If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Apple Insider)   Apple patents time machine; Woz to return to 1974, give Bill Gates atomic wedgie   (appleinsider.com) divider line 121
    More: Obvious, gates, Mac OS, first-to-file, rewriting, word processors, chronologies, OS X, plain  
•       •       •

10447 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Nov 2012 at 12:45 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



121 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-13 03:19:41 PM

t3knomanser: Vaneshi: Terminator rules: Only living organisms can travel in time, this includes living flesh wrapped around a metal endoskeleton

I know they covered this in the third movie, but why didn't they just wrap a gun in living flesh. You could have sent back a fleshbag holding a giant pile of weapons along with the Terminator.


No idea. Why send a single infiltrator unit to do the job when all it needs to do is leave a message 'somewhere' that at X time the target is at Y location... then, literally, drop a HK on its head.

The short lived TV show did actually show a Terminator cutting open it's leg to retrieve a hand gun, which would be the most logical way of arming your infiltrator as opposed to it visiting the nearest gun shop and using period weapons.

Hell for a gun you don't even need the synthetic flesh. Just a glass tank full of bacteria. The tank won't make it (glass != alive) but the bacteria and the contents will.... followed by a splash and the gun on the floor next to your soldier. No mess to hide afterwards.
 
2012-11-13 03:21:04 PM

Vaneshi: TheTrashcanMan:

From what I learned from time traveling via Terminator movies, the only possible way of carrying that bullion would be inside the body, and so that is quite a few trips, because the average human rectum can only hold so much.

But are you not allowed to take multiple people with you on the time travel? That what you could fill multiple rectums with bullion?

Terminator rules: Only living organisms can travel in time, this includes living flesh wrapped around a metal endoskeleton. So it doesn't need to be living, just 'alive' (and a very loose definition of such) at the moment you hit the 'Go' button.

What is the largest animal you could gut and empty whilst chemical processes needed for 'life' remained active in the skin? How much bullion could you shove inside said animal?

Now you are welcome to attempt this endeavour with a 24 carat solid gold buttplug installed if you so wish however I could really do with a hand emptying out this Sperm whale carcass... I'm in a bit of a hurry.


Okay, so say we got the money there some how. What are the slight odds of a butterfly effect happening. Maybe me going back and buying a ton of stock changes things slightly making Apple less successful then they have in recent years? What does Doc have to say about this?
 
2012-11-13 03:23:44 PM

TheTrashcanMan: What does Doc have to say about this?


It's [the sperm whale stuff full of bullion] heavy.
 
2012-11-13 03:33:08 PM

Theaetetus: you have pee hands: Is this worth patenting? Unless you're patenting the *idea* of incremental backups, which I think would be a pretty tough sell, it just seems like a case where you say, "Oh, that method is patented? We'll do it this way instead", for a million different varieties of "this".

The patent (i) prevents others from directly copying you, and if you believe that your method is superior/more efficient/easier then making them perform inefficient methods is valuable, and (ii) prevents others from getting a patent covering your technology and trying to prevent you from using your system.
But yeah, design arounds are always an option, and a good one that should be encouraged.


Except when I look at the claims, I don't see specifics. I see a process. A fairly broad process at that. I don't see software. I don't see specifics. Please. Point out to me how this is specific and how it's -NOT- a fairly general process. I don't care if its been done before, enlighten us. Where is the specificity?
 
2012-11-13 03:33:18 PM

Theaetetus: Counter_Intelligent: Theaetetus, please don't take this as offensive, but is there any way you could explain how the patent differs from any currently-present implementation in your own words? As it is, you aren't winning any supporters with "No. Nope. Not that either. Or this." I'm sure that at least one other FARKer exists with knowledge "beyond that of a layman" that could translate it for the rest of us.

I thought I already did, way back early in the thread. Specifically, this patent unrolls changes to files that occur during the backup time - it's an interesting way around the problem of letting a user keep working while you back up files that they're working on. Many other systems require explicit locking of files until backup is complete, including many of the ones mentioned in this thread as supposedly being invalidating prior art.
Now, there are other systems that let users keep working while backups are in process... but I don't think they do it the same way, by backing up modified files and then rolling them back to a pre-modified state.


I could cite Btrfs or XFS as being able to do this. Or Volume Shadow Copy. Or any storage hypervisor like LVM. As for prior art to the original concept, I'll just go ahead and say the Fossil file system that uses the 9P for Bell Labs' Plan 9 operating system, which, in this case is licensed under the Lucent Public License 1.02 and is considered to be OSS by bothe the OSI and the FSF.

And oh my, who is the President of the FSF? The one and only RMS.

That guy will literally burn Apple to the ground if he ever decides to go after them.
 
2012-11-13 03:35:51 PM

dbirchall: Unpossible. VMS was the height, the pinnacle, of clumsiness. Nothing could come close, let alone exceed it.


VMS : Windows NT :: NeXT : OS X
 
2012-11-13 03:40:24 PM

Theaetetus: I thought I already did, way back early in the thread.


Regrettably, no. The only instance I see is where you quoted another FARKer.
 
2012-11-13 03:41:29 PM

Theaetetus: I thought I already did, way back early in the thread. Specifically, this patent unrolls changes to files that occur during the backup time - it's an interesting way around the problem of letting a user keep working while you back up files that they're working on. Many other systems require explicit locking of files until backup is complete, including many of the ones mentioned in this thread as supposedly being invalidating prior art.
Now, there are other systems that let users keep working while backups are in process... but I don't think they do it the same way, by backing up modified files and then rolling them back to a pre-modified state.


Thank you.
 
2012-11-13 03:41:36 PM
I'm not a patent attorney and I have no idea whether the "Time Machine" invention is unique and non-obvious enough to be patent-worthy, but I will say it's the only consumer-grade backup solution I've ever used that's worth a damn.
 
2012-11-13 03:50:35 PM

Mutiny32: Theaetetus: Counter_Intelligent: Theaetetus, please don't take this as offensive, but is there any way you could explain how the patent differs from any currently-present implementation in your own words? As it is, you aren't winning any supporters with "No. Nope. Not that either. Or this." I'm sure that at least one other FARKer exists with knowledge "beyond that of a layman" that could translate it for the rest of us.

I thought I already did, way back early in the thread. Specifically, this patent unrolls changes to files that occur during the backup time - it's an interesting way around the problem of letting a user keep working while you back up files that they're working on. Many other systems require explicit locking of files until backup is complete, including many of the ones mentioned in this thread as supposedly being invalidating prior art.
Now, there are other systems that let users keep working while backups are in process... but I don't think they do it the same way, by backing up modified files and then rolling them back to a pre-modified state.

I could cite Btrfs or XFS as being able to do this. Or Volume Shadow Copy. Or any storage hypervisor like LVM. As for prior art to the original concept, I'll just go ahead and say the Fossil file system that uses the 9P for Bell Labs' Plan 9 operating system, which, in this case is licensed under the Lucent Public License 1.02 and is considered to be OSS by bothe the OSI and the FSF.


Which part of "this", and what do you mean by "being able to"? Do they do it or are they merely capable of doing it? If you're referring to the fact that they're backup systems, then you haven't really gotten the right "this".

And they don't do "this" - both Fossil and VSC use COW, which wouldn't help in the case where the file gets modified during backup. In fact, you'd end up with the modified file, which is the opposite of the behavior in the claims.
 
2012-11-13 04:12:03 PM

poot_rootbeer: I'm not a patent attorney and I have no idea whether the "Time Machine" invention is unique and non-obvious enough to be patent-worthy, but I will say it's the only consumer-grade backup solution I've ever used that's worth a damn.


Like all things Apple it looks pretty but has some pretty spectacular failure modes. As with all journaling/delta solutions, recovery is predicated on being able to read earlier data from the repository. A single bad block can render a restore impossible. It's important to have the backup repo on RAID at least or multiple copies in case of read failure.
 
2012-11-13 04:37:09 PM

t3knomanser: I think there are even a few steps that might involve using resource forks


Ha ha, resource forks. You the real deal, t3knomanser.
 
2012-11-13 08:45:04 PM
Always a good backup plan: The 3-2-1 Rule

I've lost way too many drives over the years.

Time Machine and to a lesser extent Windows Backup at least give the average person a fighting chance.
 
2012-11-13 09:19:33 PM
"Apple's U.S. Patent No. 8,311,988" when i read that, i can't not think Apple has just over 8 million patents
 
2012-11-14 12:48:11 AM
Ummmm...isn't this just Autosave? Hasn't it been around forever?
 
2012-11-14 03:01:06 AM

Emposter: Ummmm...isn't this just Autosave? Hasn't it been around forever?


Read the thread. Take your time, don't let your lips get tired.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-11-14 08:03:00 AM
isn't this just Autosave?

More like atomic autosave. Which is what you expect save to be -- either the old or the new version is saved. Originally documents were in one file and saving was effectively atomic. Then documents were split across files but you could use a version control system to keep them in sync, possibly automatically using emacs version control hooks. Now the editor applies metadata using a different, rounder mechanism.
 
2012-11-14 11:12:53 AM

Mutiny32: I could cite Btrfs or XFS as being able to do this. Or Volume Shadow Copy. Or any storage hypervisor like LVM. As for prior art to the original concept, I'll just go ahead and say the Fossil file system that uses the 9P for Bell Labs' Plan 9 operating system, which, in this case is licensed under the Lucent Public License 1.02 and is considered to be OSS by bothe the OSI and the FSF.


THIS

It's basically rsync in daemon mode. And OK, with a few tweaks. So, fine, write up "Method of detecting significant user input", and only that, because that's a novel invention.

The system is clearly broken when it hits 8.3m things. Patents should be about the truly novel, whether in terms of things no-one had ever thought of before, or people solving hard-to-solve problems. When they just do stuff that others are kinda working on, or making a slightly improved version (and really just about personal preference), it's engineering.

Incidentally, I didn't realise that it did any sort of judgement based on changes. That would worry me. If I change a file, I want the new version backed up. I don't care if the software thinks my changes matter or not. I do.
 
2012-11-14 11:55:55 AM

farkeruk: If I change a file, I want the new version backed up. I don't care if the software thinks my changes matter or not. I do.


Relax, guy, your changes to the file will be backed up the next time the Time Machine service runs an hour from now.

If it was really important for that change to be in the previous backup, well, you should have saved it a microsecond sooner.
 
2012-11-14 08:33:10 PM

brantgoose: Um, isn't backing up your hard drive automatically so you can go back to different versions of your files what those external back-up drives are for? Don't they pretty much do the whole job provided you set them that way? I know I haven't be using mine that way because it slows my laptop to a crawl when I want to watch a movie or TV show, but that's the theory, right? Real time backup of all the file types you select, recoverable for each time period you select to back-up.

Of course, it would take a lot of power to back-up absolutely every second--a lot of editors I know back things up manually with every document change of any importance whatsoever. And years and years ago, back in the 1990s, I used something which allowed multiple editors to work simultaneously on a file with all of their edits saved and available for compiling and approval by a master editor. It was called "group ware", I believe. All of this hardware and software seems to have a built-in "time machine" function of some sort.

Is Apple taking a patent out on the wheel? the gear? the pulley? the lever?

They seem to be patent-prone. They took a patent out on the rectangle and the bevelled edge, apparently. The lawsuits have been many and costly to date, and I predict that in some future time, an Android phone is going to come back from the future and try to kill the Beatles to prevent Apple from being born.

That would make a great movie.


You sir, are a glorious entity.
 
2012-11-16 06:46:29 AM
"Woz to return to 1974,"

Is there any evidence he ever left?
 
Displayed 21 of 121 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report