I completely agree with you that doing complex parsing in the kernel is stupid. And I'll make your day just that little bit worse:
Remember TTF and OTF which evolved into WOFF? Those flexible but very complex font file formats, optionally with bytecode that's actually JITted? That can be embedded into webpages therefore are interpreted by the underlying font rendering services regardless of browser used?
Windows parses them in the kernel.
It's on by default in 2008, 2008R2, Vista, 7. Quoth Enable Kernel Caching (IIS 7):
Note: By default, kernel caching is enabled in IIS 7.
Those patents disclose algorithms. Basically, applied math. Which should have never, ever been allowed as claims in a patent since they are antithetical to the compromise between the inventor's and society's benefit the patent system was designed to facilitate. So, yes, they are pretty much what one would call "software patents".
Whether or not they describe revolutionary ideas, and whether or not they required creative thought to invent is completely beside the point. Patenting algorithms runs against the very worldview that built the research scaffolding which allowed you to come up with these ideas (the old adage about standing on the shoulders of giants--and now imagine a world where those shoulders could only be visited if you paid the piper.) Math isn't invented, it's discovered.
That being said, under no circumstances would I recommend a client to hire you if I caught wind that you owned patents applicable to the field in which you would be working. That simply screams "conflict of interest", "subsequent lawsuit", and "humongous liability."
There are exactly zero methods to ensure online privacy.
Now, if one were to be talking about improving online privacy, it'd be a different matter entirely.
I.e. DRM doesn't work. Moreover, it has the opposite effect, rather than preventing copying, it encourages more copying!
I actually take issue with your assertion that DRM doesn't work. I posit that DRM works exceptionally well - it's just that most people aren't aware of exactly who DRM mechanisms are mostly aimed at: the distribution channel, the software and hardware vendors. Not the end users.
I urge you to read Ian Hickson's most excellent post on the matter. It's well worth the couple of minutes invested, but if you're impatient, this is the main takeaway:
DRM's purpose is to give content providers control over software and hardware providers, and it is satisfying that purpose well.
What amazes me is that those people seriously considered a situation that could have had a devastating economical effect on the US. Things like this cause nations to implode. A bankrupt, non-functional state has time and again led to violent overthrow and civil war. This is what their game of chicken was risking. And when you listen to some of their backers they would welcome this in the hopes to build a different state from the ashes. Only their vision is really frightening.
Indeed it should be, but I hope you're not under the impression that this is anything unprecedented in any way, shape or form. The actions of the Tea Party are perfectly rational given their underpinnings. Here's a thought-provoking (and well-researched) analysis about their origins, motives and strategies: Tea Party radicalism is misunderstood: Meet the "Newest Right"
You're correct, we did read it differently
While I wholeheartedly agree that the consequences of Elop's "strategy" were quite obvious, Ahonen did more than speculate - he tried (and, for the most part, succeeded) to back up his statements. He provided hard data, several possible market share collapse forecasts (which turned out to be faily accurate - much closer than the projections issued by any other ratings agency), and several ways to try and fix Nokia's decline.
That's why I was a bit miffed - I dislike other people's actual work to be brushed aside with a shallow joke. I know this kind of belittling "humor" is endemic, but it's representative for the pernicious "bah, big deal, I could've done the same thing if I'd only bothered to work at it" mindset.
Woah, he predicted Windows Phone would not succeed at the level of iPhone and Android? Better tell James Randi to hang it up, because we got a real god damned psychic right here!
Bra-vo, very sarcastic and blasé, but unfortunately it makes you look quite ignorant. Ahonen predicted this in February 2011 right after Elop's announcement. For example:
- Microsoft's solution: System Center Configuration Manager
- Free + OSS solution: Local Update Publisher (uses the same official, documented APIs as SCCM)
The enterprise MSIs are patched in sync with the other updates. Managing Chrome via LUP + the Chrome ADMs is a breeze, since if an "uncontrolled" (LocalAppData) Chrome instance starts and there's a MSI on the machine, the uncontrolled instance will respect the GPO settings.