or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple loses patent-infringement trial over Cover Flow, Time Machine
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple loses patent-infringement trial over Cover Flow, Time Machine - Page 3

post #81 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

First of all, Cover Flow and Time Machine, as well as Quick Look are composed of two single words, i.e., separated by a space.

Ha ha I had not even noticed! Thanks for the correction. My brain must have been altered with all those wonderful products like the MacBook, MacPro and of course QuickTime and heck all the way back to ... SilentWriter, AppleWriter and ImageWriter etc. I guess. I just 'see' all those Apple names like that now!
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #82 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by alansky View Post

Why isn't it illegal to file patent suits in this Kangaroo Court unless you actually live in Tyler County, Texas??? What a crock!!! There is so much corruption in the U.S. legal system that the whole country has grown accustomed to the stench of it!

Yep, there should at least be some law that says any court hearing a technology case should at least be in an area where they don't think the Earth is 6000 years old!
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #83 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Yep, there should at least be some law that says any court hearing a technology case should at least be in an area where they don't think the Earth is 6000 years old!

Awesome
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #84 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Awesome

And where they don't think Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church.
post #85 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Awesome

OMG you quoted me in your sig! I am honored ... you sir are no old fogey!
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #86 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Wow.

The internetz is such a wonderful thing. It is simply amazing to behold its ability to enable folks like you to inhabit a world about which you know nothing!

I'm a professor. So maybe I do maybe I don't know much, but that would only prove my point! Ouch! You got yourself stuck on an unwinnable petard! -- The title doesn't let you know anything about a persons intelligence, I work with some smart folks and some amazingly din ones, all "professors".

I also have spent the years seeing what the graduate studies are really about. They are nothing short of a medieval guild apprenticeship which really only requires average intelligence and above average persistence to complete.

Now would you like to further show the "internetz" (sic) how to insert hear into arse some more?
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #87 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

And where they don't think Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church.

You know I don’t care for politics or religion on tech sites, but I can’t resist when it comes to this classic pic. It cracks me every time I see it.

Note: If this offends anyone or even looks like it’s going to start a debate about the age of the Earth I will take it down.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #88 of 129
Removed
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #89 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headrush69 View Post

My god these patents sound awfully vague and obvious.

If iTunes Coverflow is a violation, clearing holding playing cards fanned in your hand is a pre-cursor to this. Is it really any different?

The patent system, at least for software, is hideously broken. It needs to be repaired before it destroys the entire industry.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #90 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

I'm a professor. So maybe I do maybe I don't know much, but that would only prove my point! Ouch! You got yourself stuck on an unwinnable petard! -- The title doesn't let you know anything about a persons intelligence, I work with some smart folks and some amazingly din ones, all "professors".

I also have spent the years seeing what the graduate studies are really about. They are nothing short of a medieval guild apprenticeship which really only requires average intelligence and above average persistence to complete.

Now would you like to further show the "internetz" (sic) how to insert hear into arse some more?

How do you win a petard? Just curious.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #91 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

And where they don't think Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Awesome

Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Yep, there should at least be some law that says any court hearing a technology case should at least be in an area where they don't think the Earth is 6000 years old!

Kind of immature if you ask me.
post #92 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

I'm a professor. So maybe I do maybe I don't know much, but that would only prove my point! Ouch! You got yourself stuck on an unwinnable petard! -- The title doesn't let you know anything about a persons intelligence, I work with some smart folks and some amazingly din ones, all "professors".

I also have spent the years seeing what the graduate studies are really about. They are nothing short of a medieval guild apprenticeship which really only requires average intelligence and above average persistence to complete.

Now would you like to further show the "internetz" (sic) how to insert hear into arse some more?

I'll bet you're not a professor at Yale.
post #93 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash-reverse View Post

So why does he submitted the claim in a place where the outcome is favourable to him if he is confident he is still entitled to it then? Not so 'honest' himself does he?

If I was suing, honestly or not, I'd file in Eastern Texas. Wouldn't you?
post #94 of 129
http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/20...ing-invention/

http://answers.google.com/answers/th...id/603242.html

Mirror Worlds Technologies failed. The rights to the patent changed hands numerous times. Looks like it was time for them to cash in when Apple got involved.

Patent trolls: some of them even have degrees.

They had nothing to sell since 2004.

http://web.archive.org/web/200406070...scopeware.com/

The year their Scopeware product was taken off the market. Seems to have failed. They couldn't sell their product and Mirror Worlds Technologies disbanded in 2003.

There's barely any word of them, especially since 2004.

Good for Apple. Pay out the patent trolls and continue actually making use of the tech.

The original owner of the tech couldn't do anything meaningful with it. Dollars-to-donuts he was sitting on it until he could milk someone for it. His *new* company, Mirror Worlds LLC, resurfaced later and was incorporated in . . . surprise, surprise . . . Tyler, Texas. He was just waiting for the opportunity to cash in.
post #95 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post

oh dear, I think that you will find that Academics can be the worst infringers of intellectual property. They often 'borrow' the ideas of others to advance themselves. Its a serious cutthroat business. Morals have no place in academia. Glad you picked Albert Einstein as an example as he was also a thief/plagiarist.

I think you'll find that Academia is structured to cross-pollinate ideas between research to advance fields of Science.

How much has Corporate America ripped off Academia? W/o Academia there is not technical innovation.

It cuts both ways.
post #96 of 129
Just because Gelernter et al. no longer holds the patents involved--if you believe him, he's not under oath in the interview--it doesn't mean he won't profit from this lawsuit through a royalty mechanism or even as an expert witness.

If Gelernter wasn't interested in the money and had truly wanted to make the ideas "freely available as academics", he could have simply published the ideas without patenting.
post #97 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

If Gelernter wasn't interested in the money and had truly wanted to make the ideas "freely available as academics", he could have simply published the ideas without patenting.

'Publish' where?

It's probably not the kind of work that a high-level 'academic' (as opposed to practitioner-) journal would accept.
post #98 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

'Publish' where?

It's probably not the kind of work that a high-level 'academic' (as opposed to practitioner-) journal would accept.

Really, probably? How did you determine P > 0.5?

How about the student's thesis?

Gelernter could even have applied for a patent and given the technology away if a patent was actually awarded. If a patent wasn't awarded, his application would still be published by the US PTO and become included in prior art.
post #99 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

Really, probably? How did you determine P > 0.5?

How about the student's thesis?

Gelernter could even have applied for a patent and given the technology away if a patent was actually awarded. If a patent wasn't awarded, his application would still be published by the US PTO and become included in prior art.

He should 'give the technology away' because he is an academic?

And, I have no idea what a 'student's thesis' or p > 0.5 have to do with anything. You completely lost me there.

Add: Something is not 'probable' only if (or because) p > 0.5.
post #100 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

He should 'give the technology away' because he is an academic?

I was just quoting from his own interview.

Quote:
And, I have no idea what a 'student's thesis' or p > 0.5 have to do with anything. You completely lost me there.

Add: Something is not 'probable' only if (or because) p > 0.5.

Ah, but you wrote "probably", which means something very different than probable.
post #101 of 129
This pic is 100% pure WIN.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism;

You know I don’t care for politics or religion on tech sites, but I can’t resist when it comes to this classic pic. It cracks me every time I see it.

post #102 of 129
Umm guys that's 0.05, not 0.5. In Biology/Molecular Biology anyways it just means your results are statistically "significant". Which essentially means that if you have any data where p > 0.05 your data is shite and worthless, go back and do another several hundred hours of experiments until you get a "result". BTW this is what I remember anyways from my Honours year (4th year of Bachelors Degree) thesis. Oh, the painful memories...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro;

Really, probably? How did you determine P > 0.5?

How about the student's thesis?

Gelernter could even have applied for a patent and given the technology away if a patent was actually awarded. If a patent wasn't awarded, his application would still be published by the US PTO and become included in prior art.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram;

He should 'give the technology away' because he is an academic?

And, I have no idea what a 'student's thesis' or p > 0.5 have to do with anything. You completely lost me there.

Add: Something is not 'probable' only if (or because) p > 0.5.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro;

I was just quoting from his own interview.


Ah, but you wrote "probably", which means something very different than probable.
post #103 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Um guys that's 0.05, not 0.5. In Biology/Molecular Biology anyways it just means your results are statistically "significant". Which essentially means that if you have any data where p > 0.05 your data is shite and worthless, go back and do another several hundred hours of experiments until you get a "result". BTW this is what I remember anyways from my Honours year (4th year of Bachelors Degree) thesis. Oh, the painful memories...

And who said what you remember is correct?

We weren't talking about confidence intervals.
post #104 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

And who said what you remember is correct?

We weren't talking about confidence intervals.

I remembered correct. But I see you're just talking about something happening more than 50% of the time. Which is quite an abstract way to say you disagree with anantksundaram's post.
post #105 of 129
As was said apple bought cover flow via catfish. This was also a big ui thing discussed in the 80s.

I too know a lot of college professors and there are a lot of a.holes there, and idiots too.

I also wonder how much input the prof. had and how much the Phd student, by my experience a lot of time the weight is on the latter side... Get the one with the best idea and have him do a phd with you.

Plus all that disingenuous righteous anger by the prof. sounds very, very fishy. If his patents did hold any weight how come he contained his anger for so long since '99, did he have word maybe that apple would implement them more extensively system wide and thus he'd make more $$$?

Pay the patent troll, and move on, as others said.
post #106 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

If it's true then Apple must pay up. How much is such a technology worth? The story didn't say anything about damages being awarded or the disposition of the future usage of the technology. What's up?


We Know NOW " VILLAIN of VILLAINS OF WALL STREET (ROTHCHILEDE) " and Their Proteges, Lackays and Bagmen, YOU NAME IT!!!!!!!!, HAVE STARTED to " MANIPULATE " Apple's Stock AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Apple's Stock Holders SHOULD be " VIGILANT "!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


AppleInsider, These Days, You HAVED MISSED SO MANY SIGNIFICANT TOPICS on Apple.


ARE YOU WORKING for WHO???????????????????????
post #107 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by HIMOKO View Post

We Know NOW " VILLAIN of VILLAINS OF WALL STREET (ROTHCHILEDE) " and Their Proteges, Lackays and Bagmen, YOU NAME IT!!!!!!!!, HAVE STARTED to " MANIPULATE " Apple's Stock AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Apple's Stock Holders SHOULD be " VIGILANT "!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


AppleInsider, These Days, You HAVED MISSED SO MANY SIGNIFICANT TOPICS on Apple.


ARE YOU WORKING for WHO???????????????????????



" Story of HERE in U.S. "?????????????????

YOU, AMERICAN ( Especially Ordinary Stock Investors ), SHOULD SAY,

" ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GET ROTHCHILDE OUT OF LAND OF AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ".

Apple's Stock Drastically DOWN more Than 10 $ Last Week!

WHY???????????

Was There Any " BAD NEWS " for Apple???????????????????

NO, ON The CONTRARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


THE NUMBER of Pre-Order of Newly i-Phone 4 Launched Countries As Follows:


South Korea ( Home Land of Samsung and LG ) 300.000

Taiwan ( HomeLande of HTC ) 200.000

Main Land China 200.000

Thai Land 100.000

Philippin 100.000

Malaysia 100.000


ONLY Pre-Oder HIT A MILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And THESE ANOTHER COUNTRIES FOLLOWED The SUIT So " ENTHUSIASTICALLY WELCOMED "!!!!!!!!!!!!!


South Africa, Russia, Israel, Brasil, Argentine, Croatia, Macedonia, Moldova, Hungary, Romania, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Turkey etc. etc.


So, WHAT'S The PROBLEM of Apple????????????????????

The REAL PROBLEM is " Cain " of 21st Century!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


STOP THOSE " High Frequency Traders " of ONES of Rothchilde's Lackay SUCH AS " Getco " to MANIPULATE Apple's Stock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


REALLY FED UP, We Apple's Stock Holders SHOULD SPEAK OUT LOUD, Posing THE QUESTION, " Present U.S. Stock Market is Really DISTORTED by VILLAINS of WALL STREET "!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
post #108 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by knwbuddy View Post

You can win using a petard. Or you can use a petard that cannot help you win - an unwinable petard.

Or something like that.

LOL, a stretch but well done for trying. If you simply swap 'petard' for 'bomb' (which it is kind of) try the same logic. I was just pulling the leg of the writer who was being a little pompous in his use of English and slipped up.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #109 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

Being a professor implies one thing. Persistence to finish the doctorate. That's it.

nope. That is just the beginning.

Once hired by a university, the individual must then work his tail off to prove he is a recognized member of the community. Which means bringing in big research $$$, writing a ton of papers to respected journals, getting published over and over. The first 2-3 years of a new professors life makes the doctorale defense a fond memory. Getting tenured is a tough battle.

Those individuals who don't want to do that sort of thing soon find themselves jobless.
post #110 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by myapplelove View Post

I also wonder how much input the prof. had and how much the Phd student, by my experience a lot of time the weight is on the latter side... Get the one with the best idea and have him do a phd with you.

My experience in graduate school was the latter. I developed an optimization routine that was 25% faster than anything out there at the time as minor part of my thesis. The concept and math caused a glaze in my professor's eyes but that didn't stop him publishing it as his own!!! He also taught numerical optimization which I took and corrected him many times during his lectures. Note to graduate students - do not correct your major professors, it really pisses them off.
post #111 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

Frankly, I think apple could drop CoverFlow completely and no one would notice.

Speak for yourself!
post #112 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by knwbuddy View Post

Help me out. Doesn't that mean that something is "more probable than not"?

Why isn't that "probable"?

Sure, happy to.

'Probable' can just as likely mean 'likely' (non-zero probability) as it can 'more likely than not' (probability greater than half).
post #113 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

How do you win a petard? Just curious.

The same way you win a queupie doll. It's a thing. A nasty little thing you can hurt yourself with if you are careless.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #114 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tmarks11 View Post

nope. That is just the beginning.

Once hired by a university, the individual must then work his tail off to prove he is a recognized member of the community. Which means bringing in big research $$$, writing a ton of papers to respected journals, getting published over and over. The first 2-3 years of a new professors life makes the doctorale defense a fond memory. Getting tenured is a tough battle.

Those individuals who don't want to do that sort of thing soon find themselves jobless.

You have no idea of the reality do you. (statement, not question) Writing papers doesn't require intelligence, it requires persistence, and a few students. And sometimes a willingness to cheapen your research by splitting one paper into two or three submitted to several journals simultaneously. Those tactics which are all too successfully chasing tenure are anything but driven by intelligence. No that isn't the only way, there are plenty of solid researchers that do things the right way, but the micro thread you are joining into is about whether professors are automagically "smart" -- just because they are professors. And the answer to that is resoundingly NO.

Tenure is all too often more a social thing that an achievement thing. If you do well at parties with the Dean and Provost, you can be quite mediocre and get tenure. You just need to have published enough and have a couple other senior faculty plead your case. It works the other way too, if you actively suck at the parties and meetings, but roughly challenge senior faculty dogma you can find yourself asked to leave even when the research is solid.

For the majority of the tenured faculty, neither of the above situations apply. They work hard and honestly. Your late to the fray points also don't say anything about the inherent intelligence of a professor as tundraboy tried to assert back on page 1. That's the context of the exchange and bringing up a side-point doesn't do anything to affect the original question/response at all.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #115 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

Gelernter could even have applied for a patent and given the technology away if a patent was actually awarded. If a patent wasn't awarded, his application would still be published by the US PTO and become included in prior art.

His name is on three of the patents listed.
post #116 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveN View Post

He also taught numerical optimization which I took and corrected him many times during his lectures. Note to graduate students - do not correct your major professors, it really pisses them off.

Or instead, do it in his office, where he is not called out in public...
post #117 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

You have no idea of the reality do you. (statement, not question) Writing papers doesn't require intelligence, it requires persistence, and a few students. And sometimes a willingness to cheapen your research by splitting one paper into two or three submitted to several journals simultaneously. Those tactics which are all too successfully chasing tenure are anything but driven by intelligence. No that isn't the only way, there are plenty of solid researchers that do things the right way, but the micro thread you are joining into is about whether professors are automagically "smart" -- just because they are professors. And the answer to that is resoundingly NO.

Tenure is all too often more a social thing that an achievement thing. If you do well at parties with the Dean and Provost, you can be quite mediocre and get tenure. You just need to have published enough and have a couple other senior faculty plead your case. It works the other way too, if you actively suck at the parties and meetings, but roughly challenge senior faculty dogma you can find yourself asked to leave even when the research is solid.

For the majority of the tenured faculty, neither of the above situations apply. They work hard and honestly. Your late to the fray points also don't say anything about the inherent intelligence of a professor as tundraboy tried to assert back on page 1. That's the context of the exchange and bringing up a side-point doesn't do anything to affect the original question/response at all.

I am willing to bet that you are in the humanities or social sciences or are at a 2nd tier school, as what you describe has very little bearing on the tenure process in the sciences, or at a top tier school. Having done the tenure grind in the sciences, the simple fact is that, without multiple publications and at least one R01 grant, you can start looking for a new job. No amount of kiss ass at departmental parties, favorable teacher ratings or committee work will change that simple fact.

If you have enough grant money, you can still be an ass and they will give you tenure. It is all about the money in the sciences.
post #118 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbarriault View Post

and nobody even bothers to consider that maybe someone else came up with the same idea independently.

That point is completely irrelevant under patent law. And I'm grateful. We had a great idea, and someone else made noise about us stealing their idea. After rummaging through the prior art, we discovered the same idea had appeared in another patent, and an expired patent at that. One troll butted right off the bridge.

You only get to patent an idea once, and if someone else in a different field comes up with it again 18 years later, too bad.
post #119 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

Or instead, do it in his office, where he is not called out in public...

Correct. I recall a similar incident during Tensor Calculus/Vector Analysis when the prof couldn't explain his manifold derivations and how he came to his "obvious" conclusion.

Of course, I expected more seeing as it was a class of 20 and it was full of Mechanical Engineers, Physicists and more who have already graduated in their respective fields and expected a little more than that for our money.

I was spoiled with several M.E. professors who weren't just academics and they taught us 3 ways to solve a problem.

This professor was demoted from the School of Electrical Engineering, to the School of Pure and Applied Mathematics, for his lack of Research and it became clear he didn't like the knock [he spent more than one occasion taking shots at his former peers--all of whom were actually laughing behind his back] by professing his superior mathematical skills to his former colleagues and I just couldn't help myself by taking him up on this prowess and expecting him to put on a demonstration.

He couldn't deliver the goods and he didn't like the humiliation.

Even professors need to keep their skills current, especially those pesky derivation and algebra skills.
post #120 of 129
Well, my only experience is during my undergraduate years and my honours thesis at Molecular Bio labs. Wet lab Biology is pretty much about experiment, experiment, experiment and hope your data is "meaningful" ie. publishable. My Honours year was under a non-teaching Professor that had published in the big ones - Science, Nature, PNAS, and also in other second-tier(?) journals.

Anything to do with Math and Physics at university level scares the hell out of me. That's why I went with Biology, kinda a pre-Med thing was my idea at the time.

The summer project thingy I did was part of a paper (second-tier(?)) that was published, the head of the lab put my name on it... In Molecular Bio it's standard practice for papers to list the primary investigators first, then research assistants, then the lab head at the end of the list of names. Or something like that IIRC.

In my summer project and my honours year I didn't know anyone that got shafted majorly by not having their name on papers. There were politics and other weird sh1t going on like any academic or corporate setting, but these were quite reputable labs that I was at.

I could do the literature review, connect the dots, and so on, at least... During the late 90's Molecular Biology was about how different proteins, genes and cellular bits and pieces end up doing something in an organism. I was always partial to an IT view of things, so DNA was basically like signalling packets with stop and start bits, and proteins are like function() {} executing, and the organism the OS running. I liked developmental biology, which is kinda the "bootup sequence" of a living thing... Imagine you had a blob of metal and glass and depending how you "booted up" the "hardware and software" you could end up with an iPad, iPhone, Mac or PC or BallmerPhone.

The academic environment wasn't too bad, for medical/biology stuff it's all about results both at the basic research and clinical level. You can have big theory but everything is mostly evidence and statistics. The biggest risk is people just fabricating numbers. I'm sure all sorts of shenanigans do go on, but my main issue was I didn't like the wet lab experimentation. All the theory is cool, and bioinformatics is very interesting (but sadly at the time not big in Australia by any stretch of the imagination)... However staring at slides under a microscope and "cooking" (squirt this here, add enzyme there, bake for 30 minutes, let sit, cool down, put enzymes back in fridge, stain cells, wait, repeat, etc.) was all boring as watching paint dry.

Bailed after I completed my honours year and got into web stuff, never really looked back since.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple loses patent-infringement trial over Cover Flow, Time Machine