Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:I'm a professional Malware removal guy. Literal (Score 1) 319

by beavioso (#31585656) Attached to: Malware Delivered By Yahoo, Fox, Google Ads
I had to clean up a vundo and Antivirus 2009 on a few of my relatives computers. The best thing I've found is the Ultimate Boot CD for windows (UBCD for windows). You need a legitimate copy of a Windows OS disc and then it creates a boot CD of a clean fresh new OS with a whole host of tools.

It's a great way to attack the virus from a fresh OS install running off a RAM disk.

Comment: Re:Time value of money (Score 1, Insightful) 541

by beavioso (#28445869) Attached to: Switching To Solar Power, One Year Later
Why pin the impending inflation on Obama? The $700 Billion TARP program started under Bush, and some nice legislation (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act) got passed during Clinton that may be one of the underlying causes of this housing mess. Some political nerds and/or historians may dig up even more reasons that we're in this mess, but the point is that they're just different sides of the same coin. Why blame one guy, when the whole system is at fault?

Comment: Re:What a joke! (Score 1) 161

by beavioso (#27883723) Attached to: IBM "Invents" 40-Minute Meetings
I doubt anyone at the patent office other than a classifier has read this. The backlog for cases is really long at about 2.5-3 years. It's calssified in class 705, the Business Method class, and that has an average backlog of 34-106 months. Maybe when this patent application actually gets looked at in a few years, an examiner can have a good laugh too and hopefully reject. Maybe by then "Business Methods" will become unpatentable, who knows (let's hope).

Comment: Re:Does patent expiration apply? (Score 1) 476

by beavioso (#27224207) Attached to: Intel Threatens To Revoke AMD's x86 License
The patents for the core x86 could be expired. Patents used to be valid for 17 years from the Patent Date (all patents before June 7, 1978) or 20 years from the filing date, which ever was longer (assuming it was filed before June 7, 1995). Patents filed after June 7, 1995 are now valid for 20 years after the earliest filing date. I picked up this information from: The Impact of GATT on Patent Tactics

In any event, the patents on the SSE extensions, assuming they exist, are probably still enforcable. So maybe AMD loses the ability to used 3DNOW, SSE, etc. No one really knows what's in the cross-licensing agreement. There could be patents on the fab process, or maybe they share industry secrets (is that ever part of cross-licensing?).

Comment: Re:As far as US is concerned (Score 2, Informative) 185

by beavioso (#22941258) Attached to: Open Source Patent Donations?
IANAL, but I think you're trying to say that if this person writes it down in a journal, or a blog, that this person will not be able to stop someone from patenting it.

If that's what you're asserting, then you're wrong. There's a court case about prior art, which ruled something to the effect that prior art is anything that is accessible by the public (i.e. a PhD dissertation available through a public university library only needs to be available for access, and you do not need to prove that someone actually looked at it or read it after it's been cataloged). Once an examiner finds a reference with a varifiable date that predates a filing by one year, then 35 USC 102(b) is used and it creates a bar for patenting (e.g. the person seeking a patent cannot swear back and come up with evidence that they in fact invented more than one year ago).

In the end, I'm almost positive that blogs can be used as evidence, especially if they provide enough detail and motivation to do something. It might even be best to let archive.org to archive your blog, so that the dates have a second varifiable date attached to it.

Now, if all you meant to address, was that a person cannot get a patent after abandoning, suppressing, or concealing the subject matter, then that is correct. But, I haven't heard of many 102(g)(2) rejections.
Media

+ - Unremovable DRM Encoding: Be afraid - Very Afraid.-> 1

Submitted by
Alex Turner
Alex Turner writes "As I have come up with this idea, you can bet your bottom dollar that the music industry guys have to. Hey — if they have not — shame on them. The principle is based on the fact that humans are very good at telling the differences between the shape and tone of sound, but very bad at estimating time. However, computers are awe-inspiringly good at analysing time.

Encoding data into an audio stream in such a way that a human can not hear the encoded data, but a computer can detect, is simply a matter of messing with time. See here for the complete story"

Link to Original Source

The way to make a small fortune in the commodities market is to start with a large fortune.

Working...