But privacy advocates fear the inevitable mission creep, ending with the proof of self being required at polling places, to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane or even attend a sporting event or log on the internet.
Don't you sort of already have to do this for everything above, minus "attend a sporting event" or "log on to the internet"?
So calm down everyone. The patent system may be broken, but this is not an example of it.
Does this actual patent serve a purpose though? I have a few different Android products and my wife has an iPhone and I honestly couldn't tell you how their page turning animations differ, I just know they have one. I don't think anyone is going to confuse an Apple product with its competition based on the page turning animation. Patenting the icons and even the swipe to unlock thing (which most definitely had prior art anyway) could hold some legitimacy, but this patent just seems like something to bog down the approval system. Am I missing something?
"Imagine you and your friends playing multiplayer Starcraft on one big screen instead of individual computer screens!"
You'll still need an internet connection though...
"We are told that the browser will let Xbox users surf all parts of the web straight from their living rooms." Does that include YouTube for example? As far as I remember you have to be a XBox Live Gold Member to use the YouTube application...
I'm not trying to be rude, but do people actually buy an Xbox and not have a Gold membership? It equates to something like $5 per month for access to demos, weekly arcade games, an indie game market, promo videos, media streaming, a stable staging environment for multiplayer gaming across games, etc.
Not to burst your bubble, but you'll probably need a Gold membership to use the IE browser anyways. Hopefully they launch Skype soon. That's my only real complaint.
It's not hard to admit errors that are [only] cosmetically wrong. -- J.K. Galbraith