Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Last Chance - Get 15% off sitewide on Slashdot Deals with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment I'm going to patent... (Score 1) 164

a Slashdot post that doesn't overreact to patents.

Said post will contain an accurate analysis of a subject patent, correctly pointing out how the general public and media hype might misinterpret the key provisions of the patent claims.

This one is a slam dunk, there is no prior art.

Comment Re:I don't understand how this is possible (Score 1) 228

Um, no, "closing the hatch and deprive it of oxygen" is never an option on a submarine... whether it's operational and underway or in the shipyard.

For one thing, the compartments are huge. An LA class is only divided into two compartments.

For another thing, there is plenty of things on board a submarine to make a self-sustaining fire for a long time - high capacity, high pressure ~3000 psi air banks... banks containing pure oxygen, high pressure hydraulic systems, diesel fuel, etc. I'm guessing the torpedoes were probably off-loaded prior to the overhaul which would be SOP, but there are still plenty of other things like flares, countermeasures, etc that are kind of "mini torpedoes" as well.

I'm an ex-submariner.

Comment Re:Interesting Timing (Score 1) 65

Personally, I don't see it as an "in your face" kind of thing and have never minded my taxes going to such programs. The ballooning entitlement programs bug me more.

I saw several launches while living in Orlando... truly awe-inspiring. I also saw several orbital passes, and a couple of approaches while living in Colorado (including the ill-fated Columbia).

Anyway, hope to get to see it... I'll be in Baltimore on a business trip.

Comment Re:double standard (Score 1) 611

How are software errors legally taken advantage of by casinos?

The machines are tested by the manufacturors, then by a 3rd party testing lab such as GLI, then often undergo further testing before being publicly available... depending on jurisdiction. Yeah, stuff gets through sometimes. Regulators continue to monitor and/or spot check machines while they are in the field. If something gets discovered in the field, action is usually taken fairly quickly. Depending on the nature of what was discovered, a software update may be ordered or the machine may be recalled (sometimes immediately).

The jurisdictional regulator exists to protect the players, not the casinos. The majority of regulations are designed to ensure the players get a "fair shake." That said, of course the casinos are in the business to make a profit... but at least in a manner that is predictable and "fair".

Comment Re:Got to read the claims... (Score 1) 307

The specification teaches the invention, not prior art. If the invention was covered by prior art it wouldn't be novel and therefore wouldn't be patentable.

You're correct in saying that the claims actually define the invention.

If you're quoting a real Claim 1, it's not properly formed and will get thrown out anyway - it lacks proper antecedent basis.

In 1750 Issac Newton became discouraged when he fell up a flight of stairs.