On IPs and Patents

On Monday, Google will finally get a chance to defend Android–the leading mobile operating system in the world, the linchpin of its mobile strategy and a lightning rod for criticism–in open court against those who charge Google has stolen its way into the smartphone market, as Oracle’s lawsuit against the company finally comes to trial. Here’s what you need to know:
What’s all this, then? Well, my British-sounding friend, this is where we stand nearly 20 months after Oracle first filed a patent suit against Google, alleging that the Dalvik virtual machine used in Android infringed on Sun Microsystems patented technology. Sun had developed Java and later sold itself to Oracle. That part of the case hasn’t gone exactly how Oracle had hoped: of the seven patents it originally asserted against Google in August 2010, only two will be argued before Judge William Alsup in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California after re-examinations cast doubt on the other five.
Two is better than none, right? That’s certainly true. However, the focus of the case has actually shifted over the last six months from patents to copyright. Oracle is now hoping to convince a jury that Google copied liberally from the APIs (application programming interfaces) associated with Java when creating Android, and that those APIs are subject to copyright protection. But even then, the overall amount of damages Oracle will be able to collect should it prevail has been dramatically reduced by the judge.
What’s an API? Basically, it’s a set of rules and guidelines that one piece of software uses to make sure it can interact with another piece of software. Oracle is saying that engineers working on Java came up with unique artistic ways to steer those interactions, and that should be subject to copyright. Google, as you might imagine, disagrees that APIs are a creative expression. Google says they are functional and not subject to copyright protection.
Who is going to win? That would be the point of the trial. But Oracle’s argument is novel: if it were to prevail, the ruling would be “fairly catastrophic” to software developers, Simon Wardley of Computer Sciences Corp. told BusinessWeek last week. APIs are so widely used that were Oracle’s interpretation to be upheld, a new wave of litigation that would make the mobile patent wars look like Twitter fights could take hold.
This is confusing. Yep. Complex technologies and legal issues will be argued in front of jurors, and these things are difficult to understand for professionals. Judge Alsup tried very hard to get the parties to settle this dispute–especially after the meat of Oracle’s patent claims went away–and he has gone so far as to dub this “the World Series of IP (intellectual property) trials.”
What is Oracle’s best weapon? The day that Oracle lawyers read an e-mail from Google’s Tim Lindholm to Andy Rubin, the leader of the Android project, every eye in the courtroom will be watching the reaction of the jurors. In that e-mail, which Google unsuccessfully tried to keep out of this trial, Lindholm wrote what will be a central part of Oracle’s argument that Google knew it was copying Java:

What we’ve actually been asked to do by Larry [Page] and Sergey [Brin] is to investigate what technical alternatives exist to Java for Android and Chrome. We’ve been over a bunch of these and think they all suck. We conclude that we need to negotiate a license for Java under the terms we need.

Google has argued that Lindholm was reacting to Oracle’s legal threats in suggesting it might be better to take a license rather than try something else, but it may not matter: it’s not out of the question that a few jurors may see this as Lindholm telling his bosses that Google had used something that required a license.
How long is this going to take? Probably eight weeks, although my colleague Jeff Roberts and I won’t be surprised if the parties settle this thing before it ever gets to the jury. There will be three phases: first the companies will argue the copyright question, and then they’ll consider the patent question. Once that is wrapped up, the third phase will involve how much Google might have to pay in damages to Oracle.
What does this mean for Android? At one point it looked like this case was going to be a referendum on the ongoing patent cases being tried against Android partners like Samsung, HTC, and Motorola, but the patent part of this case has definitely taken a back seat to the copyright question. So those cases will likely continue to plod along regardless of what happens in San Francisco.
Google told BusinessWeek that it has removed the disputed parts of Android’s code from the most recent version of the operating system, so it’s also unlikely to affect Android going forward. The most likely outcome, should Google be found in the wrong, is that it will have to cut a big check: albeit for a fraction of what it hopes to spend on its acquisition of Motorola.
This case is unique, however, in that it’s the only Android legal dispute that directly involves Google as a defendant. It’s possible that Oracle could win an injunction against sales of older Android handsets, since it does still have two patents in its arsenal. However, it’s really hard to get an injunction, and given that legal experts seem much more interested in the copyright portion of the trial than the patent portion, Oracle might find that a tough goal.
A lot depends on the classification of technologies and the legal definitions of copyrights, licenses, patents of IPs. An API is generic and cannot be copyrighted unless you have patented your own technologies on the very specific use which the API is just a series of codes of that technology. IPs and technologies must not be seen as a setback for mankind to move forward, and companies who own IPs must be willing to collaborate to get maximum returns as a battle in the courts will do it no good, companies who will cement their foothold needs to invest in their patents and technologies.
– Contributed by Oogle.

Haemophilia : A rare blood disorder

Fibrin (also called Factor Ia) is a fibrous, non-globular protein involved in the clotting of blood. It is formed from fibrinogen by the protease thrombin, and is then polymerised to form a “mesh” that forms a hemostatic plug or clot (in conjunction with platelets) over a wound site.
Fibrin is involved in signal transduction, blood coagulation, and platelet activation.
A protease (also termed peptidase or proteinase) is any enzyme that conducts proteolysis, that is, begins protein catabolism by hydrolysis of the peptide bonds that link amino acids together in the polypeptide chain forming the protein.
Thrombin is a “trypsin-like” serine protease protein that in humans is encoded by the F2 gene.[2][3] Prothrombin (coagulation factor II) is proteolytically cleaved to form thrombin in the coagulation cascade, which ultimately results in the stemming of blood loss. Thrombin in turn acts as a serine protease that converts soluble fibrinogen into insoluble strands of fibrin, as well as catalyzing many other coagulation-related reactions.
The activity of proteases is inhibited by protease inhibitors. One example of protease inhibitors is the serpin superfamily, which includes alpha 1-antitrypsin, C1-inhibitor, antithrombin, alpha 1-antichymotrypsin, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, and neuroserpin.
Natural protease inhibitors include the family of lipocalin proteins, which play a role in cell regulation and differentiation. Lipophilic ligands, attached to lipocalin proteins, have been found to possess tumor protease inhibiting properties. The natural protease inhibitors are not to be confused with the protease inhibitors used in antiretroviral therapy. Some viruses, with HIV/AIDS among them, depend on proteases in their reproductive cycle. Thus, protease inhibitors are developed as antiviral means.

The study of protease inhibitors could lead to a breakthru in the knowledge of fribinogen, which is essential in the clotting of blood, the missing gene factors of a person with this disease compared to a normal person, and the breakdown of molecules found in fribinogen, will unlock all the keys. If you could reverse engineer the protease inhibitors, you could in fact produce fribinogen, but no knowledge is available at present.
– Contributed by Oogle   

Tour of TSMC at Taiwan

Designing the Intelligent software using ARMv8(64bit-1st Generation) architecture. Next Generation(128bit-Huge Cache). The birth of intelligent devices with basic instruction sets, minimum 7″ display to display huge cache of data.

Released in late 2011, ARMv8 represents the first fundamental change to the ARM architecture. It adds a 64-bit architecture, dubbed ‘AArch64’, and a new ‘A64’ instruction set. Within the context of ARMv8, the 32-bit architecture and instruction set are referred to as ‘AArch32’ and ‘A32’, respectively. The Thumb instruction sets are referred to as ‘T32’ and have no 64-bit counterpart. ARMv8 allows 32-bit applications to be executed in a 64-bit OS, and for a 32-bit OS to be under the control of a 64-bit hypervisor.[1] As of March 2012, only the ARMv8-A (“application”) profile has been defined, and no implementations have been announced.

To both AArch32 and AArch64, ARMv8 makes VFP and advanced SIMD (NEON) standard. It also adds cryptography instructions supporting AES and SHA-1/SHA-256.

AArch64 features:

New instruction set, A64
31 general-purpose 64-bit registers
Instructions are still 32 bits long and mostly the same as A32
Most instructions can take 32-bit or 64-bit arguments
Addresses assumed to be 64-bit
A new exception system
Fewer banked registers and modes
Memory translation from 48-bit virtual addresses based on the existing LPAE, which was designed to be easily extended to 64-bit

Right hand/voice controls by Kinetic Technology

Right hand/voice controls by Kinetic Technology

The next UI
Is the rewriting of software
To recognise the points of the exact location of the fingers
In infra red using the two sensors
Of the Kinetic Technology
Even the possibilty of voice control
Using the 4 voice detection sensors
By adding intelligence to a voice recogniton software
Who will meet up to the challenge
To create the next User Interface?

– Contributed by Oogle.

What a Load of Rubbish!

SINGAPORE: Minister of State for Trade and Industry, Lee Yi Shyan said Singapore must be careful about raising wages without a corresponding increase in productivity.
Mr Lee was responding to media questions about Professor Lim Chong Yah’s recent wage restructuring proposal on the sidelines of a community event.
Prof Lim had said a wage revamp is needed to address the issue of growing income inequality.
This includes progressively raising the pay of low income workers and freezing the wages of top earners.
Prof Lim suggested that those earning below S$1,500 a month should have their pay increase by 50 per cent over the next three years, and freezing wages of those earning S$15,000 or more a month, for the same period.
Prof Lim was one of those involved in Singapore’s economic restructuring exercise in the late 1970s.
“In a free market system, for it to work well, we have to be very mindful of the interventions we introduce and if you artificially raise it too much… there are consequences and some of these consequences are not what you want to see,” said Mr Lee.
“So I think by Prof Lim’s proposal, if I understand him correctly… I think this is a very drastic way of raising the wages without corresponding increase in productivity and that will have a wide impact on the economy,” he added.

– CNA/cc 
Just introduce Minimum Wage for those who earn less than $1k by funding $1 for every single dollar of their salary, those affected are not large a grouping, but the funds can be derived by privating the HDB which is a cash cow, is the government willing to do that to achieve Swiss standard of Living? Impact? Those in the income bracket $1k-2k will have a pressure to increase their salary, an increase of business costs of between 3-5%, but does the benefits outweigh the investments? Yes. You will definitely win in 2016, you need to give away to get back what you deserve, understand my logic? Heeheehee.
– Contributed by Oogle. 

An experiment gone wrong

An experiment gone wrong

From the very beginning
US has been waiting for
Someone who possess the tree of knowledge
Every single technology is used to achieve this
When they discover I am the one
They use all kinds of experiments on me
By interfering everything in my life
Even try to control my mind
But I am one step ahead of them
I have developed my own technologies to counter them
Even planning everything so that they will never win
The evil that man does
Even if the world gang up against me
I will refuse to even move an inch
Until I achieve all my goals
To free mankind from this evil
So that peace and prosperity
Will fill this world again.

– Contributed by Oogle

How I derive my Technologies

How I derive my Technologies

Give me any products, even software
Even if it is a black box
I will strip everything apart
And reconstruct everything again
Hit it with inputs
And observe the outputs
Test and probe and observe
To get an intimate knowledge no one can
Even software I can do that
Missing info I will come back to process
To learn everybody’s technology
To get a bird’s eye view of everything
So that I can create my own technologies
By filling in the blanks.

– Contributed by Oogle.