wissler

41 ms·

361.
by wissler 14y ago
"Particularly as you naively think that an expired patent is enough to protect you from the system." Note that I said with respect to ...
362.
by wissler 14y ago
I think you're engaged in wishful thinking. I wish you were right too.
363.
by wissler 14y ago
It's way too early to be suing with merely YouTube, no network effects. Google can easily switch away.
364.
by wissler 14y ago
Show me an entity, any entity, that could be sued for lots and lots of cash, that is using these "unencumbered" algorithms.
365.
by wissler 14y ago
They won't present their patents until there's a big haul of cash to be extracted. There won't be a big haul of cash to be extracted until some deep-pocketed manufacturer implements the algorithms. Which they likely won't do because they un
366.
by wissler 14y ago
It is unencumbered, unless there's a ton of money to be made by suing them. Same goes for Theora. When some deep-pocketed hardware manufacturer dares put one of these "unencumbered" algorithms into its hardware, then we will see. But I doub
367.
by wissler 14y ago
The mere threat is enough to keep people from investing much in these "alternatives." E.g., Steve Jobs wrote: "All video codecs are covered by patents," Jobs wrote from his iPad. "A patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and oth
368.
by wissler 14y ago
Related: http://www.mpegla.com/main/pid/vp8/default.aspx
369.
by wissler 14y ago
No matter how many times I'm downvoted, it's still not unencumbered. It's simply not in the nature of our patent system that something this complex can be unencumbered, unless it's with respect to an expired patent. I know my position cause
370.
by wissler 14y ago
There is no such thing as "unencumbered by patents". Unless you have a technology that has already been tested thoroughly in the courts, which is the only way you can really determine whether something would be deemed to violate a patent or
371.
by wissler 14y ago
Indeed. They claim to be against abuse of authority, but then take full authority to be judge, jury, and executioner. All in secret.
372.
by wissler 14y ago
Heaven forbid that anyone possess a moral backbone.
373.
by wissler 14y ago
Security theatre.
374.
by wissler 14y ago
My only criticism isn't directed at you, but at the fact that you have to make an argument that thinking is good. The original article is itself thought -- poor thought, but thought nonetheless. It refutes itself.
375.
by wissler 14y ago
They are probably just small, idealistic, and prioritize producing actually working hardware over producing marketing fluff.
376.
by wissler 14y ago
If you are incompetent to judge others and you pull the trigger on a verdict anyway... clearly, the fool deserves what he is getting. He has aided and abetted theft on a grand scale.
377.
by wissler 14y ago
Yes, the time has come for an Apple boycott, both by consumers of their products and by any decent engineers that work for Apple.
378.
by wissler 14y ago
I'm sure that Semmelweis's bumbling associates would have agreed with you. But the fact remains that empirically he was saving lives; there was more truth in Semmelweis's claims than in theirs, and it was a matter of life and death.
379.
by wissler 14y ago
I don't dismiss Apple's contribution. On the contrary, I think Apple dismisses the contributions of scientists and engineers that allowed them to build their iPhone. They want to take all the credit, when in fact, only a relatively minuscul
380.
by wissler 14y ago
Usually engineers don't get to decide where major resources are applied. That's the call of the increasingly non-technically savvy CEO. (HP is typical of this trend -- founded by engineers who were the cause of its greatness, over time degr
381.
by wissler 14y ago
"Obvious" is a relative term. What is obvious to an adult may not be obvious to a 2-year-old. Likewise, to many engineers the iPhone was obvious. To many of the CEO's heading large cell phone companies? Not so obvious.
382.
by wissler 14y ago
"Apple revolutionised the industry" You give them far too much credit. Apple happened to be first in implementing an obvious conclusion in the evolution of computing: combining a true operating system with the features of a PDA and adding a
383.
by wissler 14y ago
The main problem is the illogic of it: "if young people don't flock to something then it must be wrong." Wrong. I don't agree with agile either but I actually have reasons. But to be fair, the article did say "Seven Things I Hate ...", it
384.
by wissler 14y ago
$15M won't be enough.
385.
by wissler 14y ago
> The lesson I take from this is that the Shuttle should have been killed on the drawing board, never flown. Exactly, yes. The design should have been revised until they weren't pushing safety margins so hard. Of course, that would have
386.
by wissler 14y ago
Government is merely a set of people. These people don't give you your rights any more than some random person on the street gives you your rights. Both merely either respect them or not. America, in spite of its contradictions, was to a si
387.
by wissler 14y ago
It's a SINGLE COLOR!
388.
by wissler 14y ago
"$11.2 million is a lot of money. What it gives us is certainty. No matter what else happens in the world, the core team will be able to focus entirely on Meteor for several years" Assuming you're not targeted with any software patent suits
389.
by wissler 14y ago
Your attitude only keeps the status quo in place. We need to be radically opposed to patents, there is no good in them whatsoever. They are a gross injustice to decent people trying to create new things and move humanity forward and deserve
390.
by wissler 14y ago
coffee mug bug: a bug you could have found by talking to your coffee mug rather than enlisting someone else's help.

More ›