Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Patents cited in article (Score 1) 30

by Theaetetus (#47785907) Attached to: Judge Lucy Koh Rejects Apple's Quest For Anti-Samsung Injunction

The linked article cite the following patents : - Auto-correction/completion on keyboard entry... Il looks quite similar to the autocompletion that you find in some Japanese IME under Linux... which sometimes allow both conversion to kanjis and completion. Auto-correction is quite old on the wordprocessor scene - transformation of email & phone numbers to link AFAIK, most forums and webmails already convert email to link for a long long time. As for Phone number, the extension is quite trivial - slide to unlock it's mimicking a physical (door) lock... so nothing real new...

In hindsight, everything looks trivial. That's why you need to find actual prior art that invalidates the claims. And in particular, mimicking something in the real world may still be patentable, if the patent goes to the method of how it's mimicked. For example, we're trained from birth to recognize faces, but would you say that a facial recognition technology for a computer would never be patentable, because it just mimics that real-world ability? No - it depends on what's actually in the claims, and whether they go to how that simulation is implemented, rather than just the general idea of "recognizing faces" or "unlocking something".

Comment: Re:Slashdot comments indicative of the problem (Score 1) 1182

>be the games journalist who never wrote a review, or even a single word, about Depression Quest http://www.rockpapershotgun.co... Sorry to burst your bubble, but that's a myth borne out of people being unable to use a search engine properly. What's funny is that Grayson himself lied about having written anything about it: http://inagist.com/all/5004497...

That's what the controversy is over? "Here's a list of 50 games, and oh yeah, this is one of them"? Geez. Are you going to start demanding long form birth certificates from everyone now?

Sure, he didn't write a full-blown review, so he's not technically telling a lie, but he DID give her game preferential treatment in an article he wrote about Steam games being greenlit and there is ample evidence (pictures and video) that Grayson and Quinn were spending private time together prior to that article. I'll let the readers be the judge of whether or not Grayson's choice of her game as cover art was influenced by their relationship.

Well, when you're done clutching your pearls, we'll get you a glass of water so you can calm down. I mean, the way you were carrying on, I thought there was a review, not a "here's 50 new Greenlighted games".

Comment: Re:Slashdot comments indicative of the problem (Score 1) 1182

There's also the part where she's declaring harassment because people are trying to find out the truth about whether or not she unethically used an intimate relationship with a games journalist to promote Depression Quest. The fact that she had an intimate relationship with Nathan Grayson is a big deal, especially considering that they officially started dating less than a week after Grayson's article was published, and there is evidence that the relationship may have existed before that but was kept away from public view.

Ah, yes, would that be the games journalist who never wrote a review, or even a single word, about Depression Quest? The journalist who wrote an article about a reality show, months before Depression Quest was even created, and hasn't published anything since?

Comment: Re:What lessons are the video games teaching? (Score 2, Interesting) 1182

Mod this up please...

Not sure why. Most people on Slashdot should realize that screenshot of a web browser showing a page that says "12 seconds ago" doesn't necessarily mean that the corresponding message was created 12 seconds before the screenshot, but just that the page was refreshed 12 seconds after the message... and then the page could have sat, displayed from local RAM, for minutes or hours before a screenshot was taken.

Comment: Re:That's all? (Score 1) 35

by Theaetetus (#47775277) Attached to: Google Wins $1.3 Million From Patent Troll

Just $ 1.3 million for attorney's fees? And I've been telling clients they should have $ 3 million set aside for fees if they want to pursue a patent lawsuit.

But, I guess this is more breach of contract than a real patent suit, so maybe the "low" fees aren't too surprising.

That - this suit didn't really have anything to do with patents, there was no claim construction or Markman hearing, there weren't prior art searches, invalidity contentions, expert reports, etc. It was just a straightforward breach of contract.

Comment: Not really over patents (Score 5, Informative) 35

by Theaetetus (#47773629) Attached to: Google Wins $1.3 Million From Patent Troll
This was a breach of contract suit over a settlement between Google and Beneficial, under which Beneficial wasn't supposed to bring infringement suits against Google customers. They did, hence the breach. The settlement included a provision under which a prevailing party could get attorney's fees after a breach, and this was just the judge awarding those fees.

That's not to say that there aren't people winning money from patent trolls - there are, in other cases, and the lower standard for awarding fees to the defendant is a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Octane Fitness last April. But this isn't one of those - this is more like Google suing the guy who paints the fences at the Googleplex for doing a shitty job, and then getting attorney's fees under their existing contract.

Comment: Re:the purpose is tracking cars (Score 0) 256

by Theaetetus (#47771929) Attached to: DoT Proposes Mandating Vehicle-To-Vehicle Communications

Forget the happy horseshit about super-safe robot cars. We don't have those, and they won't work when we do. This is about the ability to track all the vehicles in the world, either by private entities who will backdoor the info to government and political groups, or straight-up security force tracking. Not just here, but all over the world. We are building turnkey police state infrastructure. If you can't grasp this, you might want to contemplate how privileged you are not to ever feel endangered by cops or polical opponents like Scientology or the Moonies. Do not give the monkeys the key to the banana plantation. Once you are in a worldwide prison, there is no escape.

Now go on and tell us about how the fringe on the flag means that the country is really a corporation.

Comment: Re:WRONG (Score 1) 256

by Theaetetus (#47771919) Attached to: DoT Proposes Mandating Vehicle-To-Vehicle Communications

This is the wrong way to go about it. The government should not be involved in this at all.

Mandate the standard not the use of the technology. i.e. "IF you are going to implement this safety feature, communication with the other vehicle must happen via RF (or whatever) on X frequency. Pulse Y indicates speed, pulse Z indicates direction..." etc...

Did you not even bother reading the summary, much less the article? "NHTSA believes that V2V capability will not develop absent regulation, because there would not be any immediate safety benefits for consumers who are early adopters of V2V"
Under your proposal, why would any consumer pay extra for a car that "implement[s] this safety feature", considering it doesn't work unless everyone else around has one too?

Anti-government nuttery aside, this actually is one of the areas were regulation and required use make sense.

Comment: Re:The death of leniency (Score 4, Insightful) 601

by Theaetetus (#47767467) Attached to: U.S. Senator: All Cops Should Wear Cameras

The problem with this is that if all cops feel like they're being audited all of the time, they're less likely to let you off the hook for a minor violation. Then since they have to charge you with something, and there's supporting evidence, you're not going to get a plea or reduction from a mandatory sentence in court.

I know that doesn't sound like a big deal but cops let thousands of people off per day on minor things where people just need a warning.

Frankly, I'm a little less concerned with the "problem" of cops letting off people who do commit minor infractions, than the problem of cops falsifying evidence or destroying exculpatory evidence, beating or torturing suspects, and lying on police reports in order to arrest people who haven't committed any crime. You getting out of a speeding ticket for going 60 in a 55 is less important than Joe Innocent getting arrested for walking in the wrong part of town while black, having a gun with defaced serial numbers planted on him, and suddenly facing 10 year felony charge with an "option" to plead guilty and only get a year (and a felony record).

Comment: Re:Why hasn't it happened already? (Score 2) 233

by Theaetetus (#47757097) Attached to: California Passes Law Mandating Smartphone Kill Switch

iPhones have had the ability to be remote wiped for a long time. Yet I have not heard of a pandemic of hacker-led mass bricking of iPhones.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/27/...

Now you have.

According to the Ministry the criminals used two “well-established schemes.” One of them was hacking users’ email accounts and elaborate phishing pages to glean victims’ Apple ID credentials. The second scheme – which may or may not related to the Oleg Pliss scam – allegedly bound devices to prearranged accounts and used “various internet resources to create ads.” Those ads promised access to Apple ID accounts that contained “a large amount of media content.” As soon as someone accepted the offer and linked their device to the account, attackers hijacked the devices.

Phishing to obtain email credentials and then presenting yourself as the legitimate user, or offering access to free media to suck in greedy people. Social engineering - not the same thing as hacking the bricking/remote wipe protocol.

Comment: Re:Hye, how about this... (Score 1) 112

by Theaetetus (#47751999) Attached to: Is Dong Nguyen Trolling Gamers With "Swing Copters"?

Not quite what's happening here. These aren't people just copying designs. They're usually trying to pose as the original work, including the developer name, to trick people into installing their version.

Slight modification to the GP post, then:

Put another way, the ask is that Google/Apple create a private patent and trademark system.

Comment: Re:Of course they'll downplay it.. (Score 2) 145

by Theaetetus (#47746941) Attached to: Airbnb To Hand Over Data On 124 Hosts To New York Attorney General

OK, but in both cases you need a fire alarm, right? And in neither case is someone legally allowed to disable the alarm, right?

I still don't see any difference.

From the post you're replying to:

The requirements for a hotel should be stricter. If you are renting a room for the night, you should not have to check the batteries in the fire alarm. If you have a three year lease on an apartment, it is reasonable for that to be your responsibility, rather than the landlords.

Add to that that hotels have mandatory annual inspections, with a fire inspector who walks through and checks all of the alarms and extinguishers. You don't do that in your apartment, I'm sure, and yet it's something a hotel tenant relies on.

Comment: This story paid for by AT&T and Verizon... (Score 4, Insightful) 299

If the authorities want to stop you from calling, they can already tell the providers to block your IMEI. They can also track you as you move between towers, listen in to your phone calls if they want, and read your SMS messages. But seriously, the providers can already "brick" your phone - otherwise, how do you think they shut off service when you stop paying your bills? How do you think they know to charge you for your long distance calls? And similarly, the police/NSA/CIA/FBI/whomever already has all of those abilities, simply by telling the phone company to give them whatever they want.

Enabling a kill switch is not really creating a new kill switch... It's simply giving you, the purchaser, the right to tell the phone company to block the IMEI using the same tools that law enforcement does now. It literally costs them nothing to allow, since it already exists, but, as noted in the Summary, will result in a huge drop in the number of re-purchased phones after theft/breakage... phones that are frequently re-purchased at full price, due to the multi-year contract lock-ins. This is all about money, not freedom.

Comment: Re:Diplomatic pouch? (Score 1) 299

by Theaetetus (#47697457) Attached to: WikiLeaks' Assange Hopes To Exit London Embassy "Soon"

Do the British regularly search suspicious human-sized boxes coming out of the Venezuelan Embassy?

If the Venezuelans send these boxes regularly, and the British don't usually search them, then the Venezuelans could slip Assange into one of the boxes.

Or, they could throw each box into temporary quarantine in a vacuum chamber (or one filled with an inert gas) for 10 minutes "to be safe against the unintentional transportation of undesirable bacteria". How long can Assange hold his breath?

Comment: Re:Diplomatic pouch? (Score 1) 299

by Theaetetus (#47697049) Attached to: WikiLeaks' Assange Hopes To Exit London Embassy "Soon"

There must be a way to do it. Maybe they could appoint Assange a diplomatic courier.

Once they ship a big box, with a diplomatic seal on it, the host country can't open it. It's like a Fourth Amendment protection.

That's like saying the police can't search you without a warrant, because it's a fourth amendment violation. Sure they can, they just can't use anything they find against you in court. For example, if they search you and find a crack pipe and destroy it but never charge you with possession, you're going to have a really tough time alleging a violation of your civil rights without first admitting that you were carrying.

Similarly, the host country can open the diplomatic bag, find the drugs/weapons/person, and destroy them... leaving the sending country in the unenviable position of either letting it go, or claiming that their rights were violated regarding a diplomatic bag that itself violated the Convention. It's like those Russian tanks that Ukraine destroyed - sure, it was an act of war to blow them up... but it was an act of war for them to be in the Ukraine in the first place, so Russia sure isn't going to be the one to complain.

One picture is worth 128K words.

Working...