Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: As a lawyer . . . (Score 1) 353

by hawk (#49670181) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: How To Own the Rights To Software Developed At Work?

I am a lawyer, but this is not legal advice. If you want legal advice from me, pay my retainer. If you get your legal advice from slashdot, you deserver whatever happens . . .

Anyway, I've read much of the below. If you are in this situation, and it's not worth paying a lawyer who practices in this area, what you're doing isn't that important.

I don't work in IP at the moment, but there is enough misinformation below to keep several lawyers busy.

There is a reason for hiring a professional programmer instead of doing it yourself. Similarly, there is a reason to hire an actual lawyer rather than misinformation of the internet . . .

hawk, esq.

Comment: Re:I wonder (Score 1) 113

by hawk (#49427119) Attached to: Turning the Arduino Uno Into an Apple ][

Earlier than that.

The Mac IIfx had a pair of chips each of which effectively had such a creature. One ran the serial/network ports, and I forget the other.

Had apple sold that chip, combined with the network that ran on the second (unused) pair of standard home wiring, they could have *owned* home automation years ahead . . .


Comment: Re:Interlacing? WTF? (Score 1) 113

by hawk (#49427085) Attached to: Turning the Arduino Uno Into an Apple ][

for hires, rather than reading the same 40 bytes eight times in a row, and feeding to a character generator,eight different sets of 40 bytes were read (of which six set bits, and two danced around the colorburst signal. the pixel rate was just at the colorburst signal, so shifting half a bit tickled it and gave a different set of colors. Not just clever,but fiendeshly clever)


Comment: Re:THIS is a "golden age"? Yikes. (Score 1) 71

by hawk (#49383705) Attached to: We're In a Golden Age of Star Trek Webseries Right Now

I'm sorry, the fan-made "Star Trek" stuff is terrible, because the actors are terrible. It's as simple as that. They get pretty much everything right, otherwise, but without decent actors, it doesn't matter. I mean, the acting is high-school-level bad.

Err . . . how would this make it any different than Star Trek???


Comment: Re:whose payroll is the scientist on? It matters (Score 4, Informative) 514

That is true, but without understanding what the GAO report was covering it can be a bit misleading. Here is a bit of a graphic summary.

First it is important to note the 106B was over like a 20 year period. It is also important to note, that 106B wasn't all for science (in fact only the minority of it was). That number was the full amount they could attribute towards any are of work on climate change. In the above link the break it down into science, technology, and international assistance. So this covers FAR more than what one would first think of if they were told 106B went to climate change research. Research into clean coal? That would be counted. Nuclear, that would be counted. Research into better batteries for electric cars, that is counted. Research in to solar/wind, that is counted.

You can dig into the reports further to get a more detailed understanding. The point is simply saying climate change got 106B may sound like "oh my god climate researchers are getting rich!!!!". However, when you understand what the report really covers (long period of time and only a small portion goes to what you'd normally thing of as climate research) it does change the perspective a bit.

Comment: Re:How about mandatory felony sentences instead? (Score 1) 420

by hawk (#48686983) Attached to: Drunk Drivers in California May Get Mandated Interlock Devices

>And what some people are going to hate is, this approach works in the UK and Australia.

>DUI in Australia carries a mandatory license suspension in most cases.

That is the case in most (all?) US states.

> The only way you get away with just a fine is if you're just over the limit and
>it's your first drink driving infraction in 3 years...

Nevada isn't that lenient . . .

hawk, esq.