Thread to post ??? to receive rep pts

[Wu Song Jr]

Originally Posted by seabass

55

Ha ha Sui mak mak

Wah bro seabass, nice nice !!
Please give one number from 1-49.
Kumsia mak mak
Big huat arh !!!

[demonhunter]

Originally Posted by Wu Song Jr

Bro DH
You very chun number come out...
Thursday toto $3.3M
Please please, one number please
Kumsia !!!

Big huat arh !!

Now no feel yet ... Wednesday night I give

[seabass]

เจ็ด 7 jet

[Wu Song Jr]

Originally Posted by demonhunter

Now no feel yet ... Wednesday night I give

Ok bro DH
Kumsia kumsia ... Wednesday good

Originally Posted by seabass

เจ็ด 7 jet

Bro seabass
Kob kun mak mak

Very big huat arh !!!

[seabass]

mai pen rai krab

[alex18122003]

Originally Posted by seabass

mai pen rai krab

Fav returned

[Wu Song Jr]

Originally Posted by acidicavex

Upz u for 4 punches bro

Bro acid i just given you back 6 brotherly punches
Kumsia many many

Huat Arh !!!

[acidicavex]

Originally Posted by Wu Song Jr

Bro acid i just given you back 6 brotherly punches
Kumsia many many

Huat Arh !!!

Thanks bro huat arh!

[lostlilvirg]

Thread to post ??? to... 28-10-2014 02:46 PM time to zap. lol

Awww I got zapped...so sad... *sniff sniff* LOL

Originally Posted by jason_

interesting reading, but missed the point... out of 100 patents, how many can let parent owner make big money? patents that can make big money are usually owned by institutions with deep pockets, not only can develop products, market and sell a lot, and sue anyone or any other organisations that infringe their patents.

how many scientists make ground breaking discoveries and own patents but die poor or bankrupt?

as to individuals, how many of the world's billionaires own patents? back to Singapore, does the late ng ting fong own patent? peter lim? wee choo yaw?

interesting read, but like what we call bobo-shooter in army, totally missed the point.

Hmm...I'd like to see what kind of intellectual property you can "own" with your:

A: Unempirical fact-finding
B: Ill-designed study methods
C: Jump X number of steps in between to infer a conclusion

Speaking as someone who is actually IN the field, less scientists than expected hold patents, whether or not they receive monetary rewards for them. Patents can only be filed for LEGITIMATE discoveries that can lead to the formation of a product, not just some "eureka" moment. Here is where i admit it's my mistake for misreading your post. You did say intellectual property and not patent filing, so it's my mistake. My ego is not so large that I would not admit my fault.

Eureka moments can be considered intellectual property if one were to, say, be able to publish it in an academic journal before others. A good example is when the Nobel Prize in Medicine was awarded to the scientists who discovered DNA, and separately the Nobel Prize awarded to the scientists who discovered the Human Leukocyte Antigen, neither of the groups of scientists ever had a patent in their discoveries. However, the world recognised them just the same because of their findings, which are intellectual properties with valid findings. Thank goodness my previous post involved your submission of such an attempt at claiming intellectual property via submission of a research article, else I would probably be the colour of beetroot by now. As it is, my point still stands, just minus the patent bit. *smirks*

I do applaud you though, for your credible attempt at convincing the general layperson. I wonder why you have such a bee in your bonnet for your seeming intellect when with every subsequent post, you just further demonstrate your ineptitude in such matters, latest one notwithstanding?

[prettymannequin]

Originally Posted by lostlilvirg

Thread to post ??? to... 28-10-2014 02:46 PM time to zap. lol

Awww I got zapped...so sad... *sniff sniff* LOL

Give you tissue paper. There there.

[lostlilvirg]

Aww thanks, prettymannequin. Something from your showbag? hehehehe

[LWCJ]

Originally Posted by lostlilvirg

Speaking as someone who is actually IN the field (long post deleted)

sorry i have to delete your long post, because i find you dumping a lot of information (which is easily available on the internet, hence cheap by today standards) for the purpose of distracting. is it because you cannot counter his arguments?

so say a lot of other things, pretend he never say those points?

he use his understanding of human nature to make money, hope you can also make money using cheap easy to find information. i met him before, not a bit of arrogance despite his success, whereas i feel you are a bag of potato chips (10% substance, 90% empty space).

any other bros who had met Jason, want to comment if he is arrogant?

[vaxvms]

Originally Posted by seabass

mai pen rai krab

fav return

[solarflare]

Originally Posted by lostlilvirg

Thread to post ??? to... 28-10-2014 02:46 PM time to zap. lol

Awww I got zapped...so sad... *sniff sniff* LOL




Hmm...I'd like to see what kind of intellectual property you can "own" with your:

A: Unempirical fact-finding
B: Ill-designed study methods
C: Jump X number of steps in between to infer a conclusion

Speaking as someone who is actually IN the field, less scientists than expected hold patents, whether or not they receive monetary rewards for them. Patents can only be filed for LEGITIMATE discoveries that can lead to the formation of a product, not just some "eureka" moment. Here is where i admit it's my mistake for misreading your post. You did say intellectual property and not patent filing, so it's my mistake. My ego is not so large that I would not admit my fault.

Eureka moments can be considered intellectual property if one were to, say, be able to publish it in an academic journal before others. A good example is when the Nobel Prize in Medicine was awarded to the scientists who discovered DNA, and separately the Nobel Prize awarded to the scientists who discovered the Human Leukocyte Antigen, neither of the groups of scientists ever had a patent in their discoveries. However, the world recognised them just the same because of their findings, which are intellectual properties with valid findings. Thank goodness my previous post involved your submission of such an attempt at claiming intellectual property via submission of a research article, else I would probably be the colour of beetroot by now. As it is, my point still stands, just minus the patent bit. *smirks*

I do applaud you though, for your credible attempt at convincing the general layperson. I wonder why you have such a bee in your bonnet for your seeming intellect when with every subsequent post, you just further demonstrate your ineptitude in such matters, latest one notwithstanding?

if i ever had power/points, i will definitely up yours for this post.

[seabass]

Khob Khun Ma Krub ขอขอบคุณ

thank you