Mood:  accident prone

Once upon a time I started this "journey". It's been more like a hitchhike to hell but, hey, one must do what one must do for one's "fans".

Ah yes, the roar of the grease.

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_M/threadview?m=tm&bn=12004&tid=1418301&mid=1418301&tof=2&frt=2

By Portuno(Yahoo/VCSY board) I've posted about the VCSY technology since 2000 and I've correctly demonstrated the VCSY technology method predated AJAX, Comet, SavaJe, Smart Client and all the so-called next-generation agendae wavers.

You can call that pump and dump if you want, but I would call it a skillful analysis of very murky information and confusing signals. I know Al doesn't want that to be, but, it's already far past the location when Al can discuss the technology, so he resorts to ridicule, insults and threats.

Fortunately, Raymond Niro is the kind who will take an active role in rooting out vermin like our paid-poster Frenkel. Perhaps litigation against paid-posters will unfold to become a legal industry all its own.

And perhaps Al, hawcreek, and kalafella can join the bevy of Raging Bull posters who've said some agregious things that may be copied to haunt them. (note: the aforementioned usernames are posters on Yahoo the reader would do well to avoid.)

These negative, insulting rants Al feels compelled to post about me are a typical strategy with people who can't explain or debate the issues and have been beaten on the subjects at hand. So we see Al rattled by the Frenkel issue, and here we are waiting for a two week extension requested in the VCSY v MSFT case... and Al knows why lawyers ask for delays. (note: this was written a few weeks before Microsoft settled with VCSY on the 6826744 issue. Al is a nuisance poster on Yahoo MSFT who is defending open-source interests.)

And with Ozzie's comments last week about granny getting out of the sickbed and joining the party, we see a different kind of internet being predicted.

If you will look back through my posts (those which the unhappy have not succeeded in deleting, that is) you will find what the world is crowing about "revolutionary" today was quite easy to read in 2000.

 http://clearstation.etrade.com/cgi-bin/bbs?Cmd=post&post_id=1999468&Refer=http://clearstation.etrade.com/

http://clearstation.etrade.com/cgi-bin/bbs?Cmd=post&post_id=1999464&Refer=http://clearstation.etrade.com/

http://clearstation.etrade.com/cgi-bin/bbs?post_id=1144913&usernm=Portuno_Diamo

http://clearstation.etrade.com/cgi-bin/bbs?post_id=1114211&usernm=Portuno_Diamo

http://clearstation.etrade.com/cgi-bin/bbs?post_id=1069916&usernm=Portuno_Diamo

Do your own digging and do your own thinking. If you put forth some effort you can educate yourself today to see where the web world is going tomorrow. If you don't put out any effort, you'll end up reading about it as an investment opportunity in a magazine... when everybody else finds out.
------------------

Like I said. Do your own digging and do your own thinking. It's not as hard as everyone tells you it is.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 12:15 AM EDT

Updated: Tuesday, 19 August 2008 12:35 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  amorous

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=215908

By: RapidRobert2 25 Jul 2008, 02:24 PM EDT

Msg. 215908 of 216090 Jump to msg. #

MEDIATOR’S REPORT A mediation conference was held on July 24, 2008. All proper parties attended. The case has settled and the parties are in the process of circulating documents for appropriate signatures, and to be filed with the Court. Signed this 25th day of July, 2008. /s/ James W. Knowles JAMES W. KNOWLES, MEDIATOR NICE because... VERTICAL COMPUTER SYSTEMS...THE BEST IS YET TO COME! RR IMO

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 9:03 PM EDT

Updated: Tuesday, 29 July 2008 11:58 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  bright

I lost my damn glasses so I won't be able to accompany this with my usual cut and paste pâté but I thought all you 50 or so people out there might like to see what a ResponseFlash is about.

http://www.vcsy.com/pands/responseflash.php

ResponseFlash™ provides a unique solution through its "massive affiliation" technology for supporting hundreds or thousands of Web sites that may have complex relationships with each other. The ResponseFlash™ architecture is based on VCSY's underpinning SiteFlash™ , proprietary web technology, which has been proven with an existing installed base of customers in multiple industries for more than five years.

A typical ResponseFlash™ installation will create a main portal site for emergency services and multiple departmental Web sites for related agencies, such as local fire, police, health care and other entities. Each agency or department using the system can have complete control of its own site content, discussion forums, user security profiles, event calendars, look and feel, and structure without being forced to purchase or maintain its own applications for these things. At the same time, the main portal can retain the ability to "flash" emergency content updates to each departmental site if necessary, depending on its relationship with each agency. Individual agencies and departments can also share content and design templates among themselves.

ResponseFlash™ also helps to contain costs and speed development for custom integration requirements by encapsulating application logic as standard components that can instantly be applied to all of the affiliate sites in the system. Each affiliate site can be given the choice of whether they want to use these standard components or not, or may be forced to accept certain components. ResponseFlash™ security capabilities make it easy to restrict access to entire sites, areas within sites, pages within areas, and individual components of a page, such as restricted discussion forums or other content, based on the user's security profile.

Critical Characteristics

The target implementation for ResponseFlash™ is security and Emergency Response applications. The technology was designed in response to government agencies' desire to meet their ideal needs for a communication system specialized in all types of emergencies, including Homeland Security. The final product not only provides a proprietary mechanism for rapidly deploying a large number of Emergency Response web sites with advanced communication capabilities to government agencies, but also incorporates a unique system architecture that allows for the collection and dissemination of information (i.e. web pages, forums, Q&A, e-mail, videos, pictures, voice, etc.) through the Internet to and from many devices (i.e. desktop PC's, laptops, PDA's, cellular phones, pagers, Blackberries, etc.).

Typically, ResponseFlash™ is selected for a number of reasons including the following:

• Allows for the fast establishment of websites for all emergency services and provides for easy linkage to existing web sites, so that no prior investments are lost. Furthermore, ResponseFlash™ integrates seamlessly with common computer operating system platforms and databases technologies, allowing adopters to implement ResponseFlash™ with existing infrastructures.
• Allows for secure and public sites within the same communication system
• Establishes various levels of access to sensitive information based upon a users security level and department or group within the secure site
• The content is uniformly presented in the system and does not require a web genius to add content to the web site
• Reduces the load on current phone and radio communication networks during an emergency

In the government arena, ResponseFlash™ lets each government agency operate as a fully autonomous site, a semi-autonomous site, or a completely non-autonomous site, depending on its unique staffing and budgetary situation. ResponseFlash™ not only allows for the communication up and down the organization, but it provides for communication between organizational units without having to go through the entire organization structure. For example department A can communicate with department W without passing through respective supervisors. The software rules allow for selected groups to enter information for general users or to restrict information to only authorized users; it also allows authorized users to add additional information in response to inquires that will be broadcast to all users that have a need to know.

-------------

So I can't see diddly squat without the glasses. Good thing Mavis taught me to touch type. Anywho, I would like to walk through the ResponseFlash description and compare what 744 says, but maybe later when I find said glasses.

BUT, I did see this: "has been proven with an existing installed base of customers in multiple industries for more than five years."

"Patent troll" my ass.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 2:56 AM EDT

Updated: Saturday, 19 July 2008 3:12 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  don't ask

This is what "the other side" thinks about the information VCSY longs have tried to present to the public. This is a loud and clear statement claiming VCSY is nothing more than a sham and the VCSY longs are boiler-room crooks milking anyone stupid enough to buy the stock.

Would we not be in jail at least by now?

If you think through the chains of logic that necessarily flow from these attitudes, you realize somebody has to suspend belief to a far greater extent than the theories, speculations and opinions we offer. Your version might be believable in the case of a stock that's been around for a year or less. Maybe. But, to ask the readers to believe a wad of professionals would hang to play this fraction of a penny rodeo with the volumes seen and add on top the incredible claims backed up with references and information found by ongoing searched by a wad of amateurs learning the social web and mining the internet for all the corners.

Another thing; most things called "conspiracy" are little more than arrogant game players screwing the pooch and letting pieces of information become available about just how good it was. An intellectual property as valuable as VCSY's is going to bring out the worst in people who don't own it. Conspiracies? I would say, planning for the wrong outcome. Being had? I would call it picking up the soap at an inoportune time.

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_V/threadview?m=tm&bn=33693&tid=5892&mid=5892&tof=1&frt=1

Doesn't it see a little strange to you, Portuno_diamo, that the very moment a website mentioning Siteflash, eMpath, or some other vcsy "product", patent or alleged "partnership" is constructed, one of your subservient minions finds it instantaneously? Out of the BILLIONS of websites created every day, they seem to find websites that stay online for mere hours? And doesn't it seem strange that as soon as you or your minions mention it and provide a link on a bulletin board or your various blogs, that website "mysteriously" disappears? It's happened more than once.

It REEKS of fraud. It might go like this....

There's nothing going on in vcsyland worth talking about and the trops are getting restless, so one of your obedient followers or one of your bosses constructs a one-page website and makes up a fake name for a company. This website contains just enough information to make it appear there's some connection to VCSY. It might turns up as a Brazilian website (wonder who's located there??). Something like this takes a very effort and a small amount of time to do. Even a caveman could do it.

Next, you or one of your puppets is somehow informed of this website and multiple messages appear on various bulletin boards with links to that website, and you place a link in your many vcsy-related blogs, announcing a newly found "partner" or customer to vcsy.

Suddenly, there's "news" and everyone gets excited and jubilant, and in a flurry of activity they begin fabricating all sorts of scenarios by which vcsy is going to get famously rich. The pumping and hyping continues, then others try to access the website....but it's suddenly taken down, never to be seen again.

Now the conspiracy theories develop. Theories such as "vcsy didn't want anyone to know they were working in stealth with this company". "Vcsy wasn't 'ready' to announce this relationship just yet". "The SEC and NSA 'officially requested' that this website be taken down so as to not blow their investigation". "MSFT made them do it to hide the grand plan".

The problem is, the company who supposedly owned this website is phony. The website is phony. It's all designed to stir up even more questions about vcsy, to perpetuate the mystery. It will never end. You will never let it end, even if vcsy is no longer an operating entity, should that ever happen.

If/when vcsy loses the MSFT case, I'm sure you'll make up some intricately woven story that claims vcsy and MSFT agreed to make it APPEAR that they lost the lawsuit, but now they have a super-secret development agreement in place and the product will be available sometime in the future, as in "soon". Or you will claim that the judge was paid off by MSFT in an illegal attempt to "crush" vcsy so it can't dominate the world of software and fiber optic communications. I'm sure there will be more dots to connect. You and your crew will invent those dots. It will go on and on and on and on....just like it has for almost a decade so far.

You're very transparent....you and all of your cohorts.

--------------

I just wanted to place this here as a historic marker. Kind of like having a gargoyle in the baby's room to remind junior what kind of things people can say about you without any available reference information to support what's said. It's a practice honed by the Gestapo in early 20th century Germany.

-------------

Well, now, this looks significant.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080707/media_uncertainty.html?.v=4AP
Uncertainty aplenty as Web, media leaders convene
Monday July 7, 6:01 pm ET
By Jeremy Herron, AP Business Writer Media, Internet moguls meet at Idaho luxury retreat, most seeking more online revenue

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, a perennial at the Allen conference, won't be joined by CEO Steve Ballmer. But he is bringing the company's top dealmaker, Henry Vigil, Microsoft's senior vice president for strategy and partnership.

(More at URL)
--------------------

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 10:37 PM EDT

Updated: Monday, 7 July 2008 9:24 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  caffeinated

I liked my comment so much I figured I would turn it into a blog entry. Easy enough to cut and paste... snip snip squirt splotch:

You'll find it here: http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/web_services_browser/a_month_of_gates_5.html#comments

Posted by portuno | June 18, 2008 12:26 AM

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 3:37 PM EDT

Updated: Wednesday, 18 June 2008 3:40 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  irritated

More from the VCSY Claim Construction.

Claim Construction - 5/16/08

"For instance, if a company would like to roll out a new look or syndicate its content and functionality to another business, this can be easily accomplished using the present invention. Since there is no application code resident in a web page itself, the same data can be repackaged in a number of different ways across multiple sites. [Emphasis added.]

The examiner of the ‘744 patent did just that when comparing the claims with the prior art in an office action dated April 3, 2003:Furthermore, see figure 10 on page 22, with its BLO to generate content (data), Presentation Objects to represent form, and its BPO to represent functionality. [Emphasis added.]

(See right-hand column on page 3 of the office action. Attached separately as Exhibit C) The examiner also equated content with data. Accordingly, Vertical respectfully asserts that the proper definition for “content” is data.

Once again, Microsoft adopts examples and words of inclusion and improperly uses them as boundaries, importing them into the claims. In column 1, lines 18-22 (Exhibit A), under the heading “BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION,” the specification states:

Form includes informative content. Informative content can include written, recorded, or illustrated documentation, such as photographs, illustrations, product marketing material, and news articles. Content can be created by writers, photographers, artists, reporters, or editors.

This portion of the patent simply provides examples and not a definition. Microsoft conveniently uses the back end of the second (middle) sentence of this quote and leaves out the most important part – “can include.” “Content” can include these examples; but the examples do not belong in the definition. (The patent repeats a similar description of examples for “content” in column 3, lines 23 to 38.)

E. The Definition of “Form”
As with content, the ‘744 patent specification includes a listing of examples for “form.” Column 1, lines 14-16, and column 3, lines 28-39, list graphic designs, user interfaces, and graphical representations. The ‘744 patent also states that form “includes informative content” (column 1, line 17), which would indicate that form may include data, resulting in some combination of form and content.

But, this listing of examples provided in the patent simply contains examples of formatting (to intheend101 - is something missing here?) is proper. Vertical proposes that definition, while Microsoft instead again tries to import the specific examples into the claims.

Although part of Microsoft’s definition, “the look of the computer application,” is similar to Vertical’s definition, Microsoft’s listing of specific examples (i.e., the importation of those examples into the claims) is completely improper, as is the insertion of “that can be created by a designer or group of designers.” This last phrase is a modifier meant to provide an example of who can create form. But machines may also create graphic designs, etc. Thus, Microsoft’s definition is not correct."

So far I don't see any evidence Microsoft is relying on the "too obvious" or "too broad" defense. Will we get a chance to look at the Microsoft brief?

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 11:51 AM EDT

Updated: Monday, 26 May 2008 2:42 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  amorous

Some legalese:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
VERTICAL COMPUTER
SYSTEMS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
Defendant.§

Civil Action No.
2-07-CV-144 (DF-CE)
THE PARTIES’ JOINT MOTION FOR MODIFICATION
OF THE AMENDED DOCKET CONTROL ORDER
Plaintiff Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. (“Vertical”) and Defendant Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”) jointly request a modification of the Court's Amended Docket Control Order to provide for the parties to submit technical tutorials to the Court in advance of the Claim Construction hearing.

The Amended Docket Control Order currently provides for a Pre-hearing Conference and technical tutorial, if necessary, on July 9, 2008, and a Claim Construction hearing on July 10, 2008.

The parties respectfully request that the Court vacate the technical tutorial and pre-hearing conference and set a deadline for submitting technical tutorials on CD-ROM by July 2, 2008, so that the Court will have an opportunity to consider the tutorials in advance of the Claim Construction hearing on July 10.

Accordingly, Plaintiff Vertical and Defendant Microsoft respectfully request that this Court modify the Amended Docket Control Order as outlined above.

and more legalese:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
VERTICAL COMPUTER
SYSTEMS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
Defendant.

Civil Action No.
2-07-CV-144 (DF-CE)
ORDER GRANTING PARTIES’ JOINT MOTION FOR
MODIFICATION OF THE AMENDED DOCKET CONTROL ORDER
The Court, having considered the Parties’ Joint Motion for Modification of the Amended Docket Control Order and finding good cause supporting it, finds the Motion should be granted.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the
Parties’ Joint Motion for Modification of the Amended Docket Control Order is hereby GRANTED in its entirety, and that the Pre-hearing Conference and technical tutorial currently scheduled for July 9, 2008, shall be vacated and replaced with the following modification of the Amended Docket Control Order: Action Rule Date Deadline to submit technical tutorials to the Court Wednesday, July 2, 2008  

and opinion:

Now that's an interesting situation. No doubt the SiteFlash patent and all that can be derived from it can be complex and difficult to understand to people skilled in the art of software. It's a different way of doing things in software - a different architecture - and, as such, much of the novel value made available by this method of creating software will escape the comprehension on the first or even second pass.

In this particular architecture, what may at first appear to be massively complex interactions as theory soon appears as simplified abstracted enhancement to existing tools as well as Siteflash and MLE tools.

A tutorial will better prepare the court to hear the words in the patent claims from a much different prespective.

Now, that's from VCSY. What Microsoft will be doing is trying to demonstrate the parts and pieces of Siteflash have all been done before. It's the tactic most first and second time readers of the patent try to use to prove the patent(s - both of them share this quality) invalid based on prior art and obviousness.

I don't disagree there are examples of programming and software development prior art within the patent. But, as a bicycle is a collection of screws and bolts and wheels... all of which have been done before, the assembled "bicycle" invention is a much more useful machine than a boxed set of all these parts.

The traditional parts in patents 6826744 and 7076521 are assembled in such a way to build an integrated software system that does things much better, more wholly and more efficiently than any collections of any prior art.

So, the tutorial on VCSY's side will be much more productive as it will describe the way Siteflash uses all those currently existing software to build ecologys which, in turn, are used to build software frameworks in which businesses may function.

Try that with FrontPage - the "prior art" avowed by Microsoft to invalidate what Siteflash does. LOL

I would love to watch just these two tutorials. What a treasure trove of material with which to confound and befuddle the likes of dlkjla (a throwback poster on the Yahoo VCSY board - I thought I might help him build a fanbase here as he appears to be enamored of attention.)

PS - Yes. I know it's petty. I'm a petty little man. Who else would have a "new baby" freebie site on Lycos dedicated to chronical surmisings about the current industry state and Microsoft and their nemesis VCSY?

If you want to see the original source of the above posts (like you're making a anthropology exhibit for the science fair and all) you can look here, but, I should warn you. Put a q-tip soaked in pine tar in each ear and push firmly. That's the only thing that can innoculate you from suffering the torment of actually reading through the garbage you wade through to get those freegan goodies.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 12:27 AM EDT

Updated: Tuesday, 13 May 2008 1:13 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  accident prone

I've been getting very tired of hearing myself talk. It's good to hear your opinions shared. This is well worth the read so you can see where we are now that Microsoft stands denuded.

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/podcasts/why_didnt_microsoft_yell_yahoo.html

Enjoy... we'll talk later. Let's have a little quiet time and let the baby sleep. Little snookywookums has had a busy few weeks.

This is a period when history is being made.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 11:22 PM EDT

Updated: Monday, 5 May 2008 11:29 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  accident prone

How's my little snooky wookums? 

Have a bm lately? 

You know, sweety, I've been corking along trying to decide whether to return to "writing", as it were, rather than commentary. And It's been such a difficult decision simply because I do love commentary. But, commentary helps only those interested in one subject; the supposed subject matter of the commented field. "Writing", as such, may appeal to a broad spectrum of folks. Some who casually find you addressing their interests at some particular accidental intersection of idea and transaction. Some who haven't got a clue what you're talking about but, they love the feel of the community.

And, since I'm such an altruistic guy (Portuno Diamo means "to give" according to the language of those in the place where the Romans used to be) I have an urge to help the great unwashed; those who want to understand what they see around themselves but only know what they see. If all you  know is what you see, you're going to be victim to those who can hide in the brush a few feet away and become invisible to you.

They can manipulate you from that vantage point, and you don't even know you're the victim of a flimflam... whatever that is. Or, they can eat you.

You're like all "But, it's so much hard work to stay educated and vigilant".

True. But, if you had somebody or some group think about your problems while you walk fat dumb and happy along the path of life, just think how much free time you would have to make the world a better place. At least, that's what you would do on Oprah's show. In real life, you would be lazing on your boat sipping a juice joint.

And you're all indignant like because I've impuned your motives. Well, ok, you have the feelings and those things are real, so, the things you want to do would surely fall out should you be free to devote yourself to charity and philanthropy like Bill Gates and Chuck Feeney can. Sure. No doubt.

But, there's a problem there. Mister Gates and Mister Feeney have people to take care of all the mundane things of life and that costs money - the people and the mundanes.

So, you need a way to leverage your knowledge and your interests for free. Well, friend and neighbor, the internet has just that kind of liberating power. It's supposed to be as liberating as Guttenberg's press, but we mostly find ourselves beign wrapped in just more and more paper.

That's because the internet is up to now a display and interaction interface. Essentially, it's what you would have if you bought an application that was really pretty, but, upon firing the thing up, you find the application doesn't do anything new.

That's Content and Format without a demonstrable leap in Functionality. It's what we all call a hot check promising more than what's just been written on the paper... in this case, interface.

It's the kind of thing we've all watched Bill Gates do; promise a digital decade and produce a decimation. Since Mister Gates is leaving Microsoft for greener charity, we can safely assume his contribution to Microsoft is done. The latter years of his principality has been content and format with no function. All talk, lots of style but no do.

Mister Feeney may have suffered the same malaise of motivation. We do not know as Mister Feeney's efforts are as secret and inscrutible as any master disguiser. So we wait to see the legacy of General Atlantic. So far, his picks and puts are all seemingly wise moves, but, there's not theme to the pudding. We don't know if the man can cook.

The common person needs an assessment of what the big boys are doing to formulate a plan so as not to get stepped on. Let's just call this funky-skinned blogsite a way to see what's out in the trees...just beyond our discerning. Yeah. That's the ticket.

So, we wish both gentlemen well in all the good deed doing they may take on.

Just remember. It's not spelled philantrophy.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 12:45 PM EDT

Updated: Tuesday, 29 April 2008 12:19 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink