Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Or have we (secretly) hated HW patenting all along, just as bad as SW patenting? Or is it just the current setup of the patent system that is the problem?
HW patenting isn't as bad. Let me illustrate: The PAL tv colour circuitry had essential patents, many owned by Telefunken. The Japanese competitors could not use these patents in their equipment, so they developed ways around the patents, and, ultimately, better televisions. Unless you're breaking new ground, you can only get a patent to cover direct copies of your device in hardware. One company slavishly copied the day/night car mirror design of another. I worked briefly for the copyists, and their legal advice was that they could copy the circuit exactly. They did. They could not copy the mechanical action, however, and had to avoid using an eccentric to do it. The problem with software patents is that applications of known techniques to new areas are patentable, whereas in fact they really are 'prior art.'
Old money, OTOH, are tight in the main; It's just that they don't blink if the price is â10 or â100,000. They still want to know if they are getting good value. Everything is viewed as a business investment.
What sort of an object is a Kardashian?
Most epileptics know when they have issues coming. If your wife does, have an effective strategy to deal with that. If not, rethink your career. Can you take less money and work from home? Cut some deal with your boss? Take less money and work nearer home?
There is also a little known perscription drug called Epistatus. It never seems to get approval, but is available on perscription. It is absorbed through the cheek, and can be administered while unconscious. There's a youtube video.
I hear a lot of YOUR opinions, but nothing of your wife's opinions. What does she want you to do?
Yes, the Catholic Pope addressed Global Warming giving the Scientific Consensus. Yes, he is remarkably sane for a high ranking Catholic - electing him was an grave error, or else the cardinals felt quite desperate. Yes, he should be kicking out of the Vatican all criminal priests with diplomatic immunity, purging his organization of pedophiles, talking about God's Kingdom and using God's name, divesting the church of it's ill gotten gains and putting them to good use. But it is an obviously false religion. As it influences people less, it rides along with their opinions more.
The truth is - I don't think Catholicism is an organization that can be reformed. Now that I have said that much, watch for the insults, put downs, and mindless irrelevancies.
Red Hat will still be there; systemd is crap, but people who need to learn it. There is a man page. They got away with worse (selinux, their network script, pppd, etc). They have a steady income stream in Enterprise.
Oracle may not be; Motorola, Ericsson and Blackberry will all fade and shrink, or be bought over.
M$ will be smaller, but still probably there if they manage to do one thing without making a total mess of it. That is a tall order for them. Xiaomi may kick Samsung's ass but they will both probably survive. I see a fallout in newspapers, magazines, and reading matter generally as prople go vitrual.
1. Science is conservative. The 'higher' you get, the more conservative you have to be.
2. Scientists in many fields do not read enough papers. They don't have the time. They grab abstracts and conclusions and read a section or two. They also might read a paper to contradict it destructively. Look at the evolution/ID debate if you don't believe me.
3. Papers are too long anyhow. Length is equated with depth, but it might more properly be equated with obfuscation.
4. As you said, counting citations is a joke.
Much more relevant might be a system where papers consisted of
1. Background was relegated to an appendix. Maths in another. Statistics to a third (if required). The briefest of introductions
2. Next an experimental discussion which set out only information necessary for the understanding the experiments, and their results.
3. Next a section on implications of experimental results.
4. All tripe about work done to be reserved for the lecturers who are marking student papers.
Each chapter would be a generous summary of the drivel currently making reading papers such a boring job.
Have to agree. This is on the scale of "That old lemur we found could be _the_ missing link in human evolution." Which one of the 1000s of missing links?
Can't blame the guy (who obviously worked hard) for trying to make his work sound interesting. But it's significance is that it may be one of the lower steps in someone else's future ladder.