Re: [Vo]:Close the Patent Office
Michael Foster wrote: It is said that the head of the U.S. Patent Office wanted it closed in 1845, because everything significant had already been invented. That is a myth. No truth to it at all. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Close the Patent Office
Jed Rothwell wrote: Michael Foster wrote: It is said that the head of the U.S. Patent Office wanted it closed in 1845, because everything significant had already been invented. That is a myth. No truth to it at all. - Jed I saw a quote attributed to a man who was the head of the USPTO saying that every thing that was to be invented had been invented. I realize that this is not the same as saying that the USPTO should be closed, however it is the proverbial grain of truth. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Close the Patent Office
thomas malloy wrote: It is said that the head of the U.S. Patent Office wanted it closed in 1845, because everything significant had already been invented. That is a myth. No truth to it at all. - Jed I saw a quote attributed to a man who was the head of the USPTO saying that every thing that was to be invented had been invented. I realize that this is not the same as saying that the USPTO should be closed, however it is the proverbial grain of truth. This comment is attributed to P.O. commissioner Charles Duell. However, he was knowledgeable and he did an excellent job, and all of his remaining published statements on the subject take the opposite view. See: http://www.myoutbox.net/posass.htm He couldn't have said this and meant it. I have heard two versions of the story: 1. He prefaced the statement with something like: Surely nobody believes that everything . . . 2. This is a completely unfounded myth. Someone who sounds like he knows what he is talking about recently told me that. See comment #95, here: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/25/did-bill-gates-really-say-that/ Frankly, I cannot imagine that anyone at the P.O. would ever believe that we have reached the end of science! The editors at Sci. Am. believe that, but they are extraordinarily stupid people. You wonder how they ever got where they are. I suppose Parkinson's Law explains it. Actually, come to think of it, while equally stupid people might end up in the P.O., I doubt they would think this is the end of science. Extreme stupidity that inhibits the central task of the institution is rare. The central task of Sci. Am. is to sell magazines and make Sci. Am. look authoritative. Attacking cold fusion and declaring that this is the end of science helps sell magazines. In that sense, these people are not stupid. They are irresponsible, immoral, and ultimately self-defeating I hope, but in the near term they do know how to sell magazines. Anyway, I know for a fact that Horgan and the other editors are certified blockheads, even if they know how to sell magazines. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Close the Patent Office
I already said I didn't know whether it was true or not, and it does have the ring of being apocryphal. However, that doesn't change my opinion that the USPTO should be closed now or severely re-organized. It is corrupt, lethargic, and incompetent. Unfortunately, an average person has the impression that a patent gives the imprimatur of credibility, which is why, I suppose this expensive joke is allow to continue. M. --- Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael Foster wrote: It is said that the head of the U.S. Patent Office wanted it closed in 1845, because everything significant had already been invented. That is a myth. No truth to it at all. - Jed You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
Re: [Vo]:Close the Patent Office
Michael Foster wrote: I already said I didn't know whether it was true or not, and it does have the ring of being apocryphal. I was just pointing out that it definitely is apocryphal. However, that doesn't change my opinion that the USPTO should be closed now or severely re-organized. It is corrupt, lethargic, and incompetent. I agree completely! - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Close the Patent Office
Jed Rothwell wrote: thomas malloy wrote: I saw a quote attributed to a man who was the head of the USPTO saying that every thing that was to be invented had been invented. I realize that this is not the same as saying that the USPTO should be closed, however it is the proverbial grain of truth. This comment is attributed to P.O. commissioner Charles Duell. However, he was knowledgeable and he did an excellent job, and all of his remaining published statements on the subject take the opposite view. See: http://www.myoutbox.net/posass.htm He couldn't have said this and meant it. I have heard two versions of the story: 1. He prefaced the statement with something like: Surely nobody believes that everything . . . 2. This is a completely unfounded myth. Someone who sounds like he knows what he is talking about recently told me that. See comment #95, here: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/25/did-bill-gates-really-say-that/ Frankly, I cannot imagine that anyone at the P.O. would ever believe that we have reached the end of science! That would be rather self defeating wouldn't it. The editors at Sci. Am. believe that, but they are extraordinarily stupid people. You wonder how they ever got where they are. I suppose Parkinson's Law explains it. Either that or they have an agenda. Actually, come to think of it, while equally stupid people might end up in the P.O., I doubt they would think this is the end of science. Extreme stupidity that inhibits the central task of the institution is rare. Yah, what about Baldwin Locomotive? Then there is GMC, which has, AFAIK still not produced a hybrid vehicle. The central task of Sci. Am. is to sell magazines and make Sci. Am. look authoritative. Attacking cold fusion and declaring that this is the end of science helps sell magazines. Why? In that sense, these people are not stupid. They are irresponsible, immoral, and ultimately self-defeating I hope, but in the near term they do know how to sell magazines. OTOH, this is the same organization which declared heavier than air flying machines impractical in 1907 (?) Anyway, I know for a fact that Horgan and the other editors are certified blockheads, even if they know how to sell magazines. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Close the Patent Office
thomas malloy wrote: Frankly, I cannot imagine that anyone at the P.O. would ever believe that we have reached the end of science! That would be rather self defeating wouldn't it. Exactly! It would be against their interests, so even if it were true it is not likely they would recognize it. The editors at Sci. Am. believe that, but they are extraordinarily stupid people. You wonder how they ever got where they are. I suppose Parkinson's Law explains it. Either that or they have an agenda. My impression based on their articles and letters to me is that they are stupid. This is also my impression of the Bush administration's war in Iraq. I do not believe this outcome was masterminded to secure Iraqi oil. Their tactics are much too risky and wasteful. If they were smart, they could have secured the oil without destroying the country and without getting 4,000 U.S. soldiers killed, and 29,000 wounded. Actually, come to think of it, while equally stupid people might end up in the P.O., I doubt they would think this is the end of science. Extreme stupidity that inhibits the central task of the institution is rare. Yah, what about Baldwin Locomotive? Then there is GMC, which has, AFAIK still not produced a hybrid vehicle. I said that such stupidity is rare, not unheard of. Large institutions seldom collapse because of stupid decisions, but it does happen, as Parkinson, Tuchman and other authors have shown. Large institutions all go extinct eventually, for a variety of reasons. Stupidity is often a factor, but so are bad luck, obsolete technology, aging and death of the founders, and the factors described by Christensen in The Innovator's Dilemma (summarized by in my book, chapter 7). A few institutions, such as Enron, were destroyed by criminal behavior. This is rare. The central task of Sci. Am. is to sell magazines and make Sci. Am. look authoritative. Attacking cold fusion and declaring that this is the end of science helps sell magazines. Why? Controversy sells. Lurid scandal sells. Crystal healing energy and end-of-the-world, apocalyptic hokum sells, and the end of science hypothesis is more of the same. As Robert Park says, controversy spikes above the noise in Washington. If he were to write: I don't understand experiment X but I doubt it is valid no one would pay attention. So, instead, he says something like: Prof. Y is a creationist and a fraud. That gets attention. - Jed
