Techrights logo

IRC: #techbytes @ Techrights IRC Network: Thursday, March 30, 2023

(ℹ) Join us now at the IRC channel | ䷉ Find the plain text version at this address (HTTP) or in Gemini (how to use Gemini) with a full GemText version.

schestowitz[TR]. "[wife], [husband] and [PA] knew what they were doing. They never paid to Standard Life the  money they specified in our payslips (management at  Standard Life told me this). We need to sue the company while it still exists to hold them accountable. Some lawyers would agree to do this for a percent of the money awarded rather than per hour spent. Will you join us? I spoke to a lot of past staff."Mar 30 06:41
schestowitz[TR]"xxxxx, do you have xxxxxxx's contact number/email? I could not find one..."Mar 30 06:41
schestowitz[TR]"Are you talking about [boss]? I hadn’t realized they’d moved to America – they’re actually super close to me!"Mar 30 06:52
schestowitz[TR]<li>Mar 30 11:00
schestowitz[TR]                                    <h5><a href="">Documenting KeePass KDBX4 file format</a></h5>Mar 30 11:00
schestowitz[TR]                                    <blockquote>Mar 30 11:00
schestowitz[TR]                                        <p>I’ve been playing around with KeePass databases. One aspect was rather surprising: given how many open source products use this format, it is remarkably underdocumented. At best, you can find outdated and incomplete descriptions by random people. The KeePass developers themselves never bothered providing complete documentation. All you get is a semi-intelligible list of changes from KDBX Mar 30 11:00
schestowitz[TR]3.1 to KDBX 4 and from KDBX 4 to KDBX 4.1. With the starting point not being documented, these are only moderately useful.</p>Mar 30 11:00
schestowitz[TR]                                    </blockquote>Mar 30 11:00
schestowitz[TR]                                </li>Mar 30 11:00
schestowitz[TR]                                Mar 30 11:00
-TechBytesBot/ | Documenting KeePass KDBX4 file format | Almost SecureMar 30 11:00
schestowitz[TR]  <li>Mar 30 11:11
schestowitz[TR]                                    <h5><a href="">Build your own virtual camera operation hand wheels</a></h5>Mar 30 11:11
schestowitz[TR]                                    <blockquote>Mar 30 11:11
schestowitz[TR]                                        <p>Kino Wheels is a physical controller device designed to be used with a dedicated simulator. That simulator is a 3D environment that the user films with a virtual camera. The Kino Wheels device contains two hand wheels, which pan and tilt the virtual camera. This serves a very niche purpose, but could be useful for camera operators in training. Kino Wheels isn’t a commercial product, so anMar 30 11:11
schestowitz[TR]yone interested will need to build the controller themselves and then download the simulator.</p>Mar 30 11:11
schestowitz[TR]                                    </blockquote>Mar 30 11:11
schestowitz[TR]                                </li>Mar 30 11:11
-TechBytesBot/ | Build your own virtual camera operation hand wheels | Arduino BlogMar 30 11:11
schestowitz[TR]   <li>Mar 30 11:12
schestowitz[TR]                                    <h5><a href="">Pre-notification dilemmas</a></h5>Mar 30 11:12
schestowitz[TR]                                    <blockquote>Mar 30 11:12
schestowitz[TR]                                        <p>In 2011 I started to send “pre-notifications” about pending curl security vulnerabilities to the distros mailing list (back then it was still called linux-distros).</p>Mar 30 11:12
schestowitz[TR]                                        <p>For several years we also asked them for CVE IDs for the new vulnerabilities that we were about to publish to the world. By notifying the distros ahead of time, the idea is that they get a little head-start to fix their curl packages so that at the day when we publish the vulnerabilities to the world, they can already provide curl upgrades.</p>Mar 30 11:12
schestowitz[TR]                                    </blockquote>Mar 30 11:12
schestowitz[TR]                                </li>Mar 30 11:12
-TechBytesBot/#techbytes-Pre-notification dilemmas | daniel.haxx.seMar 30 11:12
schestowitz[TR]x 30 11:28
schestowitz[TR]# more tiktok spamMar 30 11:28
-TechBytesBot/ | Woman finds rare Picasso plates at thrift store, cashes in | Boing BoingMar 30 11:28
schestowitz[TR]   <li>Mar 30 12:02
schestowitz[TR]                            <h5><a href="">Father Of Russian Sixth-Grader Who Drew Anti-War Picture Escapes House Arrest, Given Prison Term In Absentia</a></h5>Mar 30 12:02
schestowitz[TR]                            <blockquote>Mar 30 12:02
schestowitz[TR]                                <p>[...] Moskalyov came to the attention of police after his daughter Maria, a sixth-grader, drew a picture in an art class in December calling for peace in Ukraine. [...]</p>Mar 30 12:02
schestowitz[TR]                            </blockquote>Mar 30 12:02
schestowitz[TR]                        </li>Mar 30 12:02
-TechBytesBot/ | Father Of Russian Sixth-Grader Who Drew Anti-War Picture Escapes House Arrest, Given Prison Term In AbsentiaMar 30 12:02
schestowitz[TR] <li>Mar 30 12:38
schestowitz[TR]                                    <h5><a href="">Americans hooked on Chinese apps</a></h5>Mar 30 12:38
schestowitz[TR]                                    <blockquote>Mar 30 12:38
schestowitz[TR]                                        <p>Why it matters: Mobile apps are one of the most powerful vectors for expanding trade and exporting soft power, given how widely accessible they are, how much time is spent on them, and how little regulatory oversight there is online.</p>Mar 30 12:38
schestowitz[TR]                                    </blockquote>Mar 30 12:38
schestowitz[TR]                                </li>Mar 30 12:38
schestowitz[TR]                                Mar 30 12:38
-TechBytesBot/ | Some Chinese apps beyond TikTok have hooked American usersMar 30 12:38
schestowitz[TR]  <li>Mar 30 13:24
schestowitz[TR]                <h5><a href="">France becomes the first European country to legalize biometric surveillance</a></h5>Mar 30 13:24
schestowitz[TR]                <blockquote>Mar 30 13:24
schestowitz[TR]                    <p>The article 7 of the Law on Olympic Games’ organization has been adopted by the national parliament, “Assemblée Nationale”, formalizing the introduction of Algorithmic Video-Surveillance in French Law, until December 2024. Due to the fuss regarding the retirements reform and following an expeditive-as-usual process, French government succeeded in making acceptable one of the most dangerous technology evMar 30 13:24
schestowitz[TR]er deployed. Using lies and fake storytellings, the government escaped from the technical, political and judicial consequences in terms of mass surveillance. Supported by MPs from the governmental majority and far-right parties, algorithmic video-surveillance has been legalized backed by lies, undermining always more the democratic game.</p>Mar 30 13:24
schestowitz[TR]                </blockquote>Mar 30 13:24
schestowitz[TR]            </li>Mar 30 13:24
-TechBytesBot/ | France becomes the first European country to legalize biometric surveillance  – La Quadrature du NetMar 30 13:24
schestowitz[TR]    Max Drei and Mr Hagel are amongst the proponents of the line that the description should be left untouched. Proof of the pudding is another one. <br /><br />Their plea is understandable, but has two drawbacks. It is not supported by Art 84, second sentence, and the existence of a long line of case law insistiMar 30 15:21
schestowitz[TR]ng upon adaptation of the description. <br /><br />One thing should however be clarified: it is whether Art 69 should be used or not when interpreting the claims during prosecution at the EPO. The dual use of Art 69 in Mr Hagel's comments shows that clarification is indeed needed. Does Art 69 apply indifferently to the description as filed or as granted is also an interesting question?<br /><br />In my humble opinion, Art 69 and itsMar 30 15:21
schestowitz[TR] protocol primarily come into play when it comes to a decision of a national court on infringement under the DoE.<br /><br />In proceedings before the EPO, Art 69 should only play a role when assessing the scope of protection in opposition under Art 123(3). <br /><br />Provided that the claims are clear, which is the primary requirement under Art 84, recourse to the description whether original or as granted, should remain exceptionMar 30 15:21
schestowitz[TR]al. <br />After all, G 3/14 has set clear limits to the examination of clarity in opposition. If what has been granted is unclear, G 3/14 has made clear that we have to leave with it. That in such a situation it might be necessary to have a look at the description is unavoidable. It should however remain an exception. <br /><br />The difficulty in interpretation of the claims should then not be compounded by leaving in the descriptiMar 30 15:21
schestowitz[TR]on original statements which are at odds with what has been granted. One difficulty is enough. This means that the description has to be amended in order for it to “support” the claims. <br /><br />This is especially the case when the claims are amended by combining claims as filed or limited with features from the description or the drawings. In case of dependent claims, it is more than often that their subject-matter is designMar 30 15:21
schestowitz[TR]ated in the original description as optional. When the independent claim is limited with optional features, those features are not any longer optional. That this has to be clarified before grant is manifest. That embodiments not falling any longer under the granted claims should as well be marked as such is also manifest. Last but not least, I still have not seen one patent revoked under Art 123(2) due to the adaptation of the descrMar 30 15:21
schestowitz[TR]iption. <br /><br />As far as Art 84 and support is concerned, we should stick to the fact that we have different, apparently irreconcilable, points of view.<br /><br />But here we are quite far from G 2/21 and assessing IS (or sufficiency). <br /><br />As I commented in another blog, that the two notions/criteria replacing “plausibility” (&quot;encompassed by the technical teaching&quot; and should be &quot;embodied by the sameMar 30 15:21
schestowitz[TR] invention&quot;) will give raise to “dynamic interpretations” is more than probable.<br />It is a euphemism when the EBA adds that it is aware of the abstractness of the new criteria.<br />Normally decisions of the EBA are meant to clarify a legally confuse situation. Strong doubts are permitted whether G 2/21 answers this fundamental requirement.<br />Mar 30 15:21
-TechBytesBot/ | G 2/21: Is the technical effect embodied by the invention as originally disclosed? - The IPKatMar 30 15:21

Generated by 2.6 | ䷉ find the plain text version at this address (HTTP) or in Gemini (how to use Gemini) with a full GemText version.