recentpopularlog in

robertogreco : patents   33

Why the Economic Fates of America’s Cities Diverged - The Atlantic
"What accounts for these anomalous and unpredicted trends? The first explanation many people cite is the decline of the Rust Belt, and certainly that played a role."



"Another conventional explanation is that the decline of Heartland cities reflects the growing importance of high-end services and rarified consumption."



"Another explanation for the increase in regional inequality is that it reflects the growing demand for “innovation.” A prominent example of this line of thinking comes from the Berkeley economist Enrico Moretti, whose 2012 book, The New Geography of Jobs, explains the increase in regional inequality as the result of two new supposed mega-trends: markets offering far higher rewards to “innovation,” and innovative people increasingly needing and preferring each other’s company."



"What, then, is the missing piece? A major factor that has not received sufficient attention is the role of public policy. Throughout most of the country’s history, American government at all levels has pursued policies designed to preserve local control of businesses and to check the tendency of a few dominant cities to monopolize power over the rest of the country. These efforts moved to the federal level beginning in the late 19th century and reached a climax of enforcement in the 1960s and ’70s. Yet starting shortly thereafter, each of these policy levers were flipped, one after the other, in the opposite direction, usually in the guise of “deregulation.” Understanding this history, largely forgotten today, is essential to turning the problem of inequality around.

Starting with the country’s founding, government policy worked to ensure that specific towns, cities, and regions would not gain an unwarranted competitive advantage. The very structure of the U.S. Senate reflects a compromise among the Founders meant to balance the power of densely and sparsely populated states. Similarly, the Founders, understanding that private enterprise would not by itself provide broadly distributed postal service (because of the high cost of delivering mail to smaller towns and far-flung cities), wrote into the Constitution that a government monopoly would take on the challenge of providing the necessary cross-subsidization.

Throughout most of the 19th century and much of the 20th, generations of Americans similarly struggled with how to keep railroads from engaging in price discrimination against specific areas or otherwise favoring one town or region over another. Many states set up their own bureaucracies to regulate railroad fares—“to the end,” as the head of the Texas Railroad Commission put it, “that our producers, manufacturers, and merchants may be placed on an equal footing with their rivals in other states.” In 1887, the federal government took over the task of regulating railroad rates with the creation of the Interstate Commerce Commission. Railroads came to be regulated much as telegraph, telephone, and power companies would be—as natural monopolies that were allowed to remain in private hands and earn a profit, but only if they did not engage in pricing or service patterns that would add significantly to the competitive advantage of some regions over others.

Passage of the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890 was another watershed moment in the use of public policy to limit regional inequality. The antitrust movement that sprung up during the Populist and Progressive era was very much about checking regional concentrations of wealth and power. Across the Midwest, hard-pressed farmers formed the “Granger” movement and demanded protection from eastern monopolists controlling railroads, wholesale-grain distribution, and the country’s manufacturing base. The South in this era was also, in the words of the historian C. Vann Woodward, in a “revolt against the East” and its attempts to impose a “colonial economy.”"



"By the 1960s, antitrust enforcement grew to proportions never seen before, while at the same time the broad middle class grew and prospered, overall levels of inequality fell dramatically, and midsize metro areas across the South, the Midwest, and the West Coast achieved a standard of living that converged with that of America’s historically richest cites in the East. Of course, antitrust was not the only cause of the increase in regional equality, but it played a much larger role than most people realize today.

To get a flavor of how thoroughly the federal government managed competition throughout the economy in the 1960s, consider the case of Brown Shoe Co., Inc. v. United States, in which the Supreme Court blocked a merger that would have given a single distributor a mere 2 percent share of the national shoe market.

Writing for the majority, Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren explained that the Court was following a clear and long-established desire by Congress to keep many forms of business small and local: “We cannot fail to recognize Congress’ desire to promote competition through the protection of viable, small, locally owned business. Congress appreciated that occasional higher costs and prices might result from the maintenance of fragmented industries and markets. It resolved these competing considerations in favor of decentralization. We must give effect to that decision.”

In 1964, the historian and public intellectual Richard Hofstadter would observe that an “antitrust movement” no longer existed, but only because regulators were managing competition with such effectiveness that monopoly no longer appeared to be a realistic threat. “Today, anybody who knows anything about the conduct of American business,” Hofstadter observed, “knows that the managers of the large corporations do their business with one eye constantly cast over their shoulders at the antitrust division.”

In 1966, the Supreme Court blocked a merger of two supermarket chains in Los Angeles that, had they been allowed to combine, would have controlled just 7.5 percent of the local market. (Today, by contrast there are nearly 40 metro areas in the U.S where Walmart controls half or more of all grocery sales.) Writing for the majority, Justice Harry Blackmun noted the long opposition of Congress and the Court to business combinations that restrained competition “by driving out of business the small dealers and worthy men.”

During this era, other policy levers, large and small, were also pulled in the same direction—such as bank regulation, for example. Since the Great Recession, America has relearned the history of how New Deal legislation such as the Glass-Steagall Act served to contain the risks of financial contagion. Less well remembered is how New Deal-era and subsequent banking regulation long served to contain the growth of banks that were “too big to fail” by pushing power in the banking system out to the hinterland. Into the early 1990s, federal laws severely limited banks headquartered in one state from setting up branches in any other state. State and federal law fostered a dense web of small-scale community banks and locally operated thrifts and credit unions.

Meanwhile, bank mergers, along with mergers of all kinds, faced tough regulatory barriers that included close scrutiny of their effects on the social fabric and political economy of local communities. Lawmakers realized that levels of civic engagement and community trust tended to decline in towns that came under the control of outside ownership, and they resolved not to let that happen in their time.

In other realms, too, federal policy during the New Deal and for several decades afterward pushed strongly to spread regional equality. For example, New Deal programs such as the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Bonneville Power Administration, and the Rural Electrification Administration dramatically improved the infrastructure of the South and West. During and after World War II, federal spending on the military and the space program also tilted heavily in the Sunbelt’s favor.

The government’s role in regulating prices and levels of service in transportation was also a huge factor in promoting regional equality. In 1952, the Interstate Commerce Commission ordered a 10-percent reduction in railroad freight rates for southern shippers, a political decision that played a substantial role in enabling the South’s economic ascent after the war. The ICC and state governments also ordered railroads to run money-losing long-distance and commuter passenger trains to ensure that far-flung towns and villages remained connected to the national economy.

Into the 1970s, the ICC also closely regulated trucking routes and prices so they did not tilt in favor of any one region. Similarly, the Civil Aeronautics Board made sure that passengers flying to and from small and midsize cities paid roughly the same price per mile as those flying to and from the largest cities. It also required airlines to offer service to less populous areas even when such routes were unprofitable.

Meanwhile, massive public investments in the interstate-highway system and other arterial roads added enormously to regional equality. First, it vastly increased the connectivity of rural areas to major population centers. Second, it facilitated the growth of reasonably priced suburban housing around high-wage metro areas such as New York and Los Angeles, thus making it much more possible than it is now for working-class people to move to or remain in those areas.

Beginning in the late 1970s, however, nearly all the policy levers that had been used to push for greater regional income equality suddenly reversed direction. The first major changes came during Jimmy Carter’s administration. Fearful of inflation, and under the spell of policy entrepreneurs such as Alfred Kahn, Carter signed the Airline Deregulation Act in 1978. This abolished the Civil Aeronautics Board, which had worked to offer rough regional parity in airfares and levels of service since 1938… [more]
us  cities  policy  economics  history  inequality  via:robinsonmeyer  2016  philliplongman  regulation  deregulation  capitalism  trusts  antitrustlaw  mergers  competition  markets  banks  finance  ronaldreagan  corporatization  intellectualproperty  patents  law  legal  equality  politics  government  rentseeking  innovation  acquisitions  antitrustenforcement  income  detroit  nyc  siliconvalley  technology  banking  peterganong  danielshoag  1950s  1960s  1970s  1980s  1990s  greatdepression  horacegreely  chicago  denver  cleveland  seattle  atlanta  houston  saltlakecity  stlouis  enricomoretti  shermanantitrustact  1890  cvannwoodward  woodrowwilson  1912  claytonantitrustact  louisbrandeis  federalreserve  minneapolis  kansascity  robinson-patmanact  1920s  1930s  miller-tydingsact  fdr  celler-kefauveract  emanuelceller  huberhumphrey  earlwarren  richardhofstadter  harryblackmun  newdeal  interstatecommercecommission  jimmycarter  alfredkahn  airlinederegulationact  1978  memphis  cincinnati  losangeles  airlines  transportation  rail  railroads  1980  texas  florida  1976  amazon  walmart  r 
march 2016 by robertogreco
Apple invents natural tap-based gesture input for nudging onscreen objects, selecting text
"A patent granted to Apple on Tuesday reveals a novel mode of mobile device gesture input that turns taps detected on non-touchscreen surfaces, like the side of an iPhone, into granular on-screen controls.

As published by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Apple's patent No. 9,086,738 for "Fine-tuning an operation based on tapping" describes a solution to a problem many iPhone and iPad owners face when attempting to conduct highly granular user interface manipulations on multitouch displays.

As Apple notes, touchscreens excel in operations requiring only coarse granularity, such as swipes and taps, but are often times unsuitable for performing fine adjustments. For example, picking out a specific character in a line of text is difficult on a touch interface because the mechanism relies on an input object with a relatively large contact area (a user's finger).

Apple's iOS features a virtual magnification loupe as a workaround for accurate UI asset selection, but the method is not as precise as a traditional computer mouse. Instead of looking for an answer in multitouch screen technology, Apple's patent makes use of motion sensors available throughout its iOS device lineup.

In one embodiment, a user is able to move an onscreen object left or right with extreme precision, perhaps nudged a pixel at a time, by lightly tapping on the side of an iPhone. Tap gestures on non-touchscreen portions of a device are picked up by an accelerometer or gyroscope and processed naturally, meaning inputs are represented onscreen in an equal and opposite direction. For example, a light tap on the right side of an iPhone would move an object to the left, while a tap on the left would send the object to the right.

The patent also accounts for varying input magnitudes. Stronger taps move objects greater distances, for example.

Another embodiment detailing text selection notes users can easily extend or contract an active boundary through suitable tapping procedures. Lighter taps would move the cursor one character at a time, while more prominent taps jump entire words or lines. The idea can be extended to any number of selection or virtual object manipulation operations, as seen in the above illustration relating to a spreadsheet application.

Apple also covers taps in other directions, for example from the top and bottom of a device, as well as input involving more than one finger and other UI variations.

It is unclear if Apple intends to incorporate the tap-based fine tuning mechanism into its iOS platform anytime soon. However, the company is slowly extending device usability beyond the years-old multitouch interface by augmenting its devices with new forms of input like Force Touch, which is rumored to make the jump from Apple Watch to iPhone this year.

Apple's patent for fine UI manipulation through tap gestures was first filed for in January 2013 and credits Maxim Tsudik as its inventor."
2015  via:tealtan  interaction  apple  patents  technology  nudging  interface  gestures  touch  motion  ios  accelerometers  gyroscopes 
july 2015 by robertogreco
Shape of the Web
"The Web is a living ecosystem that exists in a delicate balance and we all have a role to play in shaping — and ensuring — its future.

At Mozilla, we believe that the more you know about the Web, the easier it is for you to make more informed choices and be a more empowered digital citizen.

That’s why we created this site: to show you where the Web stands today, the issues that impact it and what you can do to get involved."
mozilla  web  internet  online  maps  mapping  accessibility  advertising  adtracking  adoption  affordability  civility  power  data  dataportability  identity  digital  censorship  government  policy  surveillance  content  netneutrality  opensource  security  privacy  patents  software 
may 2015 by robertogreco
A negative interest rate world? Why? | Ian Welsh
"Why there is too much money chasing returns is important, however, so I’m going to tease apart some of the reasons.

Central Bank Policy

Look, the ECB is buying bonds. The BOJ is buying bonds. The US was doing so. This is demand. It pushes the yield of bonds down.

China is printing piles of money, Japan is printing it, etc… That money isn’t staying in those economies, it is hunting through the world for returns or even just security. Federal Reserve policy has put a floor under losses from various securities by accepting that at near par, and Fed policy of free money has underwritten an epic bull market in securities.

No cleanup of the banking or shadow banking systems.

Most money is created by private actors. Banks, shadow banks (brokerages, etc…) There is no effective oversight of these organizations, still (you’d think after 2007, but you’d be wrong.) In fact, not only is there not enough oversight, but in most cases they’ve been effectively encourages to create more money. We have another derivatives bubble underway, we have housing bubbles in multiple countries (e.g. Canada and the UK), and while the US doesn’t have one, parts of the US, like Manhattan, do.

Oligopolistic profits.

US broadband profits are almost 100%-annualized. Every app store takes a 30% cut (a level which would have been shut down by regulators of the post-war liberal period.) Copyright law makes it difficult to impossible to create generic alternatives to common items. These have all led to very high profit levels, and those profits have largely been plowed back into stock buy backs (most corporate borrow is matched by stock buy backs). But much of the economy is not available to be bought on the stock market, many large investors can’t invest on the stock market by law (they have to invest in high-grade bonds), and much of those profits are now priced into stock prices anyway.

Inequality

In the United States more than all the gains of the last “recovery” have gone to the top 10% (really the top 3% or so.) There has limited broad based demand for new goods. Luxury goods, investment art, and London and Manhattan real-estate do not scale. Without widespread demand, opportunities for new businesses, with new employers, are limited.

Barriers to Entry

Much of this came under oligoplistic profits. Draconic “intellectual property” laws make it difficult to compete, bringing prices down and increasing volumes while freeing up money for people to spend on other things. 30% cuts from app stores and other virtual marketplaces make many businesses simply unprofitable—first they must make 30% for Apple or whoever, then they get to make a profit for themselves. But if you aren’t on those virtual marketplaces (and there is usually one which controls most of the business) you will not make enough sales to be viable. This sort of “you make no money without us, so we’ll take all the profits” behavior is little different from what the railroads did to farmers in the late nineteenth and early 20th centuries.

And while there’s tons of credit for big business and people who are already rich, a new business trying to get funding faces huge barriers to getting money. It’s boutique investment, it requires a lot of time, and most investors would rather just buy bonds, structured securities, or play the stock market. Money may be cheap, but not for you.



No Future Till The Current Rich Can Monetize It

We could have had a lot of what we have today many years ago.  But the rich control the politicians, and the politicians won’t allow it to occur.  There was great squealing for years about subsidies for solar, and corruption in how they were given out, but they were always a rounding error compared to subsidies for oil, let along the military-industrial complex, big agriculture, pharma, health insurance, and so on.  All of those industries were powerful enough to strangle subsidies to competitors (solar, generic drugs, whatever) and strong enough to insist on new laws which strangled startups and competition (every copyright extension is nothing but an anti-competitive measure intended to keep profits coming to incumbents.)

Bottom Line

We have too much money chasing too few returns because we’ve spent 40 odd years making sure that ordinary people get less and less money; the rich get more; and that oligopolies are nurtured and protected.  The rich control government, and they intend to make sure that all the money goes to them.  Unfortunately, in a mass market economy, that means the economy becomes lousier and lousier.  This doesn’t matter to the rich because they are comparatively better off. Better a Czar amidst serfs than the CEO of General Motors in 1955."
deflation  inflation  labor  capitalism  power  inequality  economics  2015  ianwelsh  wealth  us  policy  banking  finance  wallstreet  oligarchs  intellectualproperty  copyright  patents  business 
march 2015 by robertogreco
Patent US8156160 - Poet personalities - Google Patents
"A method of generating a poet personality including reading poems, each of the poems containing text, generating analysis models, each of the analysis models representing one of poems and storing the analysis models in a personality data structure. The personality data structure further includes weights, each of the weights associated with each of the analysis models. The weights include integer values."



BACKGROUND
This invention relates to generating poetry from a computer.

A computer may be used to generate text, such as poetry, to an output device and/or storage device. The displayed text may be in response to a user input or via an automatic composition process. Devices for generating poetry via a computer have been proposed which involve set slot grammars in which certain parts of speech, that are provided in a list, are selected for certain slots.

SUMMARY
In an aspect, the invention features a method of generating a poet personality including reading poems, each of the poems containing text, generating analysis models, each of the analysis models representing one of poems and storing the analysis models in a personality data structure. The personality data structure further includes weights, each of the weights associated with each of the analysis models. The weights include integer values.

In another aspect a poet's assistant method including loading a word processing program, receiving a word in the word processing program provided by a user, displaying poet windows in response to receiving the word and processing the word in each of the windows. The poet windows may include combinations of a finish word window, a finish line window and a finish poem window. Processing the word in the finish word window includes loading an analysis model, locating the word in the analysis model and generating a proposed word in conjunction with the author analysis model.

The details of one or more embodiments of the invention are set forth in the accompanying drawings and the description below. Other features, objects, and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the description and drawings, and from the claims.



"1. A computer-implemented method of generating a poet personality comprising:
analyzing by one or more computers a plurality of poems, each of the poems containing a plurality of words;

generating by the one or more computers a plurality of analysis models, each of said analysis models representing one of said plurality of poems, by

marking by the one or more computers words in the poems with rhyme numbers with words that rhyme with each other having the same rhyme number;

generating by the one or more computers a data structure that specifies n-grams found in the text, with each analysis model haying a set of weights, bigram, trigram and quadgram exponents; and

storing the plurality of analysis models in a personality data structure including a set of parameters that control poetry generation using the personality data structure."
poetry  poets  patents  raykurzweil  google  johnkeklak  1999  via:soulellis  artificialintelligence  ai 
march 2014 by robertogreco
Glowing Sushi
"The GloFish® is a patented and trademarked brand of genetically modified (GM) fluorescent zebrafish sold by Yorktown Technologies. Although not originally developed for the ornamental fish trade, it is one of the first genetically modified animals to become publicly available as a pet. Although not originally developed for use in sushi, it is one of the first genetically modified animals to become publicly available as meat."



"A WORD ON INNOVATION

Glowing Sushi is a byproduct of business innovation
in the life sciences.
Innovation is very often doing something that
"wasn't supposed to be done".

ZebraFish weren't supposed to glow.
Glowing ZebraFish weren't supposed to leave the lab.
Glowing ZebraFish weren't supposed to
help fight environmental pollution.
(Actually, that one never panned out!)

Glowing ZebraFish weren't supposed to be sold as pets.
Lifeforms weren't supposed to be patented and trademarked.
GloFish® weren't supposed to be crossbred at home.
GloFish® weren't supposed to be eaten.

A byproduct of innovation is more innovation.
And never quite as one expected.
What do innovators upstream think about their progeny?
Do they even recognize them?
A byproduct of innovation is more innovation."



"California is the only state in the nation that does not allow the sale of GloFish®. Sale or possession of GloFish® remains illegal in California due to a regulation that restricts all genetically modified fish. The regulation was implemented before the marketing of GloFish®, largely due to concern about AquaBounty's AquaAdvantage® Salmon product. Yorktown Technologies has decided to not undertake California's ecological review to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act citing the cost and time involved in that process, as well as the uncertainty of the outcome. Although California is a large state it does share borders with states where GoFish® are totally legal to purchase."

[via: https://twitter.com/Interdome/status/343111155381829632 ]
glofish  zebrafish  animals  fish  genetics  geneticmodification  biotechnology  bioengineering  gmo  sushi  food  innovation  patents  low  legal 
june 2013 by robertogreco
Design for the New Normal (Revisited) | superflux
"I was invited to talk at the NEXT Conference in Berlin by Peter Bihr, as he felt that a talk I gave last year would fit well with the conference's theme Here Be Dragons: "We fret about data, who is collecting it and why. We fret about privacy and security. We worry and fear disruption, which changes business models and renders old business to ashes. Some would have us walk away, steer clear of these risks. They’re dangerous, we don’t know what the consequences will be. Maintain the status quo, don’t change too much.Here and now is safe. Over there, in the future? Well, there be dragons."

This sounded like a good platform to expand upon the 'Design for the New Normal' presentation I gave earlier, especially as its an area Jon and I are thinking about in the context of various ongoing projects. So here it is, once again an accelerated slideshow (70 slides!) where I followed up on some of the stories to see what happened to them in the last six months, and developed some of the ideas further. This continues to be a work-in-progress that Superflux is developing as part of our current projects. "

[Video: http://nextberlin.eu/2013/07/design-for-the-new-normal-3/ ]
anabjain  2013  drones  weapons  manufacturing  3dprinting  bioengineering  droneproject  biotechnology  biotech  biobricks  songhojun  ossi  zemaraielali  empowerment  technology  technologicalempowerment  raspberrypi  hackerspaces  makerspaces  diy  biology  diybio  shapeways  replicators  tobiasrevell  globalvillageconstructionset  marcinjakubowski  crowdsourcing  cryptocurrencies  openideo  ideo  wickedproblems  darpa  innovation  india  afghanistan  jugaad  jugaadwarfare  warfare  war  syria  bitcoins  blackmarket  freicoin  litecoin  dna  dnadreams  bregtjevanderhaak  bgi  genomics  23andme  annewojcicki  genetics  scottsmith  superdensity  googleglass  chaos  complexity  uncertainty  thenewnormal  superflux  opensource  patents  subversion  design  jonardern  ux  marketing  venkateshrao  normalityfield  strangenow  syntheticbiology  healthcare  healthinsurance  insurance  law  economics  ip  arnoldmann  dynamicgenetics  insects  liamyoung  eleanorsaitta  shingtatchung  algorithms  superstition  bahavior  numerology  dunne&raby  augerloizeau  bionicrequiem  ericschmidt  privacy  adamharvey  makeu 
april 2013 by robertogreco
The Overwhelming Empirical Case Against Patent and Copyright
"Below is an excerpt adapted from my draft paper “Law and Intellectual Property in a Stateless Society,” collecting and summarizing just some of the empirical case against patent and copyright."
copyright  patents  law  patentlaw  legal  economics  policy  2012  stephenkinsella  ip  intellectualproperty 
january 2013 by robertogreco
Sowing Scarcity – The New Inquiry
"This is late capitalism’s inverted world, where business and government treat nature as infinite but strictly ration culture. Thus does capitalism, billed in every economics textbook as the supreme mechanism for allocating scarce resources, degenerate into a machine that introduces scarcity where it need not exist and blithely squanders the things that are in short supply.

Capitalism is itself a kind of social technology, one capable of organizing and managing a massive and complex division of labor without concentrating power over the system at any one point. But it is a technology that is much better suited to some tasks than others. When maximizing the output of commodities with the least input of human labor is posed as society’s main problem, capitalism’s defenders can point to it as an historically unsurpassed technology for this purpose.

If, however, the main problem is to maintain the ability of the Earth to support an advanced civilization, and to ensure that the bounty of…
ecosocialism  capital  legal  law  patents  intellectualproperty  ip  agriculture  monsanto  production  scarcity  peterfrase  2012  environment  capitalism  latecapitalism 
december 2012 by robertogreco
Kirby Ferguson: Creating is Stealing - The Takeaway
"And it’s not just in music and movies that artists steal from other artists. It’s already happened in design during the war of smartphones. What did Apple steal from Samsung and what did Samsung steal from Apple? If we’re ever going to stop clogging up our legal pipes with endless patent lawsuits, Ferguson says we have to accept the ugly truth that creativity is stealing."

[See also: http://www.ted.com/talks/kirby_ferguson_embrace_the_remix.html ]
unfinished  nothingnewunderthesun  making  legal  law  creativity  stealing  ted  2012  copyright  patents  everythingisaremix  kirbyferguson 
august 2012 by robertogreco
Legal Services Wanted; Lawyers Need Not Apply - Miller-McCune
"Why a globalized U.S. economy requires new legal infrastructure devised and controlled by innovators (who will probably be something or someone other than law firms or lawyers)."
law  legal  lawyers  2011  globalization  patents  business  future  simplicity  economics  price  money  efficiency 
july 2011 by robertogreco
Lessig: It's Time to Demolish the FCC - Newsweek
"The solution here is not tinkering. You can't fix DNA. You have to bury it. President Obama should get Congress to shut down FCC & similar vestigial regulators, which put stability & special interests above public good. In their place, Congress should create something we could call Innovation Environment Protection Agency (iEPA), charged with simple founding mission: "minimal intervention to maximize innovation." iEPA's core purpose would be to protect innovation from its 2 historical enemies—excessive government favors, & excessive private monopoly power…

America's economic future depends upon restarting an engine of innovation & technological growth. A first step is to remove government from mix as much as possible…corporate America has come to believe that investments in influencing Washington pay more than investments in building a better mousetrap…We need to kill a philosophy of regulation born w/ 20th century, if we're to make possible a world of innovation in 21st."
innovation  copyright  internet  government  2008  larrylessig  monopolies  restart  influence  corruption  power  patents  communication  stasis  gamechanging 
december 2010 by robertogreco
Marc Laperrouza » Cities of science
"Is science the product of countries or of cities?The measurement of scientific production is usually done either at country level (patents filed in country for given year) or at organizational level (scientific papers published by university). In a recent paper a team researchers used a different unit of analysis, namely urban conglomerations, & sketched the evolution between 1996-98 & 2004-06 (see table on right).<br />
Provided you evacuate delicate question of what constitutes an urban conglomeration - here defined as distgances reachable by 40-minute commute from city centre - one finds the ‘usual suspects’ but one can’t fail to notice new comer in top 10, Beijing.<br />
<br />
Actually if one scrolls further down ranking, some other new kids on block are Seoul, Teheran, Istanbul, Singapore & Sao Paolo.<br />
<br />
Not surprisingly either, once you factor in the quality of research, i.e. the impact factor, ranking looks different, this time w/ Boston on top & only 2 non-US (Paris & Tokyo) in top 10."
science  cities  nations  countries  research  patents  urban  urbanism  marclaperrouza 
december 2010 by robertogreco
How Oracle might kill Google’s Android and software patents all at once — RoughlyDrafted Magazine
"Google doesn’t even have any experience in creating software platforms, having only ever launched a series of web apps and services that are supported by its single revenue machine: paid search, an idea that it appropriated from Overture! Recall that, in a “this all happened before” kind of way, Yahoo bought Overture and then used its new aggrieved subsidiary to demand 2.7 million shares of Google to license the rights to paid search. Google is nothing but a series of infringements snowballed together.<br />
<br />
Anyone who thinks Google looks before it leaps has forgotten that Google only ever leaps, buying up regular new companies on a schedule rather than with a strategy, and blowing out one failed project after another… Google acts like a white trash family who won the world’s largest lottery, which is why it behaves just like Microsoft. Some companies actually early their revenues in a competitive marketplace, and have for generations of technology, like say, Apple."
2010  android  apple  oracle  opensource  microsoft  java  technology  software  property  ip  google  patents 
august 2010 by robertogreco
What If The Very Theory That Underlies Why We Need Patents Is Wrong? | Techdirt
"paper concludes w/ some policy recommendations, seeking to have the government look for ways to encourage more collaborative & open innovation, such as by supporting more open licensing programs directly, though I'm not sure what specific support the government really needs to do there. It also suggests that net neutrality actually plays into this as well -- as one of the reasons why there is greater collaboration is that a neutral network infrastructure made that possible. Removing network neutrality could limit the ability to collaborate, & because of that, the social benefit found from such collaborative projects. Again, I'm not convinced that any ISP would go so far as to restrict communication to that level, but it is an interesting note.
entrepreneurship  legal  law  politics  technology  patents  economics  collaboration  business  innovation  ip 
april 2010 by robertogreco
Newswise Business News | Economists Say Copyright and Patent Laws Are Killing Innovation; Hurting Economy
"Patent and copyright law are stifling innovation and threatening the global economy according to two economists at Washington University in St. Louis in a new book, Against Intellectual Monopoly. Professors Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine call for abolishing the current patent and copyright system in order to unleash innovations necessary to reverse the current recession and rescue the economy. The professors discuss their stand against intellectual property protections in a video and news release linked here."
economics  innovation  patents  copyright  intellectualproperty  ip  law  politics  legal  drm  research 
march 2009 by robertogreco
David Byrne Journal: 12.05.08: Mattel, Bratz and Creative Rights
"It seems to me that it would be nice if there were a fairer attitude towards passed-over creations. What if the law said this: if a company like Mattel turned down his drawings, then they would automatically revert back to him after some period of time — a couple of years, for example. Long enough for Mattel to reconsider, given an always-changing marketplace, but short enough that the creation, whatever it is, might still be relevant. This could apply to recording artists, screenwriters, designers, authors and photographers — where the same kind of proprietary nastiness happens all the time."
copyright  patents  mattel  law  toys  barbie  bratz  creativity  music  art  design  corporations  davidbyrne 
december 2008 by robertogreco
Putting people first » “Patenting will be seen as a limitation of human rights”
“Patenting will be seen as a limitation of human rights.” “There are no cheaters ’cause in my system cheating is the most positive activity.” “Faulty residents are charged with negligence and sent to live in ‘financially active’ communities.” “[There will be] a never-ending variety of new richness values that makes the informal economy supremely superior to the current nonsensical cash culture.”
future  patents  open  free  creativity  innovation  tcsnmy  informaleconomy  economics  money  cash  humanrights  cheating  collaboration  community 
november 2008 by robertogreco
A Whole Lotta Nothing: How to get my nerd vote
"Broadband Everywhere, Universal Healthcare, No federal taxes on internet purchases, Renew a commitment to Education, Renew a commitment to Science, Real changes to transportation, Allow early voting by mail, Revamp Copyright/IP law, Fund the patent office so it can do a better job, Open government"
politics  us  change  reform  healthcare  broadband  internet  taxes  science  matthaughey  education  bikes  transportation  business  smallbusiness  entrepreneurship  voting  elections  copyright  ip  open  opengovernment  patents 
october 2008 by robertogreco
The Pirate's Dilemma
"The Pirate’s Dilemma tells the story of how youth culture drives innovation and is changing the way the world works. It offers understanding and insight for a time when piracy is just another business model, the remix is our most powerful marketing too
books  classideas  informationliteracy  copyright  patents  creativity  innovation  business  politics  piracy  culture  drm  consumption  competition  freeconomics  filesharing  p2p  marketing  technology 
july 2008 by robertogreco
Annals of Innovation: In the Air: Who says big ideas are rare? - The New Yorker
"Merton’s observation about scientific geniuses is clearly not true of artistic geniuses, however. You can’t pool the talents of a dozen Salieris and get Mozart’s Requiem. You can’t put together a committee of really talented art students and get
malcolmgladwell  ideas  innovation  creativity  technology  entrepreneurship  economics  discovery  culture  intelligence  genius  adaptive  thinking  science  invention  mind  brainstorming  history  art  patents  ip  paleontology  dinosaurs  design  process 
may 2008 by robertogreco
Internet Software Patents
"Why didn't you patent this yourself, if you developed it first?" My reply was "It only took me an hour to build; if I went down to the patent office after every hour of programming, I wouldn't get very much done."
amazon  business  computing  development  innovation  internet  invention  law  ip  patents  programming  property  technology  software 
february 2008 by robertogreco
Freedom to Tinker
"The focus is on issues related to legal regulation of technology, and especially on legal attempts to restrict the right of technologists and citizens to tinker with technological devices. But we reserve the right to write about anything that strikes our
activism  tinkering  technology  opensource  open  legal  law  homebrew  engineering  ethics  encryption  modding  mobile  commons  censorship  anarchy  software  making  make  hacking  hardware  piracy  policy  politics  regulation  security  society  patents  copyright  anarchism 
december 2007 by robertogreco
The Piracy Paradox: Financial Page: The New Yorker
"But we should be skeptical of claims that tougher laws are necessarily better laws. Sometimes imitation isn’t just the sincerest form of flattery. It’s also the most productive."
apparel  business  capitalism  competition  consumerism  copyright  culture  design  fashion  innovation  law  legal  patents  piracy  retail  trends  economics 
november 2007 by robertogreco
BLDGBLOG: Architecture as a form of deliberate paranoia
"a man, or woman, who spends all of his or her time sketching strange buildings – finds that his (or her) sketchbook has been stolen."
architecture  design  paranoia  theft  ideas  crime  patents 
january 2007 by robertogreco
Family income - 2 vs 1 | Ask MetaFilter
"In the U.S., why does a family need two incomes to live at a standard that was previously attainable by one?"
economics  society  parenting  patents  children  us  europe 
august 2006 by robertogreco
Nettime-l relay :: <nettime> The Stuff of Culture
"The controversy between the object-oriented and the exchange-oriented visions of culture is currently being fought on all levels, legal (expanding versus narrowing copyrights and patents), technical (digital rights management versus distribution and acce
culture  society  art  creativity  copyright  patents 
january 2006 by robertogreco
In India, it's IKEA without the assembly | csmonitor.com
"Carpenters in Bolpur, India, near Calcutta, make furniture for clients based on photos in IKEA catalogs. There are no IKEA outlets here."
design  rights  patents  copyright  furniture  diy  make 
january 2006 by robertogreco

Copy this bookmark:





to read