fairly standard process

Hmm. It’s an interesting story – it doesn’t seem that it’s 100% the typical patent troll mold, though it’s obviously still a shitty tale of bullshit patent litigation tactics. It looks like Pappas had his original idea and filed for a patent in 2000, basically trying to create a way to monetize the ad hoc markets that pop up whenever people are in line or reserving places for entertainment (probably based on his own restaurant experience). He filed a single, very broad, multiregion patent on this, and launched a company and online platform around it in 2008 (OptionIt) to provide an online service for trading ticket reservations / places in line. Braxton had a similar but more clearly defined idea in 2011, and filed his own patent.

Like I said – I don’t like this idea, I wish it hadn’t been granted patent protection, and I’m happy if it never reaches the market. However, for all that, I think Pappas original idea was a bit more inventive. Back in 2000 we didn’t have an app economy, and we hadn’t gotten used to these kinds of ad hoc, internet-facilitated temporary market places. When Braxton came up with it, it was pretty dull.

Either way, once Pappas started his business, I guess he instructed his law firm to handle litigation as aggressively as possible, which is fairly standard practice, and which is the unfortunate behavior described in the video. After losing the original suit and then losing the Rule 11 motion, they argued like aggressive assholes in mediation, and got Braxton to back down. I think their threat was fairly hollow – he says that they threatened him with their ‘patent portfolio,’ but this is the only patent family I can find for OptionIt / Smart Option.

I’m not sure I would call this a textbook case of patent trolling – usually patent trolls file or acquire patents for the sole purpose of extorting legitimate businesses, but here it looks like Pappas was actually trying to make a go of this (shitty) app idea, but used intimidation to try to protect that idea. It’s one shitty business trying to intimidate another upstart shitty business, and the courts ruling against the first party. On the whole we all lose – OptionIt wins the mediation through shitty intimidation, and Braxton’s shitty patent gets added to Spangenberg’s portfolio of shitty troll assets to keep the cycle going.

According to the manual, you can have 6 "custom" tunings, where you simply tune the guitar however you want (A444, some crazy microtonal tuning or whatever) and then it "remembers" that tuning.

Ultimately, when the price drops enough, I could see this being fairly standard on guitars and ultimately replacing a tuner (I assume it'd be fairly trivial to build a chromatic tuner into it).

@overdude, I know you're being funny, but I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that this can replace developing a good ear. Yeah, all those things you mentioned are important, but they're not important all the time. Just because you can drive a manual doesn't mean you can't have an automatic for doing the groceries.

Um...so?
Cops dont use hollow point in the states? They use them here (Australia), fairly standard.
The hague convention is for MILITARY use...cops dont fall under that, fairly certain the DHS doesnt either.

>> ^heropsycho:

And, sadly, lots of practice. That's the scariest part is knowing he's probably done this a lot. Not kick ass, extremely dangerous.
>> ^BoneRemake:
This is kick ass if nothing less.
Skills and balls to that driver, you do not maneuver like that without knowing what you are doing.



Yes, the thoughts you laid out are fairly standard and would come to most people, Not I ; you infer quite a bit from this situation, you seem to build a back story and life for this truck, you do not know anything about the driver, you assume that it was done on roads that where filled with school bus' full of children, you assume that this guy works for someone else and is not driving his own rig/business. You assume so much about this and can not enjoy the video for what it actually is at its base point.

Relax guy !

my kids know their anatomy. probably because my careers have been all about the anatomy. and i'm all about anatomy. i like that they know their anatomy. right now my son is all about saying "butt" everything. we went camping a few weeks ago and he shared a tent with his friend and they were up saying the word "buttcrack" ALL NIGHT. i think it's probably the dirtiest word they know. it's getting pretty annoying though. i've started just ignoring it and hope he grows out of it soon. probably not though. inflatablevagina and i still giggle about buttholes every time we get together. at least we've grown out of picking each others noses. >> ^spoco2:

That's a pretty standard 5 year old thing to say I reckon...
'butthole' is something a lot of them find funny, along with bumhole, bumface, poo breath and the like.
'punch you in your vagina' is pretty much the same as 'hit you in the penis', which I know my kids find funny... although they currently find the word 'doodle' more amusing than penis. Sure we scorn them if they say that to anyone, even in jest, because of just, the whole violence thing as a whole, but it is fairly standard fare.
My kids certainly know it's called a penis and that their sister doesn't have one, but has a vagina. I can't stand kids being taught 'fanny' or 'hoo hoo' or any one of the many ridiculous fill-ins for penis and vagina. That's what they are, it's not rood.
So, yeah, not great that you have such a dick neighbour and that your kid felt angered at him like that, but it's pretty innocuous language really, certainly much more 5 year old than "Shutup asshole before I hit you in your cunt".
I would imagine that the word 'vagina' stopped the other kid in his tracks because his parents think that's a terrible, rude word, rather than just the name of a piece of anatomy.

That's a pretty standard 5 year old thing to say I reckon...
'butthole' is something a lot of them find funny, along with bumhole, bumface, poo breath and the like.
'punch you in your vagina' is pretty much the same as 'hit you in the penis', which I know my kids find funny... although they currently find the word 'doodle' more amusing than penis. Sure we scorn them if they say that to anyone, even in jest, because of just, the whole violence thing as a whole, but it is fairly standard fare.

My kids certainly know it's called a penis and that their sister doesn't have one, but has a vagina. I can't stand kids being taught 'fanny' or 'hoo hoo' or any one of the many ridiculous fill-ins for penis and vagina. That's what they are, it's not rood.

So, yeah, not great that you have such a dick neighbour and that your kid felt angered at him like that, but it's pretty innocuous language really, certainly much more 5 year old than "Shutup asshole before I hit you in your cunt".

I would imagine that the word 'vagina' stopped the other kid in his tracks because his parents think that's a terrible, rude word, rather than just the name of a piece of anatomy.

There is no conspiracy, no hidden technology. Just a fairly standard turbofan engine and some VTOL construction. Nothing fancy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williams_X-Jet

I don't have a CDL license, but I used to drive semi trucks on back roads for my family farm, so I'll take a stab at a couple of the question/comments here.
>> ^sadicious:

How does it turn at an intersection?
This is a fair bit different from the trucks and trailers I've seen, but I've personally been at the wheel of a double trailer and seen quite a few triple trailers. In either case, I was quite surprised at how well the successive trailers track the path of the semi cab itself and the trailer in front of it. I could actually take corners sharper in a double trailer than with a standard long single trailer. So, I bet that this thing can take a fairly standard wide semi-turn and each trailer will follow almost exactly the same track as the one in front of it.

Backing up would be pretty much impossible, although I felt that way about the double trailer I drove and some of the more seasoned hands than mine could back it through a course around obstacles with seemingly relative ease. I've even seen veterans do the same with triple trailers, which just blows my mind.
>> ^mxxcon:

i'm surprised that wimpy truck could pull so many
Note that all of the trailers were empty! A standard semi with a single grain hopper trailer like my family farm used would weigh about 23-25,000 pounds empty, with a bit higher empty weight for a double/triple trailer. The limit on total weight for any such a rig in the US is around 82,000 pounds (with some more specific regulations on weight per axle, etc.) so you can legally haul a bit under 60,000 pounds of cargo. On back dirt roads with very very rare vehicle inspection, sometimes we would try to cram a trailer full and ignore the weight limits.

Most of our hopper trailers could get up to around 92,000 lbs for semi plus trailer if we did that, but the double trailer I drove on occasion could sometimes top 105,000 lbs.

My guess is that the truck in the video is hauling about all the weight that it can handle in empty trailers, and once they get loaded with sugarcane (I think?, from the tags) the 10 trailers get divvied up between either 5 or 10 trucks. They might not have weight limit regulations, or they might not be enforced. Without any weight limit laws, or lax enforcement, people will tend to load to the maximum their trucks can handle.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Again, conflation- I think you'll find that Flash does in fact run on Mac OS X- I wouldn't have started this site without it. And I actually had a little LOL when you said that Steve Jobs is keeping Direct X off of Macs. Really - is he keeping it off of Linux as well? [sigh]

I know it's very cool to hate on Apple at the moment - they are the victims of their own success. Apple as a fashion is very passé and hipsters gain cool points for dissing the Man, Steve Jobs - but I use Windows every day at my day gig- and I will give up my MacBook when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

>> ^ForgedReality:
>> ^dag:
I think you are conflating two different platform arguments. The Mac is not the iPad. If you're saying that OpenGL does not have direct access to the GPU on Macs- that's incorrect.
It's actually kind of funny that for you - the Mac is a "closed platform" for using an open standard like OpenGL compared with Microsoft's VERY proprietary - DirectX.
But yeah, Apple's all closed and shit - boo, Steve Jobs.
>> ^ForgedReality:
>> ^dag:
I'm finding Portal to be fast and good-looking on my MBP. >> ^ForgedReality:
At first, I was like, "OH LOOK! MACS CAN PLAY STEAM GAMES NOW! WOOHOOO!"
Then I was like, "Fuck. This is slow as shit! I'm going back to playing on my Windows PC."


Perhaps for a Mac, but the problem is, it uses OpenGL, which Valve's games are not as well-optimized for. A Windows machine with similar specs could run at higher settings with much improved framerate, and better visuals.
Last time I played an OGL game (which, granted has been some time), there were quite a few extensions that could not be ported over from DirecX, as there just was no OpenGL counterpart. I'm sure things have improved since then though.
But the problem is in Apple's clenched fist. It's a shame that Ol' Steve-o has such an extreme closed-platform mindset, because, really, all it does is harm his users' experience. Except, of course, where his concern is, when it causes problems such as incompatibility for his users. But really, were he more open to outside influence, any such problems could easily be worked out in short order, since Macs generally have a fairly standardized set of hardware.


Hehe.. No no no. I never suggested that OpenGL does not have access to the GPU, I said that the games recently brought to the MacOS via Steam are not optimized for OpenGL, and that, hopefully, with time, they would start to run better on the Mac.
Also, by "closed," meant that Steve Jobs wants the Mac to run the way he wants to run it. He has an interest in "protecting" his users in ways that PC users are not protected. He seems to have an almost paranoid obsession with having a major say in what users are able to do on their systems, as he has to "okay" every technology brought to the OS.
This is why he doesn't allow DirectX or Flash.

>> ^dag:

I think you are conflating two different platform arguments. The Mac is not the iPad. If you're saying that OpenGL does not have direct access to the GPU on Macs- that's incorrect.
It's actually kind of funny that for you - the Mac is a "closed platform" for using an open standard like OpenGL compared with Microsoft's VERY proprietary - DirectX.
But yeah, Apple's all closed and shit - boo, Steve Jobs.
>> ^ForgedReality:
>> ^dag:
I'm finding Portal to be fast and good-looking on my MBP. >> ^ForgedReality:
At first, I was like, "OH LOOK! MACS CAN PLAY STEAM GAMES NOW! WOOHOOO!"
Then I was like, "Fuck. This is slow as shit! I'm going back to playing on my Windows PC."


Perhaps for a Mac, but the problem is, it uses OpenGL, which Valve's games are not as well-optimized for. A Windows machine with similar specs could run at higher settings with much improved framerate, and better visuals.
Last time I played an OGL game (which, granted has been some time), there were quite a few extensions that could not be ported over from DirecX, as there just was no OpenGL counterpart. I'm sure things have improved since then though.
But the problem is in Apple's clenched fist. It's a shame that Ol' Steve-o has such an extreme closed-platform mindset, because, really, all it does is harm his users' experience. Except, of course, where his concern is, when it causes problems such as incompatibility for his users. But really, were he more open to outside influence, any such problems could easily be worked out in short order, since Macs generally have a fairly standardized set of hardware.



Hehe.. No no no. I never suggested that OpenGL does not have access to the GPU, I said that the games recently brought to the MacOS via Steam are not optimized for OpenGL, and that, hopefully, with time, they would start to run better on the Mac.

Also, by "closed," meant that Steve Jobs wants the Mac to run the way he wants to run it. He has an interest in "protecting" his users in ways that PC users are not protected. He seems to have an almost paranoid obsession with having a major say in what users are able to do on their systems, as he has to "okay" every technology brought to the OS.

This is why he doesn't allow DirectX or Flash.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I think you are conflating two different platform arguments. The Mac is not the iPad. If you're saying that OpenGL does not have direct access to the GPU on Macs- that's incorrect.

It's actually kind of funny that for you - the Mac is a "closed platform" for using an open standard like OpenGL compared with Microsoft's VERY proprietary - DirectX.

But yeah, Apple's all closed and shit - boo, Steve Jobs.

>> ^ForgedReality:

>> ^dag:
I'm finding Portal to be fast and good-looking on my MBP. >> ^ForgedReality:
At first, I was like, "OH LOOK! MACS CAN PLAY STEAM GAMES NOW! WOOHOOO!"
Then I was like, "Fuck. This is slow as shit! I'm going back to playing on my Windows PC."


Perhaps for a Mac, but the problem is, it uses OpenGL, which Valve's games are not as well-optimized for. A Windows machine with similar specs could run at higher settings with much improved framerate, and better visuals.
Last time I played an OGL game (which, granted has been some time), there were quite a few extensions that could not be ported over from DirecX, as there just was no OpenGL counterpart. I'm sure things have improved since then though.
But the problem is in Apple's clenched fist. It's a shame that Ol' Steve-o has such an extreme closed-platform mindset, because, really, all it does is harm his users' experience. Except, of course, where his concern is, when it causes problems such as incompatibility for his users. But really, were he more open to outside influence, any such problems could easily be worked out in short order, since Macs generally have a fairly standardized set of hardware.

>> ^dag:

I'm finding Portal to be fast and good-looking on my MBP. >> ^ForgedReality:
At first, I was like, "OH LOOK! MACS CAN PLAY STEAM GAMES NOW! WOOHOOO!"
Then I was like, "Fuck. This is slow as shit! I'm going back to playing on my Windows PC."



Perhaps for a Mac, but the problem is, it uses OpenGL, which Valve's games are not as well-optimized for. A Windows machine with similar specs could run at higher settings with much improved framerate, and better visuals.

Last time I played an OGL game (which, granted has been some time), there were quite a few extensions that could not be ported over from DirecX, as there just was no OpenGL counterpart. I'm sure things have improved since then though.

But the problem is in Apple's clenched fist. It's a shame that Ol' Steve-o has such an extreme closed-platform mindset, because, really, all it does is harm his users' experience. Except, of course, where his concern is, when it causes problems such as incompatibility for his users. But really, were he more open to outside influence, any such problems could easily be worked out in short order, since Macs generally have a fairly standardized set of hardware.

--edit--
Lookie if you don't believe me:
http://themacgamer.com/2010/05/18/portal-performance-mac-vs-pc/

>> ^blankfist:

Most mouseover events are antiquated practices.

Mouseover is still used everywhere; it's not antiquated at all. I know what you're getting at though; most people probably would think of the cheesy rollever effects when they think of what mouseover is used for.

Check the menu at the top of this page for an example; and every link here has a :hover style to slightly change the colour. It's a fairly standard and good UI practice to give feedback.

Where mouseover is mostly used though is in combination with click. Think of any UI that uses drag and drop - it's good practice to give feedback on what you're going to drop onto and mouseover is used to trigger that feedback.

On most OS', mouseover just about any UI element and you'll get feedback

Click then mouseover is supported on most capacitive touch devices (ie drag with your finger). Some implement non selected mouseover by allowing you to touch anywhere on the screen (that doesn't react to a hold event) then move your finger around. This isn't completely intuitive though, and flash apps that use non clicked hover will likely have to be changed or suffer usability problems on a touchscreen.

They have a fat policy. Sure fat people may be able to get their behind in a seat, but then their other parts droop over into the neighboring seat. That is simply not fair to the other person. Many airlines make people who cannot fit between the armrest to purchase another seat. SouthWest goes a little further in that if they find out that the adjacent seat would have been empty anyways they refund the extra seat. That is totally a fair policy.

Airlines sell seats, that is their unit of measurement. They cannot sell less than a seat for very skinny people. Therefore they have to choose something that is fair to all passengers. I think the standard of "your whole body fitting between the two armrests" is a fair standard.

Debating on the size of the seats is another issue. Airlines are constanlty trying to cram us in smaller spaces. That is a different argument though.