Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Prior art (Score 1) 60

Or, he filed the patent years ago, and then filed a series of updates to it. Each update delays the final "approval date" and allows him to modify the patent. Over time, he can craft a vague sounding patent and/or one that covers existing technology. Then, his "prior art date" is from a year before when he INITIALLY filed the patent. So while the final patent might have been considered innovative if filed as-is on the initial filing date, patent trolls abuse the "update" system to draw their patents out until they are hard to beat via prior art.

That's simply not true. While patent applicants can file continuation applications with revised claims, they must have support in the originally-filed application, and the applicant cannot modify the original application at all. If anything is added that wasn't in the original document, then the "prior art date" is moved to when the modification was added. See

Comment: Re:Attacking me now are you? (Score 0) 642

by dbIII (#49609717) Attached to: Two Gunman Killed Outside "Draw the Prophet" Event In Texas

It's quite simple. "Deliberate pissing on beliefs" is generally good when the beliefs are crap

You should note that the belief you say is crap is the belief of not worshipping idols - one which you probably share. In my mind the crap is the extremes it gets taken to and how they react about it (eg. murder).
Good job in blowing a molehill of a post that was really about deliberately poking the bear into a mountain over other stuff because apparently it wasn't interesting enough. The personal attack with "You need to get your... *something* re-calibrated" is a nice touch.

Comment: Attacking me now are you? (Score 0) 642

by dbIII (#49609557) Attached to: Two Gunman Killed Outside "Draw the Prophet" Event In Texas
Oh so I've got to "correct my worldview" with some random goatse link or something instead of expressing freedom of speech - funny how libertarians do that when someone wants to say something other than propaganda they want to spread.

This thing in Texas was a deliberate case of shouting fire in a crowded theatre - you can do it but consequences should be expected.

Comment: Yet that's what they are doing (Score 1) 642

by dbIII (#49609495) Attached to: Two Gunman Killed Outside "Draw the Prophet" Event In Texas
It may not be hard to do, but deliberate trolling is definitely what is going on.
It looks like it's counterproductive and just adds more fuel to those who want to recruit more radicals. "See this thing in Texas kids, it means all of America hates us - so sign up now to teach them what we taught the Russians in Afganistan". That's how it goes. Stupid in every level (especially the bit about the Russians but they do believe it) but still just adding fuel to the flames for a bit of personal publicity aided by useful idiots.

Comment: Re:tip of the iceberg (Score 4, Insightful) 642

by dbIII (#49609453) Attached to: Two Gunman Killed Outside "Draw the Prophet" Event In Texas
Then join with me in BBQ pig in a synagogue. Surely they'd be no reaction to that? I may not share beliefs with them but I can recognise deliberate pissing on beliefs to draw a response when I see it.

That's the level of deliberate stirring we're seeing and it is designed to get a response - bbq in synagogue level squared. If I was in law enforcement in that place I'd make them have their international trollfest way out in the desert so bystanders don't get killed if someone takes the bait.

Comment: Re:"xenophobic fascist" (Score 1, Insightful) 642

by dbIII (#49609421) Attached to: Two Gunman Killed Outside "Draw the Prophet" Event In Texas

He is standing up for the values of the west

You clearly know almost nothing about him


He's definitely one, the others are something else and something worse because they are prepared to murder him just because he is spouting his beliefs.
Happy now? Or did I disappoint you be being a real person that thinks both sides in this issue are deplorable and not a handy strawman on one side or the other?

Comment: Re:You went THAT far? (Score 1) 576

by dbIII (#49609255) Attached to: My High School CS Homework Is the Centerfold
"You cannot possibl(y) be so stupid" is not actually an insult is it. I am accusing you of posting as if you are far more stupid than you actually are instead of accusing you of stupidity. Comments such as the following are obviously far beneath you:

I think perhaps the goal is to change STEM into another version of the veterinarian field, where men are becoming pretty scarce.

So if you want to pretend to be an idiot you should be able to put up with a mild rebuke as a consequence. In you don't like it then there's an easy fix - stop pretending to be an idiot just to try and turn a storm into a teacup into some kind of insane global conspiracy.

As for your anecdote - yes high school was a shitty time for anyone other than the head of the football team - so consider your anecdote and have some empathy with the girl who posted the story because she was picked on a bit more due to a teacher's fuckup. That's all there is to see here - no global conspiracy.

Comment: Re:Way to get waaaay off the point (Score 1) 576

by dbIII (#49609233) Attached to: My High School CS Homework Is the Centerfold
Are you really telling me you can't tell the difference between this fuckup where the teacher made things difficult for the girls in the class and that?
You can?
Then what is the point of posting it at all? It has fuckall to do with the post we are commenting on.
This is not about images of naked women in modern society, this is about kids acting like little shits in a high school class fuelled by a teacher's idiotic fuckup.

Comment: It's THERE ON THE PAGE (Score 1) 229

"Followed by The Black Swan"
Which was in 2007, and his day job was an economist in the finance industry while he was writing those.

Edge cases were considered in science long before an economist picked a new name for a gross oversimplification of old ideas. He's very much an anti-statistician and calls them "pseudoscientists".

What is the motivation of your little luddite sig? To say that the views of any expert are worthless and thus climate science if worthless - or is it something less obvious that makes you want to challenge the authority of anyone with a clue?

The perversity of nature is nowhere better demonstrated by the fact that, when exposed to the same atmosphere, bread becomes hard while crackers become soft.