bmags

I thought that last year too. Beside OKC I don't see the dominant team like the Heat, but they have very specialized teams that can get you in a bad matchup. And I still really like memphis damn it.

The West is an incredible conference again this year, I wouldn't throw around that the winner of the heat/bulls matchup will win the championship just yet.

If you want this kid to move toward reforms you don't start by insulting his father, either.

The Keith Law hate has jumped the shark at this point. He said pretty much exactly what every poster on here was saying yesterday, but as soon as he says it he's a hater who just hates the white sox so much and he's out to get us!!!!

sad drunks are the best drunks!

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 21, 2011 -> 11:45 PM) you f***ing nerds

ho ho hooooly s***.

From the last decade's experience, banking on players to hit their averages on the white sox is an exercise in futility.

BTW wasn't wainwright injured before the season started?

five for 54? Yes. absolutely you make that contract.

...wut

I'd rather start McCown than enderle. Enderle looked bad in preseason. You owe it to the vets on this team to TRY and make it to 9-7.

I'd be nervous about it. I don't watch a lot of lakers games, and all I saw was last years playoffs. Now quite obviously that was not representative of pau's game the last 3 years. But I'm just wondering if he can get up again for more championship runs.

Hypothetical question: If the lakers asked for boozer + noah would you do it?

Doesn't Gasol's contract expire next year? That should get you more than Boozer + Korver.

That's nonsense.

I still keep dreaming about that pacers game when rose was knocked out. Noah took the offense on his shoulders it felt like, and I loved it. He's so capable of it. I want him to do it.

how has noah looked?

I don't think we have to with the new CBA rules.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 20, 2011 -> 09:57 PM) And honestly, part of the problem is that these people come to the patent office when these technologies are far off into the future and they seem more novel than they do to us now. Perhaps there could be a requirement for a working prototype or something? I know Apple patented the iPad in 2004 or something and it showed a drawing of a guy holding a rectangle table device. Well what the hell does that tell us? Nothing. Fine. How about this. you get a software patent for 9 months. If after 9 months you have not began seriously moving forward your idea into production you lose that patent.

I think you are the only person to think that mizzou finally beating the teams they should beat in Nov-Dec (unlike under anderson and quinn) is a bad thing instead of just enjoying it.

Someone sued twitter because they had a patent for "electronic messaging between celebrities and fans".

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 20, 2011 -> 07:27 PM) So what reward did he get for that innovation? What is the incentive for people to create things like that if everyone is just going to steal it from you anyways? Ultimately, the world has changed, the market for goods has changed, technology has changed, etc. People who have the skills and the imaginations to create good products are usually rewarded in the job market or in the goods market in an immediate fashion that was not reality back when much of patent law was drafted and the case law was developed. I get that. The laws and protections need to be changed or updated. However, I still feel there needs to be some protection. There will always be some small innovators that maybe design one or two great things, whether they be large or small, that are so simple or such an improvement that everyone in that industry will utilize them. Those innovators need to be protected, otherwise their numbers will dwindle, along with their imaginations. Go ask an engineer. 1) They like building things. 2) They'll get hired as an engineer at a big firm. or 3) make a name for themselves among investors and start their own startup.

Here's a good example, the pull down refresh. That is a very intuitive move that has been copied all over. It started out in one of twitter's third party apps. IT's been adopted pretty much universally. It's been good for everyone, and that person could have patented something like "scroll refresh" that was very vague, and sued everyone in existence. He has nothing beside a defunct app, but he could get money from every company. Is that good for anyone? Was he going to make a whole business on this? It's just silly to give patents for so long in a market like this, and for things that are so vague.

Yes, apple is incentivised to do that. However, that incentive adversely affects the consumer and business. Apple, google, etc would probably take the trade off of loss of their patents in exchange for no more petty lawsuits of patent infringement by some guy that said he invented the text chat bubble in 1994. edit: no slide to lock should not be. When you have a touch screen phone, there are only so many things you could sensibly do to unlock.