doesn't mean that CSS3-compliant browser will support CSS3
Multicol
module (or CSS3 Tables, or CSS3 Absolute Positioning)
|
| Greetings
|
| Christian
Cheers,
--
Vadim Plessky
http://kde2.newmail.ru (English)
33 Window Decorations and 6 Widget Styles for KDE
http://kde2.newmail.ru/kde_themes.html
KDE mini-Themes
http://kde2.newmail.ru/themes/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [definitely OT] LZW patent [was Re: MathML package structure?]
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@nc.rr.com>.
And all this because I hit the wrong button on Ximan Evolution :-). If
anyone want to chat about this further they'll have to email me
directly. I don't want to turn cocoon-dev into a big political
discussion room. :-)
On Sat, 2002-01-19 at 11:49, Roger I Martin PhD wrote:
> Just my two capitalistic cents: As I understand it, the patent office was
> not set up to only provide protection of inventions for would-be
> manufacturers but to get all ideas and inventions into the hands of the
> military as quickly as possible so they can pick through 'em(I happen to
> agree with this. It "wouldn't be prudent" having US citizens selling
> military ideas to the country with the highest bid!). Therefore what is
> considered patentable has been kept very broad to give people an incentive
> to submit their ideas. For example, if you figure out how to make a bullet
> travel further and more accurately by "rifling" a gun barrel, they want to
> know about it and "convince" you to keep it a US military secret! You get
> patent protection for civilian and commercial applications and if it has
> miltary significances, a fat contract. If you can't manufacture in a timely
> fashion the US military has the right to get it done.
>
> I agree that software and algorithms don't patent well. Mostly because of
> lawyers (this is not proverbial lawyer bashing) just a fact. Code blows 'em
> away. It's too much for 'em. They can't handle patenting something
> progressively changing with more words than the patent. Try explaining to a
> lawyer what a reserved word is or all the "prior art"! I had to write a
> patent for one .com and by the time management and the lawyers were
> satisfied with the patent prose, .coms were no longer getting VC money for
> fledging ideas. Since this experience I've stayed away from patenting
> software alone!
>
> Why deal with gif? Why not jpg, png, etc?
>
> Blame this OT continuation on it being Saturday morning.
>
> -Roger
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
--
www.superlinksoftware.com
www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html
- fix java generics!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [definitely OT] LZW patent [was Re: MathML package structure?]
Posted by Stephan Michels <st...@vern.chem.tu-berlin.de>.
On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, Roger I Martin PhD wrote:
> Why deal with gif? Why not jpg, png, etc?
Because of the transparency :-| JPG hasn't transparency, and PNG's
transparency were not correct handled from, i think it was the IE, browsers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [definitely OT] LZW patent [was Re: MathML package structure?]
Posted by Roger I Martin PhD <hy...@hypernexinc.com>.
Just my two capitalistic cents: As I understand it, the patent office was
not set up to only provide protection of inventions for would-be
manufacturers but to get all ideas and inventions into the hands of the
military as quickly as possible so they can pick through 'em(I happen to
agree with this. It "wouldn't be prudent" having US citizens selling
military ideas to the country with the highest bid!). Therefore what is
considered patentable has been kept very broad to give people an incentive
to submit their ideas. For example, if you figure out how to make a bullet
travel further and more accurately by "rifling" a gun barrel, they want to
know about it and "convince" you to keep it a US military secret! You get
patent protection for civilian and commercial applications and if it has
miltary significances, a fat contract. If you can't manufacture in a timely
fashion the US military has the right to get it done.
I agree that software and algorithms don't patent well. Mostly because of
lawyers (this is not proverbial lawyer bashing) just a fact. Code blows 'em
away. It's too much for 'em. They can't handle patenting something
progressively changing with more words than the patent. Try explaining to a
lawyer what a reserved word is or all the "prior art"! I had to write a
patent for one .com and by the time management and the lawyers were
satisfied with the patent prose, .coms were no longer getting VC money for
fledging ideas. Since this experience I've stayed away from patenting
software alone!
Why deal with gif? Why not jpg, png, etc?
Blame this OT continuation on it being Saturday morning.
-Roger
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [definitely OT] LZW patent [was Re: MathML package structure?]
Posted by Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>.
wow!
politics from an italian...hmmm, and a capitalist that doesn't believe in
corporations??
I guess it's the weekend :)
I'm off to count some money :-$
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@nc.rr.com>
To: <co...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2002 6:43 AM
Subject: Re: [definitely OT] LZW patent [was Re: MathML package structure?]
>
> > >
> > > I dunno. Personally I agree with the author of this page, that it
> > > equates to a theorem and I don't think that mathematical laws should
be
> > > patentable. At the very least I think the patents run for way too
> > > long. US Patent laws were base on the idea that you'd have to build a
> > > big factory and ramp up for production in order to profit from an
> > > invention or sell it to someone who can. This isn't necessarily the
> > > case for software.
> >
> > Oh, here I totally agree! Two years should be plenty to get enough
> > visibility to become big and healthy enough, without stopping everybody
> > else.
> >
>
> I guess I can buy that, enough to get compensated. Which if it was
> worth patenting anyhow shouldn't take so long.
>
> > > Next, a 6-12 months cycle can be a lifetime in
> > > software, let alone several years. I'm a bit leftist on software
> > > patents. I think they stifle innovation. I think progress is a
> > > community effort. We'll have to agree to disagree on the idea of
> > > software patents.
> >
> > I think that protection of intellectual property is not a bad thing, per
> > se. The concept that 'information wants to be free' is screwed: for the
> > first time in the history of mankind, the marginal cost of copying
> > information is *zero*, not 'low' or 'low for big numbers' but *zero*.
> > This changes the picture a lot (see napster and friends), but doesn't
> > mean that people shouldn't be rewarded for the brainwork they did.
> >
> > note that *rewarded* doesn't mean 25$ per CD or 3% of your software
> > revenue per 15 years!
> >
>
> +1. The trouble is protecting the little guy from the Microsoft and
> Suns of the world, but I believe oneupmanship and competition is the way
> to do this. Supposing we were competitors, you come up with an idea, I
> build on it and improve it. You build on my idea and improve it. This
> kind of competition causes rapid innovation. Once again the trouble is
> protecting the little guy from the sharks who can control his access to
> the marketplace. In the US we don't do this very well anymore.
>
> > I give away my software and my patents (yes, a few things in Cocoon
> > could be patentable) but I get *rewarded* with respect, fun, knowledge,
> > vibility, better code and new ideas.
> >
>
> yup thats why I started POI. The jobs I get paid for are boring work.
>
> > And most of these things you can't even buy with money!
> >
> > the people must understand that 'reward != money'... interesting enough,
> > europeans seem to appreciate this disequation much more than
> > americans... probably because wellfare give europeans benefits without
> > always having to pass thru money exchanges.
> >
>
> Hehe, yes someone jokingly told me I couldn't work on Jakarta because I
> wasn't European or from Sun. :-)
>
> I've found Europe is a lot more laid back then the US. People here have
> bought into the "Corporate culture." Its kinda scary.
>
> Of course Europe tends to be very socialist and Socialism gives me a
> nasty rash. (get a job you bum...oh wait...I don't have one either)
>
> I'm a capitalist but an anti-corporatist (before too long 3 companies
> will rule the world)
>
> > ah, well, getting too off topic, I guess :)
> >
> > > Lastly, from a practical standpoint -- it would be very difficult to
> > > apply them intelligently as you suggest. Maybe as the economy melts
> > > down, it will get easier. The truth of the matter is what software
guy
> > > who is general enough to understand all of the different kinds of
> > > software patent submissions he gets in and yet smart enough to be able
> > > to understand the more complicated ones would want this kind of
boring,
> > > thankless, probably low paying job? I'd hate to be the guy/gal that
> > > staffs that office.
> >
> > Yes, but I'd love to be part of an open and meritocratic community of
> > 'patent rejection'. Wound't you?
> >
>
> And work in a government building in DC. No way. (having nothing to do
> with the possibility of 747s landing on your head). I've worked in a
> government building before. Its kinda like being in jail. Secondly,
> spending all day reading patents would make me nauseous. :-)
>
>
> -Andy
> --
> www.superlinksoftware.com
> www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java
> http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html
> - fix java generics!
>
>
> The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
> vote.
> -Ambassador Kosh
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [definitely OT] LZW patent [was Re: MathML package structure?]
Posted by Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org>.
On 19 Jan 2002, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> +1. The trouble is protecting the little guy from the Microsoft and
> Suns of the world, but I believe oneupmanship and competition is the way
> to do this. Supposing we were competitors, you come up with an idea, I
> build on it and improve it. You build on my idea and improve it. This
> kind of competition causes rapid innovation. Once again the trouble is
> protecting the little guy from the sharks who can control his access to
> the marketplace. In the US we don't do this very well anymore.
How can the little guy compete when to even step into the market he has to
pay Mr Big $200,000 just to use his compression technology that hundreds
of millions of people around the world are using, and if he doesn't
support it he gets marginalised? That's the entire problem with software
patents. Patents were devised to help the little guy, because we didn't
have things like a global internet - so the little guy needed that
patent in order to find a larger market without being squashed by the big
boys - and he didn't need to worry if his new fancy steam piston didn't
interoperate with Mr Big's steam piston. With software, particularly
internet software, that very same concept is a hinderance to Mr Little's
entrance to the market. I'm amazed you can't see this, especially in the
free software business. How are you supposed to implement SVG2GIF (or
2PNG) if Adobe want's 5% of your gross profits before tax, or $5 per copy
shipped, whichever is higher? There's no way in hell you can do that as an
open source developer.
Face it, software patents have NO PLACE in today's market. There are
perfectly valid and workable alternatives for commercial entities.
--
<!-- Matt -->
<:->Get a smart net</:->
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [definitely OT] LZW patent [was Re: MathML package structure?]
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@nc.rr.com>.
> >
> > I dunno. Personally I agree with the author of this page, that it
> > equates to a theorem and I don't think that mathematical laws should be
> > patentable. At the very least I think the patents run for way too
> > long. US Patent laws were base on the idea that you'd have to build a
> > big factory and ramp up for production in order to profit from an
> > invention or sell it to someone who can. This isn't necessarily the
> > case for software.
>
> Oh, here I totally agree! Two years should be plenty to get enough
> visibility to become big and healthy enough, without stopping everybody
> else.
>
I guess I can buy that, enough to get compensated. Which if it was
worth patenting anyhow shouldn't take so long.
> > Next, a 6-12 months cycle can be a lifetime in
> > software, let alone several years. I'm a bit leftist on software
> > patents. I think they stifle innovation. I think progress is a
> > community effort. We'll have to agree to disagree on the idea of
> > software patents.
>
> I think that protection of intellectual property is not a bad thing, per
> se. The concept that 'information wants to be free' is screwed: for the
> first time in the history of mankind, the marginal cost of copying
> information is *zero*, not 'low' or 'low for big numbers' but *zero*.
> This changes the picture a lot (see napster and friends), but doesn't
> mean that people shouldn't be rewarded for the brainwork they did.
>
> note that *rewarded* doesn't mean 25$ per CD or 3% of your software
> revenue per 15 years!
>
+1. The trouble is protecting the little guy from the Microsoft and
Suns of the world, but I believe oneupmanship and competition is the way
to do this. Supposing we were competitors, you come up with an idea, I
build on it and improve it. You build on my idea and improve it. This
kind of competition causes rapid innovation. Once again the trouble is
protecting the little guy from the sharks who can control his access to
the marketplace. In the US we don't do this very well anymore.
> I give away my software and my patents (yes, a few things in Cocoon
> could be patentable) but I get *rewarded* with respect, fun, knowledge,
> vibility, better code and new ideas.
>
yup thats why I started POI. The jobs I get paid for are boring work.
> And most of these things you can't even buy with money!
>
> the people must understand that 'reward != money'... interesting enough,
> europeans seem to appreciate this disequation much more than
> americans... probably because wellfare give europeans benefits without
> always having to pass thru money exchanges.
>
Hehe, yes someone jokingly told me I couldn't work on Jakarta because I
wasn't European or from Sun. :-)
I've found Europe is a lot more laid back then the US. People here have
bought into the "Corporate culture." Its kinda scary.
Of course Europe tends to be very socialist and Socialism gives me a
nasty rash. (get a job you bum...oh wait...I don't have one either)
I'm a capitalist but an anti-corporatist (before too long 3 companies
will rule the world)
> ah, well, getting too off topic, I guess :)
>
> > Lastly, from a practical standpoint -- it would be very difficult to
> > apply them intelligently as you suggest. Maybe as the economy melts
> > down, it will get easier. The truth of the matter is what software guy
> > who is general enough to understand all of the different kinds of
> > software patent submissions he gets in and yet smart enough to be able
> > to understand the more complicated ones would want this kind of boring,
> > thankless, probably low paying job? I'd hate to be the guy/gal that
> > staffs that office.
>
> Yes, but I'd love to be part of an open and meritocratic community of
> 'patent rejection'. Wound't you?
>
And work in a government building in DC. No way. (having nothing to do
with the possibility of 747s landing on your head). I've worked in a
government building before. Its kinda like being in jail. Secondly,
spending all day reading patents would make me nauseous. :-)
-Andy
--
www.superlinksoftware.com
www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html
- fix java generics!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [definitely OT] LZW patent [was Re: MathML package structure?]
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
"Andrew C. Oliver" wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2002-01-18 at 06:30, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> <snip>
>
> >
> > I think there are just a few software patents that really deserve their
> > status (the RSA encryption algorithm, for example) but there are *TONS*
> > that don't. Or, at least, I would *personally* have came out with if I
> > had to build a system of that sort. Almost all speech recognition
> > patents are dumb, but they use very complex math so they scare the crap
> > out of the patent office! like using convolutions to match signals! wow,
> > that's non-obvious! NOT!
> >
> > good for Cauchy and Cantor that aren't here to witness the result of
> > their geniality :(
> >
> > Patents aren't the problem: the incredible ignorance of the US patent
> > office is!
> >
>
> I dunno. Personally I agree with the author of this page, that it
> equates to a theorem and I don't think that mathematical laws should be
> patentable. At the very least I think the patents run for way too
> long. US Patent laws were base on the idea that you'd have to build a
> big factory and ramp up for production in order to profit from an
> invention or sell it to someone who can. This isn't necessarily the
> case for software.
Oh, here I totally agree! Two years should be plenty to get enough
visibility to become big and healthy enough, without stopping everybody
else.
> Next, a 6-12 months cycle can be a lifetime in
> software, let alone several years. I'm a bit leftist on software
> patents. I think they stifle innovation. I think progress is a
> community effort. We'll have to agree to disagree on the idea of
> software patents.
I think that protection of intellectual property is not a bad thing, per
se. The concept that 'information wants to be free' is screwed: for the
first time in the history of mankind, the marginal cost of copying
information is *zero*, not 'low' or 'low for big numbers' but *zero*.
This changes the picture a lot (see napster and friends), but doesn't
mean that people shouldn't be rewarded for the brainwork they did.
note that *rewarded* doesn't mean 25$ per CD or 3% of your software
revenue per 15 years!
I give away my software and my patents (yes, a few things in Cocoon
could be patentable) but I get *rewarded* with respect, fun, knowledge,
vibility, better code and new ideas.
And most of these things you can't even buy with money!
the people must understand that 'reward != money'... interesting enough,
europeans seem to appreciate this disequation much more than
americans... probably because wellfare give europeans benefits without
always having to pass thru money exchanges.
ah, well, getting too off topic, I guess :)
> Lastly, from a practical standpoint -- it would be very difficult to
> apply them intelligently as you suggest. Maybe as the economy melts
> down, it will get easier. The truth of the matter is what software guy
> who is general enough to understand all of the different kinds of
> software patent submissions he gets in and yet smart enough to be able
> to understand the more complicated ones would want this kind of boring,
> thankless, probably low paying job? I'd hate to be the guy/gal that
> staffs that office.
Yes, but I'd love to be part of an open and meritocratic community of
'patent rejection'. Wound't you?
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org