|
| Authored by: SilverWave on Wednesday, October 10 2012 @ 01:07 PM EDT |
If anyone has an old kindle fire I commend this article for your
attention:
Adventures in rooting: Running Jelly Bean on
last year's Kindle Fire Amazon has left its first tablet behind, so we take
matters into our own hands.
Its a blast :-)
Have
fun!---
RMS: The 4 Freedoms
0 run the program for any purpose
1 study the source code and change it
2 make copies and distribute them
3 publish modified versions
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 10 2012 @ 01:14 PM EDT |
Your daily dose of rage: the state Supreme Court in Connecticut has
decided to let a rapist go free in a case involving a severely disabled woman
with limited mobility who cannot talk. Why? Because there was no evidence she could not communicate her refusal to have
sex with the defendant." She cerebral palsy, cannot verbally communicate,
and "is so physically restricted that she is able to make motions only with her
right index finger."
Xeni Jardin, Boing Boing
---
[.PDF] SC18523
Decision - State v. Fourtin
[.PDF] SC18523
Dissent - State v. Fourtin [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 10 2012 @ 01:57 PM EDT |
| Federal
Circuit to Consider the Patentable Subject Matter of Software ~ mw
So,
should there be a crowd sourcing to get to where we need to be - with a filing
that the court can understand and digest?
Of interest is a comment that the
judges deciding any computer related case, and certainly one about software
patents, should maybe get as part of the brief/filings, an educational
brief/filing that is easy for them to understand, where it is presented to them
in a way that is like how they would take a course on the subject. As, many
judges seem to be lacking in even a computer science 101 levels of
understanding.
So, without the education, they are guessing, or taking their
clerks word on something, were the clerk is not fully aware, other than they
know how to click here and there, better than the judges.
2 cents example - found at the Brian Cantwell Smith
video at C-SPAN link - this might help them a bit, to understand maybe, and
the DVD version of the video is available at C-SPAN store, to buy, and send to
the judges maybe?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 10 2012 @ 07:45 PM EDT |
I seriously hope this article is as inaccurate and lazy
as my title,
because... damn.
verge
If any court ever even hints that this is valid, I'm
heading for
the hills.
sooner or later a 1960s patent on use of elementary
particles (or other items, imaginary or not) to do (or not
do) unspecified
things (or nothing) will emerge. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 10 2012 @ 08:13 PM EDT |
How about someone writing a Groklaw post describing, in detail, a historical
case in which a patent clearly helped an inventor to bring something to market,
where the patent protected him while he provided value to society, and where the
patent-holder's mononopoly clearly did not impede the development and deployment
of his invention while it was in force.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Tough Idea - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 10 2012 @ 08:24 PM EDT
- Tough Idea - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 04:47 AM EDT
- Wind-up - Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 03:40 AM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 10 2012 @ 10:06 PM EDT |
| "German Government has went a bit too far trying to be transparent and has inadvertently revealed
that German police monitors Skype, Google Mail, MSN Hotmail, Yahoo Mail and
Facebook chat as and when necessary". link [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 10 2012 @ 11:00 PM EDT |
| q13fox.com [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Gringo_ on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 12:32 AM EDT |
CNet displays A
Brief History of Lasers (in pictures).
Laser weapons have been a scifi
dream since the first lasers
were demonstrated in the 60's. Such weapons
appears now to
be on the edge of becoming a reality.
My thoughts are
that caveats are in order. Laser weapons
would be useless in inclement weather,
fog, or dust storms
and they may be defeated by something as low tech as a
mirror. Indeed the
blast could be turned back to its point of origin. They may
also cause blindness in the operators or innocent by-
standers, besides the
enemy. Isn't blinding your enemy
against the Geneva Convention? That would be
such an
insidious use, but tempting to Machiavellian Generals. Each
soldier
blinded would take out one or two others required to
care for him. Hundreds or
thousands could be blinded, cooked
or fried in a single blast.
Besides,
what's the point of all this research? The
Chinese will have it all downloaded
before the first
practical weapon is installed. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 01:36 AM EDT |
| 15 minutes of pure backbone.
http://boingboing.net/2012/10/10/australian-pm-lances-a-sexist.html
Normally this sort of video would easily be classed as 'political' and not be
fit for Groklaw - not even in O/T where there is usually a wide latitude
given.
In this instance Gillard - imnsho - transcends politics.
Parliamentary junkies will note that the PM and leader of the opposition
are not at least 2 sword lengths apart. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 03:51 AM EDT |
| This
"Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal" comic. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- n e v e r (n/t) - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 05:20 PM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 01:46 PM EDT |
http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/11/3488740/appeal-reverses-
injunction-samsung-g
alaxy-nexus-in-the-us[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 01:53 PM EDT |
|
Engadget
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 11 2012 @ 02:02 PM EDT |
Under current US law, would a transporter be treated like any other infringement
device based on the idea that it could be used to produce unauthorized copies of
a trademarked or copyrighted work? When Scotty beams down to rigel-5 with a
copy of the latest StarShip Engineering Quarterly, does that amount to making an
unauthorized copy?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
