You have to post a thread involving an adult, grown-topic, aka higher education, science fiction movies, Nobel prizes. That will trigger them!
They never seem to mind or complain about threads involving racism, sexism, gossip, trolling.
California lands six universities in the global top 25
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
They never seem to mind or complain about threads involving racism, sexism, gossip, trolling.
Into the Night
Contributor
Buzzword. Listing 50-year old technology ain't 'cutting edge'.
No different than me or any other technology company.
A university is not a company.
A government is not a company.
Most small companies develop technology.
You were never at Exxon. Stop making shit up.
You've never seen a database before?
Into the Night
Contributor
You consider propaganda centers 'higher education'?
You consider science fiction stories 'higher education'?
Science is not a prize.
Science is not a university.
Science is not a government agency.
Science is not an age.
Inversion fallacy.That will trigger them!
Who is 'they'?
BRCĒ shoe laces patent
Protected by U.S. Patent #12,408,733 and international PCT filings, BRCĒ’s Lattice Grip Technology™ re-engineers how materials grip and hold tension.
BRCĒ laces introduce engineered micro-ridge structures—think microscopic scales—woven throughout the lace fibers. When the lace is tied and tension is applied, these microscopic ridges interlock with one another, creating a dynamic mechanical grip that holds up under motion, sweat, pressure, and force
The Science behind our Untie-Resistant Sports Laces | BRCĒ Laces
BRCĒ untie-resistant performance athletic shoelaces help your shoes stay tied. Proven by professional and college athletes. Shop sports and kids' laces.www.brce.shop
Technically speaking the "shoelace" implementation is only a DEPENDENT CLAIM, the independent claims are related to the fiber itself and the surface of the fiber ("composite textile").
It's not like you could just "patent" a shoelace. There's a LOT more you would need to do....like this one.
I'm fascinated now. Did you do a non-thesis track Masters Degree? I thought you were claiming you went to grad school now.
And you don't think patentable materials are "useful"? You need to read 35USC101.
Fortunately, my careers were more meaningful and useful to America than designing shoelace technology.
The amount of time and effort you spent thinking about shoelace technology hints at the probability your supposed patents being equally inconsequential.
Actually it WASN'T. The kind of things that go into getting a "shoelace" patent went into getting any number of patents for Exxon. It's the details that matter.
Interesting that you don't even know how interesting this patent is. If you were to look at the filewrapper you'd see it issued in record time. It wasn't just for a shoelace, however. That was the point you wanted to make: "Look at simple thing I found a patent for!" when in fact you were WRONG about how simple the patent is. It is anything but.
And the stuff one can learn from this sort of prosecution is quite useful across the board.
You weren't in a part of the sciences that lent itself well to patenting but someone in the company was. And they would have found this interesting as well.
For somebody who claims to have a PhD, you don't read very well.
You can search until the cows come home and you'll never find a post of me stating I didn't do a thesis. I'm not responsible for your assumptions and guesses.
When a hardcopy of a Master's thesis gets bound and stuck on the university library shelf, I don't consider that a "publication". It was never sent to any peer reviewed science journal for publication, nor were the vast majority of MS theses when I went to grad school.
You can't be relied on to tell the truth. You lied about your sock puppet accounts, and you obviously fabricated a tale about living in Kenner and driving 'everyday' on Airline highway to UNO.
If you did supposedly get patents approved they were likely as inconsequential as the shoelace technology you were so keen to write about.
Exxon's revolutionary 3D seismic technology was more important and useful to America than your shoelace technology.
Technically speaking it is. Certainly in matters of "prior art" for patenting it would be considered a publically available publication. It was indexed and put on the shelf.
Once again your limited view of the world does you no favors.
Not surprising.
Funny but you seem oblivious to the details of the actual patent you found. You think it's a "shoelace" patent but there's SO MUCH MORE TO IT than that. So much more coverage than just a "shoelace".
I'd wax more poetically about how hard it actually IS to get a patent but it would be far to complex for your simple understanding.
Wow. More of your famous "rankings".
You don't even understand the details of the shoelace patent verbiage (take Claim 1 for example), so why on earth would you understand ANYTHING about 3D seismic tech?
ALSO: Just because you worked for a company with amazing technology does NOT MEAN YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT.
For somebody who claims to have a PhD, you don't read very well.
No post of mine claims I invented 3D seismic imaging technology. I stated that 3D seismic technology is more useful to America than BRCĒ shoelaces.
I was in the first generation of petroleum exploration professionals who had widely available access to 3D seismic. That was a tremendous advantage to helping us find more oil and gas.
I have no regrets about finding gas reserves for America rather then working to build shoelaces.
How do you know that? You don't understand the BRCE patent.
No you weren't. You are about the same age as me. You weren't anything "first generation".
Yeah, you can use the technology. Good for you.
Yet none of your work was worthy of patenting or even publishing. Hmmmm.
LOL @ "technically speaking".
Unlike you, I would be ashamed of bragging that I am "published" just because I have a thesis collecting dust nobody has ever read sitting on a shelf at the University library.
Yuppers. Thems the rules. One of the things you learn in getting a patent agency is what counts as publications and "prior art". Publication takes many forms.
Per the MPEP
"
The statutory phrase "printed publication" has been interpreted to mean that before the critical date the reference must have been sufficiently accessible to the public interested in the art; dissemination and public accessibility are the keys to the legal determination whether a prior art reference was "published." Constant v. Advanced Micro-Devices, Inc., 848 F.2d 1560, 1568, 7 USPQ2d 1057, 1062 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
I. A THESIS PLACED IN A UNIVERSITY LIBRARY OR A DOCUMENT PLACED IN AN ONLINE DATABASE MAY BE PRIOR ART IF SUFFICIENTLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC"
Actually I have about 3-4 peer reviewed publications but most of those happened after my PhD. My masters thesis wasn't worthy of any sort of peer reviewed publication. But it is still "published" per se. Along with my dissertation and my peer reviewed publications and my numerous presentation abstracts.
If you are so keen to call me a "published author", fine with me
Into the Night
Contributor
This is a patent for a shoelace, Murphy.
Into the Night
Contributor
You didn't see anything at Exxon.