or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by ash471

What did Einstein accomplish the last 70% of his career (most of which was at princeton)....drumm roll.... NOTHING!  He argued a lot with his contemporaries and he tried to unify the fundamental forces, but failed.  His efforts for a unifying theory has been explored for more than half a century in the form of "string theory" which is worthless garbage science.   Don't get me wrong, Einstein was a smart and creative person and deserved recognition for a lot of good work...
I'm puzzled why people think Apple has or does come out with groundbreaking products on a regular basis.  Apple has invented three products.  The personal desktop computer (1970-1980s), handheld mobile computer (iPod/iPad), and the modern smartphone (iPhone, with its touch interface and app development). That's three products in 40 years.  Even if take out the 10 years without Steve Jobs, its still only 1 product per decade. We're not due for a new product line from...
Einstein was pretty smart, but a lot of his success had to do with luck and timing.  Einstein didn't get a job after his PhD work and took a job in a patent office where he was assigned to work in the art unit that examined inventions related to clocks.  The rapid development of railroads in the late 1800s created a great need for inventions that would synchronize time in different cities.  Therefore, Einstein's job was to think about time and space. 
Apple would be a lot better off if it released its maps for Android and desktop.  I hope that is coming sometime soon. I'm afraid that developers will all use Google because they can easily distribute their software on multiple platforms.     Apple would ruin Waze if it purchased it, because Waze needs large numbers and limiting it to Apple would limit the number of people that would play the dumb games.
Couldn't agree more.  Facebook should do a search box like Google+ and start providing users with combined searches of social network and web-based searches. Until that happens, Facebook will continue to be stuck in the 90's with shitty irrelevant ads that no one clicks on.
Agreed...which means there is no moral justifcation for it.  I think the pendulum has swung to far against inventors.  The argument I always hear for why patents are bad is that they impede companies.  Ya right.  Apple is broke paying all those licensing fees and lawyers aren't they?  I have yet to have anyone explain which of Apple or Google's markets have been hindered.  Would we have gotten an iPhone or Android sooner if it weren't for patents?  None of these large...
I see you've adopted the politically correct "NPE".  To answer your question, the validity and infringement of a patent depends on what the words of the claim mean and many times it takes expert witnesses and a lot of work to figure it out. Determining damages requires discovery to know what the infringer is selling and the value of the products. These are really hard things for arbitrator to do. 
Great analogy!  I still can't figure out why society is so endearing to copyright holders and baneful of inventors.  Everyone is bending over backwards to extend copyright laws to make sure Walt Disney, who has been dead for decades, can keep his copyright on Micky Mouse.  The Consitutional basis for granting patent rights for a "limited time" is exactly the same for copyrights.  I'm not saying the term should be the same, but sheesh, what's the justification for such...
Two years is optimistic.  Patent litigation often takes longer than two years.
Arbitration is theoretically possible, but not practical in patent cases.   
New Posts  All Forums: