From: Hector Santos on
Hence +the problem with the Patent System - even morons can get one.

It wouldn't be all a slap in the face if we knew that you were some
great inventor and programmer, someone to be admire. But you're not
and worst, you have to hang around here not even trying to show you
have some reasonable amount of intelligence. I mean, its like you know
it but don't care. Really, you are so bad at this that everything
seems new to you. The world was started just yesterday in your mind
and just when you think you believe you got a "Ah Ha" a flash of
genius, in your mind, you believe it must be novel hence patentable.

The only reason I even bother to this extent was to show really just
to much of a primitive application you have, to show how simple this
all is, all trivial, all prior intelligence, in the hope you will gain
some humility that you really aren't that smart.

I really do not like people like you, not because you are what you
are, there are plenty like you, but you have no ethics and come into
these forums trolling for ideas and threw it in our face like its nothing.

The only sanity in all this is knowing you couldn't enforce anything
you think you have generated from other people's work. You're not
going to get anything done because you don't have the capacity to do
so. You haven't yet in what 2-3 years? What makes you think you get
anything in the next 11 years?

Later

Peter Olcott wrote:

> "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eP3%2304IzKHA.5940(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Of course, the real ultimate question is if you will
>> finished by the time your patent expires.
>
> The latest improvements would likely qualify for another
> patent, thus extending the term, plus there is a whole other
> invention of using this technology to provide an easy to use
> universal graphical user interface scripting language.
>



--
HLS
From: Peter Olcott on

"Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:u2uv2lJzKHA.5940(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hence +the problem with the Patent System - even morons
> can get one.
>
> It wouldn't be all a slap in the face if we knew that you
> were some great inventor and programmer, someone to be
> admire. But you're not and worst, you have to hang around
> here not even trying to show you have some reasonable
> amount of intelligence. I mean, its like you know it but
> don't care. Really, you are so bad at this that
> everything seems new to you. The world was started just
> yesterday in your mind and just when you think you believe
> you got a "Ah Ha" a flash of genius, in your mind, you
> believe it must be novel hence patentable.
>
> The only reason I even bother to this extent was to show
> really just to much of a primitive application you have,
> to show how simple this all is, all trivial, all prior
> intelligence, in the hope you will gain some humility that
> you really aren't that smart.

I was number one in several of my classes of fifty students
even beating three students that were instructors of other
classes and taking this advanced operating systems class on
their way to a PhD. I graduated in the top 15% of my class.
My IQ is borderline genius, the same IQ as the average MD.

Any perception that you have to the contrary is a
misperception. Ah but, then you already know that.

>
> I really do not like people like you, not because you are
> what you are, there are plenty like you, but you have no
> ethics and come into these forums trolling for ideas and
> threw it in our face like its nothing.

I don't see it as throwing it in your face when I ask you
(or Joe) to prove your point. I diligently seek the truth.
perhaps most people that are not convinced by free advice
simply drop it and move on. Since I am a diligent seeker of
the truth I wanted to press on and find it.

You and Joe did give me some excellent help, and I really
appreciate that. The idea to base my web application on HTTP
was the best. I do not appreciate the rudeness, and
denigration.

>
> The only sanity in all this is knowing you couldn't
> enforce anything you think you have generated from other
> people's work. You're not going to get anything done
> because you don't have the capacity to do so. You haven't
> yet in what 2-3 years? What makes you think you get
> anything in the next 11 years?

It is not very easy for me to base anything on anyone else's
work when my work is unique in the world. Although there
are many stochastic OCR processes, this technology being old
hat, there are very few deterministic ones, and none of
these have the consistent accuracy across so many different
kinds of machine generated character glyphs. I also doubt
that any can achieve the 90,000 characters per second
recognition rate.

In any case the purpose of commercializing this as a web
server is to use trade secret IP protection for the latest
technological advances, at least until the next patent
issues.

>
> Later
>
> Peter Olcott wrote:
>
>> "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote in
>> message news:eP3%2304IzKHA.5940(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> Of course, the real ultimate question is if you will
>>> finished by the time your patent expires.
>>
>> The latest improvements would likely qualify for another
>> patent, thus extending the term, plus there is a whole
>> other invention of using this technology to provide an
>> easy to use universal graphical user interface scripting
>> language.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> HLS


From: Pete Delgado on

"Liviu" <lab2k1(a)gmail.c0m> wrote in message
news:eUt13uGzKHA.5332(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> "Pete Delgado" <Peter.Delgado(a)NoSpam.com> wrote...
>>
>> I believe that your interpretation of "fault tolerance" is that a
>> catastrophic event could happen to your system and you application
>> would not lose *any* data. Is this the definition that you are using?
>
> Absent any catastrophic events, a system might still be called
> "fault tolerant" if it managed at least one successful run under
> controlled conditions on developer's machine, despite all faults
> with its design and implementation ;-)

Given his level of understanding, I sincerely doubt that his system can
possibly overcome all of the faults that you mention! ;-)

-Pete


From: Pete Delgado on

"Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote in message
news:9ZSdnc_zBLvdfzbWnZ2dnUVZ_qadnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
> But I have said many times now that I will not scale by processes I will
> scale by threads, and these threads all share that same data so the
> benefit that you keep pushing about memory mapped files continues to be
> moot. I may actually scale by servers instead of processes or threads,
> because five single core servers cost half as much as one quad core
> server.

The laughable part of all this is that you are completely serious! So, given
your obvious naivete about development you now suggest that you can
implement your system using multiple servers all the while meeting or
exceeding your design and performance goals?

All I can say is good luck...

-Pete


From: Hector Santos on
Pete Delgado wrote:


>> But I have said many times now that I will not scale by processes I will
>> scale by threads, and these threads all share that same data so the
>> benefit that you keep pushing about memory mapped files continues to be
>> moot. I may actually scale by servers instead of processes or threads,
>> because five single core servers cost half as much as one quad core
>> server.
>
> The laughable part of all this is that you are completely serious!


That pretty much best describe it.

> So, given
> your obvious naivete about development you now suggest that you can
> implement your system using multiple servers all the while meeting or
> exceeding your design and performance goals?


Its patent pending! <g>

--
HLS