That's true. It's still a crappy patent application though, since it basically covers showing a password dialog box with eligible user accounts (along with some details about their associated privileges) when an operation requires elevated privileges.
Indeed. In fact, this patent reminds me more of PolicyKit (which is GUI-based) than sudo. See screenshot, which almost exactly matches how I visualised the patent after reading the initial claims.
For example, one should note that [patent] research has never been done for Ogg Vorbis or Theora, which is why some paranoid companies are still unwilling to adopt them.
Use Dirac then. The BBC have specifically engineered it to not violate patents that they have researched.
For example Empathy will have built in support for skype, or even Google Talk!
Are you trying to imply that Empathy doesn't already support Google Talk?
'cause if you are, you're wrong -- it has supported Jabber for years (install package telepathy-gabble if it doesn't work for you), and the latest couple of versions have even supported Jingle-based voice and video chat.
Don't forget that if you have a proxy (and you probably do at work), the eye chart is bogus. The proxy will cache successful hits from a clean computer within your network.
However, if you hit F5 (or Ctrl+F5) to refresh, your browser will send out a no-cache request in the HTTP header, which most proxies I've tried it on respect, and thus they go to fetch a new copy of the page. That's right: hitting F5 is not the same as a browser simply requesting the page a second time.
I'd think that whoever has UID 1,000,001 should be doing the QQ
He said 'less than' (<), not 'less than or equal to' (<=). So don't you mean 1,000,000?
I think there should be a sub-forum for those with UIDs of less than 10^6
:(
Isn't this an indication that the system is severely flawed when someone pops up very late to the table and claims that they own it?
[...] Softwares and methods are too easy to re-invent all over again, and who can tell if a certain solution has been available before and then silently put to the grave for one reason or another?
Speaking of trolls, you are one yourself. Before you mod me into oblivion, hear me out.
In your post, you seem to claim that (1) CSIRO is a patent troll; and that (2) the patent is a software patent, thus is unethical. Both claims are patently false. (ha ha)
For starters, to address claim (1), CSIRO is not a patent troll. What is a patent troll? A patent troll is an organisation that exists only to accumulate patents (and make a profit off royalties). CSIRO is not a patent troll! They are an Australian Government-funded organisation that does real research. They actually researched and patented the technology back in the early '90s. (Source)
To address claim (2), the patent in question is not a software patent! Thus the entire basis for your argument...
Softwares and methods are too easy to re-invent all over again, and who can tell if a certain solution has been available before and then silently put to the grave for one reason or another?
...is completely baseless. The patent in question covers the duplication and redundancy of radio waves, so it is obviously not a software patent. Basically the patent covers the way modern WiFi works, in that instead of serial (just one radio wave with error correction), parallel and redundant streams are sent, which allows you to have much greater bandwidth without losing the reliability. (And yes, that source again)
The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.
