Comments for Digital Morphogenesis http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog Evolving architecture through computation Fri, 13 Jan 2012 21:51:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Of the year – 2011 by Greg L http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/index.php/2011/12/19/of-the-year-2011/#comment-7281 Greg L Fri, 13 Jan 2012 21:51:20 +0000 http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/?p=1214#comment-7281 My god, is Schumacher ever shrill (and grandiose; and, with regard to that Vol. 2, ever the salesman/huckster)! Whenever I read him yammering on about his Parametricism, in that leaden polysyllabic simulacrum of English prose cadged straight from Theory, I hear in my head the voice of actor Udo Kier as some crazed character... There is something perfectly perverse about his answering Gage's call-to-independence of architectural from silly manifestos by saying, essentially, "No - though you may not realize it, you and everyone else is wrapped in this movement I've *uniquely* anatomized!" At this rate, I expect he'll post leaves of his seminal Vol. 2 on a church door, somewhere... My god, is Schumacher ever shrill (and grandiose; and, with regard to that Vol. 2, ever the salesman/huckster)! Whenever I read him yammering on about his Parametricism, in that leaden polysyllabic simulacrum of English prose cadged straight from Theory, I hear in my head the voice of actor Udo Kier as some crazed character…

There is something perfectly perverse about his answering Gage’s call-to-independence of architectural from silly manifestos by saying, essentially, “No – though you may not realize it, you and everyone else is wrapped in this movement I’ve *uniquely* anatomized!” At this rate, I expect he’ll post leaves of his seminal Vol. 2 on a church door, somewhere…

]]> Comment on Patenting Geometry by Daniel http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/index.php/2011/08/29/patenting-geometry/#comment-6607 Daniel Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:11:02 +0000 http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/?p=1013#comment-6607 Thank you Lee for contributing this - it is great to hear from someone who knows what is actually happening.I put a note refering to your comment in the main post because I fear it will be burried down here. I hadn't realised the applications were being challenged, so it will be interesting to watch and see what happens with them. Thank you Lee for contributing this – it is great to hear from someone who knows what is actually happening.I put a note refering to your comment in the main post because I fear it will be burried down here. I hadn’t realised the applications were being challenged, so it will be interesting to watch and see what happens with them.

]]> Comment on Of the year – 2011 by Daniel http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/index.php/2011/12/19/of-the-year-2011/#comment-6606 Daniel Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:04:42 +0000 http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/?p=1214#comment-6606 Yea thanks for sending it through Anders. Still working on channelling Mark Gage whenever I feel proud about the mess I made in Grasshoppper. Good to see you are in the website business too. Hope all is well in Europe and you are having a great break! Yea thanks for sending it through Anders. Still working on channelling Mark Gage whenever I feel proud about the mess I made in Grasshoppper.

Good to see you are in the website business too. Hope all is well in Europe and you are having a great break!

]]> Comment on Patenting Geometry by Lee http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/index.php/2011/08/29/patenting-geometry/#comment-6576 Lee Wed, 21 Dec 2011 16:01:13 +0000 http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/?p=1013#comment-6576 A few observations: 1) The "patents" referred to are only patent applications, which may or may not grant. The applications should not be referred to or represented as 'patents'. Whether the applications indeed do become patents depends on the applicant's interaction with the Patent Office, a process called 'prosecution.' To date, there are no rights granted to the applicant here at all whatsoever. There may be rights that are retroactive *IF* the applications go to grant. 2) Both applications are having trouble in the prosecution process. They are being challenged by the USPTO on grounds of prior art (someone did it before), obviousness and indefiniteness (lack of precision in claiming exactly what the invention is). All information about these applications is public, given that they are published applications: http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair. 3) Patents aren't inherently evil or counterproductive, and it's important to understand the fields of patent law and IP commerce before forming judgments on why and how companies use their IP. See http://dcipattorney.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/IAM282008.pdf Note: I am not one of the authors of the piece listed here, nor am I affiliated with them. A few observations:

1) The “patents” referred to are only patent applications, which may or may not grant. The applications should not be referred to or represented as ‘patents’. Whether the applications indeed do become patents depends on the applicant’s interaction with the Patent Office, a process called ‘prosecution.’ To date, there are no rights granted to the applicant here at all whatsoever. There may be rights that are retroactive *IF* the applications go to grant.

2) Both applications are having trouble in the prosecution process. They are being challenged by the USPTO on grounds of prior art (someone did it before), obviousness and indefiniteness (lack of precision in claiming exactly what the invention is). All information about these applications is public, given that they are published applications: http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair.

3) Patents aren’t inherently evil or counterproductive, and it’s important to understand the fields of patent law and IP commerce before forming judgments on why and how companies use their IP. See http://dcipattorney.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/IAM282008.pdf
Note: I am not one of the authors of the piece listed here, nor am I affiliated with them.

]]> Comment on Of the year – 2011 by Anders Holden Deleuran http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/index.php/2011/12/19/of-the-year-2011/#comment-6568 Anders Holden Deleuran Wed, 21 Dec 2011 12:08:16 +0000 http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/?p=1214#comment-6568 Haha, glad to see that the Fulcrum articles made the list! Somehow I just knew that you would enjoy those links. Good list in general I should add.. Anyhow, have a very merry Christmas and happy new year Daniel :) Haha, glad to see that the Fulcrum articles made the list! Somehow I just knew that you would enjoy those links. Good list in general I should add.. Anyhow, have a very merry Christmas and happy new year Daniel :)

]]> Comment on Parametric modelling is hard by Daniel http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/index.php/2011/12/13/parametric-modelling-is-hard/#comment-6509 Daniel Mon, 19 Dec 2011 03:29:30 +0000 http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/?p=1272#comment-6509 Well keep playing that record because I like how it sounds. In all six of the quotes they are definitely talking about problems with modifying a DAG, whether it is explicitly or implicitly. I guess the next track on that record is always 'what next'.... Well keep playing that record because I like how it sounds. In all six of the quotes they are definitely talking about problems with modifying a DAG, whether it is explicitly or implicitly. I guess the next track on that record is always ‘what next’….

]]> Comment on Patenting Geometry by Of the year – 2011 « « Digital Morphogenesis Digital Morphogenesis | Evolving architecture through computation http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/index.php/2011/08/29/patenting-geometry/#comment-6508 Of the year – 2011 « « Digital Morphogenesis Digital Morphogenesis | Evolving architecture through computation Mon, 19 Dec 2011 03:18:17 +0000 http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/?p=1013#comment-6508 [...] the debate that followed the majority felt Evolute was unethical, and Evolute responded essentially by telling the [...] [...] the debate that followed the majority felt Evolute was unethical, and Evolute responded essentially by telling the [...]

]]> Comment on CAD’s uneasy relationship with tablets by Of the year – 2011 « « Digital Morphogenesis Digital Morphogenesis | Evolving architecture through computation http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/index.php/2011/12/09/cads-uneasy-relationship-with-tablets/#comment-6507 Of the year – 2011 « « Digital Morphogenesis Digital Morphogenesis | Evolving architecture through computation Mon, 19 Dec 2011 03:17:59 +0000 http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/?p=1221#comment-6507 [...] I wrote a post about WebGl back in May. A bit like tablets, it is a solution seeking a problem. ShapeSmith is probably is not the right problem – in the [...] [...] I wrote a post about WebGl back in May. A bit like tablets, it is a solution seeking a problem. ShapeSmith is probably is not the right problem – in the [...]

]]> Comment on HTML5 & WebGL by Of the year – 2011 « « Digital Morphogenesis Digital Morphogenesis | Evolving architecture through computation http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/index.php/2011/05/16/html5-webgl/#comment-6506 Of the year – 2011 « « Digital Morphogenesis Digital Morphogenesis | Evolving architecture through computation Mon, 19 Dec 2011 03:17:43 +0000 http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/?p=912#comment-6506 [...] I wrote a post about WebGl back in May. A bit like tablets, it is a solution seeking a problem. ShapeSmith is probably is not the right [...] [...] I wrote a post about WebGl back in May. A bit like tablets, it is a solution seeking a problem. ShapeSmith is probably is not the right [...]

]]> Comment on Of the year by Of the year – 2011 « « Digital Morphogenesis Digital Morphogenesis | Evolving architecture through computation http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/index.php/2010/12/27/of-the-year/#comment-6505 Of the year – 2011 « « Digital Morphogenesis Digital Morphogenesis | Evolving architecture through computation Mon, 19 Dec 2011 03:17:19 +0000 http://www.nzarchitecture.com/blog/?p=690#comment-6505 [...] on from Of the year 2010, a look back at a year full of clouds, patents, and [...] [...] on from Of the year 2010, a look back at a year full of clouds, patents, and [...]

]]>