antikoan

 |::| Friday, April 19, 2002

 |::|   4:38:16 PM 

This may lead the way to solving the category mystery: http://radio.userland.com/discuss/msgReader$11619?mode=topic&y%2002&m=3

If so, it still doesn't explain why this fails for me and (presumably) works fine for everyone else. Nor does it explain why I'm still on 7.0.1, whereas I was on 7.0.8 at one point. Did versions get rolled back?

 |::|   3:47:28 PM 

XML-RPC API for Flash: http://members.netmadeira.com/killer/xmlrpc/

 |::|   11:53:35 AM 

Let's just be clear on exactly what's behind all this patent nonsense: Corporate power. Money. Most of these unquestioned patents are going to the big patent foundries -- places like Microsoft, IBM, Motorola, Sun -- where they can afford to pay a permanent staff of patent attorneys to keep the pipeline flowing. In much the same way that nuisance laws can be used arbitrarily to keep troublemakers down, picayune patents can suddenly become very important when wielded by a powerful and capable legal staff.

The recent "hyperlink" patent battle can be seen as an example of how not to do it -- and, potentially, as both a foreshadowing and an exhortation to false confidence in the ability of our courts to sort these things out. We have to remember who paid to elect the people who appoint the judges.

 |::|   11:43:26 AM 

Here's a strange concept: BlogChat. Hmm....

 |::|   11:33:16 AM 

Some more thoughts and news from ZDNet on patents.

Here's a thought: Why is it that the bias seems to have shifted to approval from disapproval? Why shouldn't the bias be against granting a patent, instead of in favor of it?

" The hidden toll of patents on standards", David Berlind

"Patent holder's edge"

"Special Report: A Plot To Take Over The Net?"

 |::|   11:12:56 AM 

What is it that Dave Winer has against the Semantic Web? Or, more precisely: Why does he love Google so much?

I can't escape the feelng that there's some fundamental understanding driving this bias. I keep coming back to the idea that he doesn't want to believe that individuals ought to get to make decisions about the value of things for other people. That's an interesting and noble attitude, but in my experience people who espouse it are almost always contradicting their own actions.

 |::|   11:02:46 AM 

It looks like the "method of swing on a swing" patent is rising into the public consciousness. Or, at least, onto C|Net. (Thanks to Scripting News .)

"Patent turns playtime into pay time"

 |::|   9:10:56 AM 

Kruschev's "secret speech", "On the Cult of Personality" (1956) Contained in Internet Modern History Sourcebook

I think it's probably hard for many people to really grasp how dangerous, and in just what way, this speech must have been. A cynic would say that it marked the boundary at which Kruschev was certain of his power. A cynic would also hold that it all boiled down to power: Kruschev wasn't really interested in building his nation, he was only really interested in accumulating power.

The cynic in me retorts that people who can't grasp the fact that they themselves hold contradictory views aren't likely to recognize complementary views in others.

Internet Modern History Sourcebook
"On the Cult of Personality" (N. Kruschev, 1956)