josaka

8 ms·

1.
by josaka 2y ago
I suspect it's, in part, because humidity is low. The fab needs to tightly control humidity and temperature. Pulling water from air is energy intensive. Facilities team in the fab I used to work in said their most energy intensive d
2.
by josaka 3y ago
My intuition matches yours. It's abundant enough to find its way into alloys for jet engine blades at single digit percentages: https://www.thenakedscientists.com/articles/science-features... And if used in chip
3.
by josaka 3y ago
Same fab, same experience. I would add that a deep understanding (and ability to explain) statistics was more critical than understanding the underlying device physics for most roles I encountered. Enormous amounts of noisy data, characte
4.
by josaka 3y ago
Lawfare did a nice analysis of whether Section 230 shields model hosts (likely no): https://www.lawfareblog.com/section-230-wont-protect-chatgpt Professor Volohk has a public draft article on liability for output of AI mod
5.
by josaka 4y ago
It would be wonderful if it was easy for most people to represent themselves. My sense is most people struggle to express themselves precisely and clearly enough to avoid being at a massive disadvantage to someone who can do so. To my untr
6.
by josaka 4y ago
Customers with assets in custodial accounts of an exchange that goes bankrupt are likely general unsecured creditors, and the assets are probably property of the bankruptcy estate. https://www.creditslips.org/creditslips&#x
7.
by josaka 4y ago
Yes, but in practice, this is just an opening offer in a negotiation. Parties will typically counter with something like: depose me in my home town for no more than x hours, and I'll produce what docs I have if you sign a protective o
8.
by josaka 4y ago
A related issue is whether the availability of AI as a tool for creating innovation should raise the bar for non-obviousness. Both effects could make it harder to obtain patents.
9.
by josaka 4y ago
This ruling did not survive on appeal: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=542088572460013...
10.
by josaka 4y ago
Bahy-Dole Act and DoD Federal Acquisition Regs. are the answer to your question about "who gets access to these patents" and should be the focus of reform if you find them inadequate. Outside my area of the law, but my understandi
11.
by josaka 4y ago
I think this might be the PCT application in question (same name as the founder, and about fusion): https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO20... Discusses an "orbital confinement fusion rea
12.
by josaka 4y ago
It's a common tactic in patents in my experience. You're not going to sue yourself. So you describe your invention in the context in which a competitor would use it. Of course, this would typically be coupled with a disclosure t
13.
by josaka 5y ago
There are gaps, but in almost all cases in the US in my experience, non-inventor owners record their interest in pubic records at the USPTO assignment database to perfect title: https://assignment.uspto.gov/patent/index
14.
by josaka 5y ago
I think the sweet spot for some blockchain use cases is where contract enforcement doesn't work well. It's really hard to seek redress for diffuse, low-grade breach. A 10 million people with one dollar in damages are less likely
15.
by josaka 5y ago
True, but there's value in reducing the number of parties you must trust to get something done. It's easy to imagine that, at the margin, there are a subset of collective action problems that will get solved if you can reduce the
16.
by josaka 5y ago
After the TX grid failure last winter, it's probably not a coincidence that Samsung's new facility will be near ERCOT's operation center in Taylor, which manages the TX grid, and will likely be the last load to shed when the
17.
by josaka 5y ago
TSA's counsel argued that the asserted patent was obvious in view of one prior art reference that disclosed scanning trays and a second prior art reference that disclosed carts at both ends of a machine processing trays. To make this
18.
by josaka 5y ago
This is probably the key passage in the validity ruling: "Defendant’s disavowal in pretrial practice of having its experts combine prior art was a serious handicap at trial." Not a good place to be as a defendant in a patent suit
19.
by josaka 5y ago
Here's the ruling where validity is analyzed by the court (again, which has not been reviewed on appeal as far as I can tell): https://cite.case.law/fed-cl/129/25/
20.
by josaka 5y ago
The most recent ruling in this case is available here: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=506583781665731... Validity was addressed back in 2016, but has not been reviewed on appeal yet. If others can find a link
21.
by josaka 5y ago
Better to look at the claims, which define the scope of rights granted. That said, the broadest claim pretty much tracks this language. I wonder if the broadest claim survived, or if the verdict was based on a narrower dependent claim.
22.
by josaka 5y ago
I think rpx and unified patents do something like this.
23.
by josaka 5y ago
You can, in some cases, sue for damages accrued up to six years in the past. You don't have to sue for those before the patent expires. You just stop accruing new damages when the patent expires. Past damages is what was allegedly a
24.
by josaka 5y ago
It's weird, but standard. These exchanges are a formal way of fleshing out what the parties do and do not dispute. Both sides limit what the agree to as much as they can with a straight face, and everything is qualified as much as po
25.
by josaka 5y ago
It's a defense against trolls acquiring those patents and leverage to force license on transfer deals with other large cos.
26.
by josaka 5y ago
I think it's because it's dry. Facilities guy in the semi plant I used to work in told me that their highest energy usage was when it was humid, not when it's hot or cold. Said the energy cost to cool the humid air to pull
27.
by josaka 5y ago
I should add that the abandoned patent application is a continuation-in-part of two issued patents, if folks are curious: 8,433,617 and 8,346,624, both of which issued before the bar for software patents was raised (and blurred, to mix meta
28.
by josaka 5y ago
That's not a patent. It's a published application, which was abandoned after being rejected by the USPTO. This can be verified on the USPTO's public PAIR system. The broader point about yokels from rural TX is less true tha
29.
by josaka 5y ago
This is the right answer, and it has implications for the development of patent law: folks cheering the restrictions on NDAs should anticipate that doing so will tend to increase pressure on lawmakers to strengthen patent rights, as those
30.
by josaka 5y ago
20 years is a good first approximation for patent term. Patents expire 20 years from the first non-provisional priority date in the US, plus whatever term extension is granted by the USPTO to compensate you for USPTO delays, less any term

More ›