(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.
| *parsifal has quit (Quit: Leaving) | May 23 00:35 | |
| *parsifal (~parsifal@uuar9r28yasyu.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 23 00:36 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > LOL, I literally make those same mistakes forever. | May 23 02:40 |
|---|---|---|
| schestowitz[TR2] | > | May 23 02:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > Yes, it does pain me - but really I have nothing but awesome happy | May 23 02:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > memories of my days in Finland. The world changes, At least it's not | May 23 02:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | > the Russies, yet. :) | May 23 02:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Yes, we had a lengthy discussion last night. | May 23 02:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | It was about the mental health crisis, world conflicts, and how that leads people to harass me and my family. | May 23 02:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | I have long said, being fine (for oneself) is fine, but if your neighbour is having a miserable life, then you too will suffer. | May 23 02:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Collective happiness in Finland may be measures as "highest", but as a Finn keepss reminding me, those measures are relative and also not objective. | May 23 02:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Some of the world's happiest people are in poor nations (in spite of the poverty), but their yardstick of contentment is not similar to ours. | May 23 02:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Finland has a very positive (outwards) image, but based on what Sompi tells me, there's a dark side and it grew darker over the years. | May 23 02:40 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | For me, writing about the world's issues - expressing myself - is one outlet. If we cannot talk about it, that won't be fixed. If we cannot fix it, at least we can make the issue known. This is what makes literary works such as Digital Vegan invaluable. Society progresses when enough people come to recognise the underlying issues in society. | May 23 02:40 |
| *silverien has quit (Ping timeout: 120 seconds) | May 23 05:03 | |
| *parsifal has quit (Quit: Leaving) | May 23 07:34 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | "A genuine selfmade billionaire — Crooked Timber" | May 23 08:04 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | x https://crookedtimber.org/2024/05/22/a-genuine-selfmade-billionaire/ | May 23 08:04 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # disinfo regarding bill's parent's money | May 23 08:04 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-crookedtimber.org | A genuine selfmade billionaire — Crooked Timber | May 23 08:04 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | x https://ubuntu.com//blog/ubuntu-supports-azure-cobalt-100-vms | May 23 08:05 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | # did not click | May 23 08:05 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-canonical.com | NO TITLE | May 23 08:05 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <li> | May 23 09:25 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <h5><a href="https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/22/apt_gains_keepassxc_loses/">In Debian, APT 3 gains features – but KeepassXC loses them</a></h5> | May 23 09:25 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <blockquote> | May 23 09:25 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <p>As we noted last year when 2.6 appeared, Apt is a vital part of Debian: it's the tool that performs automatic dependency resolution. When you install a Debian package, Apt works out what supporting dependencies that program needs – libraries and so on – and automatically installs them too, so most programs can be installed with a single command. Apt first appeared in Debian 2.1 in 1999 | May 23 09:25 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | and gave the distro a major advantage over the Red Hat family of distros for half a decade. </p> | May 23 09:25 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | </blockquote> | May 23 09:25 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | </li> | May 23 09:25 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.theregister.com | In Debian, APT 3 gains features – but KeepassXC loses them • The Register | May 23 09:25 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <li> | May 23 12:09 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <h5><a href="https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2024/05/21/a-history-of-a-logo-with-a-colon-and-two-slashes/">A history of a logo with a colon and two slashes</a></h5> | May 23 12:09 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <blockquote> | May 23 12:09 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | <p>In the Mozilla all-hands meeting in Hawaii in December 2016, I was approached by the Mozilla logo design team who asked me if I (we?) would have any issues with them moving forward with the logo version using the colon slash slash. </p> | May 23 12:09 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | </blockquote> | May 23 12:09 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | </li> | May 23 12:09 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-A history of a logo with a colon and two slashes | daniel.haxx.se | May 23 12:09 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://patentblog.kluweriplaw.com/2024/05/14/the-epo-lost-in-regard-to-translations/ | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | " | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | The American saying “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” is a bit hard to translate into French or German, but not for the interpreters employed by the EPO. Whenever I used interpretation at OP, their work was nothing short of remarkable, as long as someone bothered to actually listen to the interpretation (very occasionally, this isn’t the case, e.g. because the one person who needed interpretation hasn’t shown up). And a | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | s long as some parties will speak in French or German, the need for interpretation will not go away. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Also, under item 2.3 “Risk: Loss of competitiveness of EPO as an employer”, one can read: “Health risks related to poor sound in ViCo already make the EPO less attractive as an employer when other international institutions have largely returned to in-person simultaneous interpretation for meetings. This is due to increased risk of auditory incidents and vastly increased cognitive load when working in RSI.” I can attest tha | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | t simultaneous interpretation in ViCo seems to be incredibly tough on the interpreters. In one OP I attended in ViCo, the interpreters had to interrupt constantly to get the patentee’s attorneys to speak closer to their microphone. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Barry Moore | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 14, 2024 at 6:29 pm | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Having regularly benefited from the excellent translation provided by the EPO translation team, I cannot but echo the sentiment expressed. The EPO prides itself on providing a quality of services that transcends language and nationality- if it is not broken, do not try and fix it ! | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Caballero | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 15, 2024 at 9:00 am | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | So expensive translations were a fairytale after all. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Max Drei | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 15, 2024 at 1:28 pm | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Once again, Oscar Wilde was on to it, ages ago. As he said, “A cynic is somebody who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing”. It’s not just the cynics amongst us though, is it”. Highly-trained modern business managers are the world’s experts in knowing the price of everything, and amongst the world’s worst at putting an accurate value on that which they so painstakingly price. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | I suppose they would retort that it’s “not my job” to set a value. For that, they rely on the televant experts and specialists. Is that then why management now solicits the opinion of the B&F Cttee? | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Which prompts me to wonder whether management already knows what answer to expect from the Committee. Perhaps it has already offered the Cttee a draft answer and now just wants it signed? One suspects that a “Call for comments” is a device used by management to bring to light any “trouble-makers” on board ship. Who serves on the B&F Cttee, I wonder. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | My impression is that, sigh, EPO management gets what it wants, every time, regardless of the strength of any counter-arguments. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Can readers tell me that I am way too much of a cynic? I do hope so. But I doubt it. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Not cynical whatsoever | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 17, 2024 at 2:49 pm | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Dear Max Drew, | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | There is nothing cynical in stating the fact that the tail is wagging the dog, be it at the B&F Committee or at the AC. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | The AC and its committees have completely given their control function of EPO’s management. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | The AC rubber stamps everything coming from the 10th floor thanks to the modulation of the cooperation budget! | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | This fact is a disgrace on its own! | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | A hidden agenda? | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 15, 2024 at 5:10 pm | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | I can only follow previous commenters: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. Why on Earth does a system have to be changed and made much more complicated. Even if the EPO might expect some financial gains, is it really worth it? | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | One could however suspect more behind the move, a kind of hidden agenda. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Up to now, a change of language has been granted at the UPC, but to my knowledge, there has not yet been any request for simultaneous interpretation during a hearing at the UPC. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Simultaneous interpretation can be requested and the judge-rapporteur will decide on the request or even order simultaneous interpretation for the oral hearing, see RoP 109. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Costs for simultaneous interpretation are costs of the proceedings, and hence the losing party will have to bear these costs, up to the ceilings in place, cf. RoP 155-157. Only costs for simultaneous interpretation for the benefit of the panel will be borne by the UPC. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | The status of interpreters before the UPC is not clear. It is not sure at all that interpreters will have the same status at the UPC than at the EPO or at the EU level. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Especially taxation problems might occur as only the earnings of the judges are totally free of national taxes and are not even taken into account for determining the whole taxable revenues in their country of tax residence. See the PPI, Art 9(3). | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | So why not start earlier and get read of the special status of interpreters at the EPO right now? Interpreters will have a difficult time anyway, so they better get used to it. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Some representatives before the EPO are also representatives before the UPC. It will be interesting to pinpoint those “dual” representatives which do not, in view of the possible costs for their client at the UPC, request interpretation at the UPC, but at the EPO. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | In a next move, R 4(1) could as well be abolished, or the conditions for obtaining simultaneous interpretation made more difficult and complicated. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Those representatives having pursued OP after interpreters have left, could be treated the same as the dual representatives defined above here. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Knowing how the upper management at the EPO is keen on financial gains, the preceding thoughts are not completely out of place. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | LightBlue | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 17, 2024 at 9:55 am | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Maybe the first instance OPs should be more strict on responding to requests for translators along the model of the BoAs. Hearing a German attorney speak in English in German language proceedings in order to benefit from an English translation for their client grates somewhat. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Not as simple as you claim | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 18, 2024 at 1:36 am | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | When a party requires simultaneous interpretation one month before the OP before an OD, it can be difficult to realise whether it is just for its client’s convenience. This only becomes visible at the OP. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | A board can pick up this problem much earlier. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | As accompanying persons have no procedural right to address the deciding body, requesting simultaneous interpretation for an accompanying person will not be granted! | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | curious attorney | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 15, 2024 at 8:54 pm | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | 160 translators? Seems like a waste of public money to me… anyway, let’s wait and see how the new system works and then judge! It seems a bit biased to me to think too far ahead | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | upsidedown | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 16, 2024 at 11:57 pm | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Clever point : let’s make it like the UK Railway system : first disband it whilst pretending private does it better; then ruin it since private can often be more incompetent than public, to finally renationalise it…. Makes sense ! | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | curious attorney | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 17, 2024 at 9:14 pm | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | The number of oppositions at the EPO is decreasing, as are the number of appeals, so some flexibility in translation resources doesn’t seem out of the blue, and in general, if you don’t want to make a mistake, the easiest thing to do is to do nothing… | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | The tail is wagging the dog | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 17, 2024 at 2:58 pm | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | You might be one of those lucky people who can argue in our mother tongue and have a good command of the other two official languages of the EPO. This is not the case of many people! | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | There is no bias when looking ahead of what is likely to happen. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | This move is like any “pilot” started at the EPO. It is an acquired fact that EPO’s higher management will always be right in what it decides as the tail is wagging the dog for many years now! | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | Professional interpreter | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | May 18, 2024 at 3:44 pm | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | It’s not public money, and the number of people on the list is irrelevant to the expenditure, since they are only paid for the days they actually work. | May 23 12:56 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | " | May 23 12:56 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-patentblog.kluweriplaw.com | The EPO – Lost in Regard to Translations? - Kluwer Patent Blog | May 23 12:56 | |
| *psydroid2 (~psydroid@j9gt2haw74jrk.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 23 13:27 | |
| *Nahawand_ (~Nahawand@freenode-2ue.6ih.pu7h8v.IP) has joined #techbytes | May 23 14:24 | |
| *fury999i| has quit (Quit: ZNC 1.8.2+deb3.1 - https://znc.in) | May 23 15:11 | |
| *fury999i- (~fury999io@j2r64gtkf9rf4.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 23 15:12 | |
| *parsifal (~parsifal@uuar9r28yasyu.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 23 15:15 | |
| *fury999i- has quit (Quit: ZNC 1.8.2+deb3.1 - https://znc.in) | May 23 15:17 | |
| *fury999i- (~fury999io@j2r64gtkf9rf4.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 23 15:21 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1sDxIqT9#OP | May 23 16:16 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes- ( status 403 @ https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1sDxIqT9#OP ) | May 23 16:16 | |
| schestowitz[TR2] | "" | May 23 16:16 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | IBM deploys power much more like the mainframe This is most likely a request from the large ISV’s. IBM continues to manage Enterprise Power into the “Niche” corner. | May 23 16:16 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/22/ibm_power_virtual_server_private_cloud/ | May 23 16:16 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | IBM is treating scale out power like folks treat TV’s. Just replace them when they break as they become commodity items. The only way IBM will be able to monetize scale out is to license the IP (sunk costs). Due to the low volumes Power scale out is now generating, a commodity manufacturer will most likely fill the assembly,marketing/sales, and servicing roles. IBM will move into the DuPont mode Design, and license it. There’s | May 23 16:16 |
| schestowitz[TR2] | profit to be made, but IBM’s high current overhead su-ks all of the life out of power. | May 23 16:16 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.theregister.com | IBM packages its Power cloud into 'pods' that run on-prem • The Register | May 23 16:16 | |
| *x-amarsh04 has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!) | May 23 17:37 | |
| *x-amarsh04 (~amarsh04@qezxp5nudz5uq.irc) has joined #techbytes | May 23 17:43 | |
| *psydroid2 has quit (Quit: KVIrc 5.0.0 Aria http://www.kvirc.net/) | May 23 22:08 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.6 | ䷉ find the plain text version at this address (HTTP) or in Gemini (how to use Gemini) with a full GemText version.