or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Crowley

The big government versus small government argument has next to nothing to do with the surveillance state and secrecy agencies.  People on both sides of the political aisle are critical of the NSA, GCHQ and their like.
Tim Cook should spend his own money on fixing iOS, instead of helping out with civil liberties of a still-targetted minority?  Useless liberal frippery? I wish you'd spend some time on making the world a nicer place, rather than wasting it on this constant hateful dirge.
 Depends on the conservative cause.  Some conservative causes are reasonable, some are at the tip end of lunatic, divisive, hate-mongering.  Tim is giving to cause promoting tolerance, respect and equal rights.  Anyone against that can get as red in the face as they want, but they're on the wrong end of the way things are heading.  
Nope. I don't and no one is forcing me to do anything.And in regards the rest of your rant, the BBC is one of the best loved institutions in the country, maybe the best, though it's a close run thing between it and the National Health Service. People trust it more than the governments which you imply it's funded and/or in the pocket of. It's neither.
And yet you continue to post the anti-tax, anti-state nonsense.  What does "burden on local resources" have to do with sales tax?   Taxation is an economic balancing act, not a direct payment for supplied services.
If I've been inarticulate, I apologise.  Regardless, my previous post.  Apply it to implementations/expressions of ideas. Besides, an implementation/expression of an idea that is not put into practice either for production or as a licensable property is little more than an idea itself anyway, and I don't see why it deserves protection. Explain to me why a company, not necessarily Apple, should be allowed and legally enabled to file patents for products/processes that they...
 I think you're reading the text and not appreciating the spirit.  The purpose is to exclude competitors from ripping off a product, not to exclude them from developing products by closing down ideas.  If Apple were to litigate based on this patent (no evidence that they will, but you're bringing up the prospect) with the purpose of excluding competitors then they'd be worse than a patent troll, they aren't using the patent, they aren't offering it for license, they're...
Legal sure, but how can you stand by "constraining competitors" (just because Apple patented it first) as valid? The point of patents is to protect innovation, not to stifle it.
Internships, yuck.  Not really a "job" listing.
Funny that few in Britain either know or care about a scuffle in the colonies. Washington burned you say? That was just a fire to keep warm before Waterloo.
New Posts  All Forums: