IRC: #techbytes @ Techrights IRC Network: Sunday, April 07, 2024

back to Techrights (Main Index)

beginning of new day, April 7

00:48 *parsifal (~parsifal@uuar9r28yasyu.irc) has joined #techbytes

2 AM, April 7

02:17 *SaphirJD has quit (connection closed)

6 AM, April 7

06:03 schestowitz; <li>

06:03 schestowitz; <h5><a href="https://pointieststick.com/2024/04/05/this-week-in-kde-real-modifier-only-shortcuts-and-cropping-in-spectacle/">This week in KDE: real modifier-only shortcuts and cropping in Spectacle</a></h5>

↺ https://pointieststick.com/2024/04/05/this-week-in-kde-real-modifier-only-shortcuts-and-cropping-in-spectacle/">This

06:03 schestowitz; <blockquote>

06:03 schestowitz; <p>For years KWin has offered modifier-only shortcut handling via an obscure and undocumented method of editing the kwinrc file. Well, no more: in Plasma 6.1, KDEs shortcut choosers will accept lone modifier keys natively! This makes it much easier to, for example, re-bind what the Meta key does: now you can easily make it open Overview, KRunner, or anything else simply by assigning it

06:03 schestowitz; directly to that something else. This work required expensive re-plumbing throughout KDEs software stack and was undertaken by Yifan Zhu, closing multiple Bugzilla tickets in the processsome fairly old. Thanks a lot, Yifan! (Link 1, link 2, link 3, link 4, link 5, and link 6) </p>

06:03 schestowitz; <p> But thats not all! Though bug-fixing is eternal, weve largely gotten over the hump for Plasma 6.0, and Ive noticed that features and UI improvement have occupied more of peoples attention recently. So lets start with a much-requested one </p>

06:03 schestowitz; </blockquote>

06:03 schestowitz; </li>

06:03 -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-pointieststick.com | This week in KDE: real modifier-only shortcuts and cropping in Spectacle Adventures in Linux and KDE

9 AM, April 7

09:11 *psydroid2 (~psydroid@u8ftxtfux23wk.irc) has joined #techbytes

noon, April 7

12:37 *parsifal has quit (Quit: Leaving)

1 PM, April 7

13:53 *SaphirJD (~SaphirJD@ujrjmymbebpjn.irc) has joined #techbytes

4 PM, April 7

16:17 *SaphirJD has quit (Quit: Leaving)

16:57 *jacobk (~quassel@ish78f9gpswn6.irc) has joined #techbytes

5 PM, April 7

17:21 *SaphirJD (~SaphirJD@9iz9c2tcvthrn.irc) has joined #techbytes

17:55 schestowitz; "DOJ's Apple case could raise threat of malicious apps"

17:55 schestowitz; x https://www.axios.com/2024/04/05/apples-app-store-antitrust-malware

↺ https://www.axios.com/2024/04/05/apples-app-store-antitrust-malware

17:55 -TechBytesBot/#techbytes- ( status 403 @ https://www.axios.com/2024/04/05/apples-app-store-antitrust-malware )

↺ https://www.axios.com/2024/04/05/apples-app-store-antitrust-malware

6 PM, April 7

18:51 *jacobk has quit (Quit: http://quassel-irc.org - Chat comfortably. Anywhere.)

↺ http://quassel-irc.org

8 PM, April 7

20:17 schestowitz; http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2024/03/discrepancies-in-description-should-be.html?showComment=1712333072248#c5251972008425331261

↺ http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2024/03/discrepancies-in-description-should-be.html?showComment=1712333072248#c5251972008425331261

20:17 schestowitz; "I think the old adage can be very easily amended to resolve any perceived tension between the novelty-infringement test and the doctrine of equivalents:<br /><br />- that what comes after and infringes must, if coming before, destroy novelty;<br />- that what comes after and infringes by virtue only of the doctrine of equivalents must, if coming before, destroy inventive step. <br /><br />Ta da! I fixed it. <br /><br />There is a minor

20:17 schestowitz; flaw: this does not account for secret prior art (Art 54(3)/S2(3)) which is not citable for inventive step. As secret art, there is no justification for taking this into account when interpreting the scope of the claim, whether under a strict, literal interpretation or under the doctrine of equivalents. Accordingly, an equivalent disclosed in secret prior art is susceptible of being held to be an infringement under the doctrine of equi

20:17 schestowitz; valents. The applicant of that secret prior art would need to (and could) avail themselves of the secret prior use defence to infringement.<br /><br />Who would have thought that the legislator already provided us with all of the means necessary to prevent old technology from being injuncted by a patentee?"

20:17 -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Discrepancies in the description should be amended in line with the claims, but do not affect interpretation of the claims (T 0447/22) - The IPKat

9 PM, April 7

21:52 *psydroid2 has quit (Quit: KVIrc 5.0.0 Aria http://www.kvirc.net/)

↺ http://www.kvirc.net/)

21:55 *SaphirJD has quit (connection closed)

IRC: #techbytes @ Techrights IRC Network: Sunday, April 07, 2024

back to Techrights (Main Index)