> everyone who is not of sub-Saharan decent is part Neanderthal.
Has this been proven? I mean both conditions, ie: that everyone of sub-Saharan descent having no Neanderthal DNA? Also, the percentages are really low, eg: my friend from China did 23andme and his Neanderthal percentage was 0.1%.
I apologize if this is a silly question, but what exactly does "computer company" mean? I read the link. I see "oxide computer" which makes me think, oh is this one of those newfangled oxide transistor but I clicked a few links like oxide computer principles of operation hoping to get an idea of what this is but instead I see some stuff about candor, empathy which is not what I thought principles meant in this context. I looked through the comments hoping to see someone explain it but no win there. Oh well. I'm sure someone will explain it.
1. Bad HN title (doesn't say anything about what they did about the computer they made)
2. Landing page image has some generic background and as far as I saw, no tangible product, other than some shelves of their latest workspace.
3. If they could just include some diagram here or there and put some bold text/say they're building AWS for people/startups, that'd be great and to the point
Not bashing them, but just some thoughts I had about their presentation.
Regardless, I'm extremely excited for what they're building. Been waiting for something like this to pop up.
They forgot to add “blockchain” and “machine learning” to complete their BINGO card. “cloud hyperscale innovations” is a good one, though—haven’t heard that one yet.
"Hyperscaler" does have a meaning in the data centre world, and their use of it here speaks to the benefits they hope to deliver, so it's not 100% a marketing buzzword.
Looks like vaporware with nothing to distinguish themselves from the incumbents. Are they going to do anything special other than put their branding on Taiwanese boards?
If you ignore all the Barbary pirates, across half the North African coast, who went right back to the 12th century. In good part it was in reaction to them, and their slavery raids on English and other coasts across Europe, and their piracy that started the English era of privateers in reaction.
Prior art is very difficult to prove and patent reviewers often miss obvious examples. They can't so easily ignore a pre-existing patent. It also protects the invention from exploitation by foreign competitors, in jurisdictions with reciprocal patent protection.
It depends, obviously. Prior art is easy to prove by pointing at an existing patent. It is also easy to prove by pointing at an article in a mainstream publication in the local language. So "protective publication" or "defensive disclosure" is a reasonable alternative to getting a patent (and perhaps letting it expire at the first opportunity).
Prior art is only difficult to prove if you're relying on something along the lines of folk knowledge among the indigenous peoples of the lands where the Jumblies live.
It's non-obviousness that is notoriously difficult to prove.
Prior art doesn’t apply in foreign jurisdictions. A country that is first-to-file can file the patent then stop your domestic company from using the tech.
> Prior art doesn’t apply in foreign jurisdictions.
Can you elaborate on this? Japan, for example, requires you to disclose any prior art during application similar to the U.S. Israel recently adopted similar rules. These disclosures frequently include US and foreign (WO, EP, etc) patents and patent publications.
> A country that is first-to-file can file the patent then stop your domestic company from using the tech.
Assuming you filed first in your domestic country, then you just apply in the foreign country and claim priority from your domestic application - thereby granting your application an even earlier effective filing date.
Sorry, but I have to challenge your authority. You're saying "measurable impact on learning outcomes" and then linking to same site which doesn't give any evidence of this. As far as I can tell, these prizes are being awarded by people who are all in the same social circles and even their peer reviewed papers don't seem to carry serious outcome analysis. The whole Nicholas Negroponte-Epstein-Ito scandal just shows these people are not interested in the outcome. Again, as he self-described himself "a rich white guy", Negroponte didn't suddenly wake up and care about the welfare and education of children in the third world, nope, not believable, as shown by his subsequent actions.
Negroponte and his gang of destroyers went from developing country to developing country intent on destroying simple proven-to-work schemes and replacing them with his costly OLPC. He knew that local NGOs desperate requests for funding would be bypassed in favor of his large contracts which could be utilized by bureaucrats to hide corruption.
I'm sorry that you wasted your time working on the software. I was tasked to work with the XO-1 and it was an utter waste of our time. We'd have been far better off if those funds had been spent on providing vaccinations, and lunches at school which have been proven to have a vastly better long term outcomes than a underpowered unconnectable amd-geode board with a wonky unusable pixelqi LCD.
Honestly, when I first heard of OLPC, I was so excited by all the claims. I remember they sent us screenshots of MIT engineers designing a pulley type charger and they told us the OLPC would run for hours from a few minutes of pulling. It was all fake and total marketing BS. Honestly, after the OLPC, my respect level for MIT Media Lab went down the drain. I realized these people aren't really significantly different than a reasonably educated grad student in a developing country. They just use their accents and mannerisms and social circles to get themselves perceived as being capable of delivering something superior, when in reality they delivered a barely passable netbook. The whole Joi Ito-Epstein pedo scandal has further reinforced my opinion. Developing countries would be better off not buying into the whole MIT aura as it does not seem deserved. It is sad that MIT continues slurping funds from developing countries to do jobs-for-the-boys club type projects. I had thought better of such an institution but I was completely wrong.
Has this been proven? I mean both conditions, ie: that everyone of sub-Saharan descent having no Neanderthal DNA? Also, the percentages are really low, eg: my friend from China did 23andme and his Neanderthal percentage was 0.1%.