←back to thread

1798 points jerryX | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.205s | source
Show context
beautifulfreak ◴[] No.18567190[source]
If the author pops in here, I hope he takes a look at this patent, because it might be prior art: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8512151 I complained about it to the "Stupid Patent of the Month" attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (here: https://www.eff.org/issues/stupid-patent-month) and got a nice response agreeing that it looks obvious.
replies(2): >>18567233 #>>18569186 #
neonate ◴[] No.18567233[source]
I think the author is a she.
replies(1): >>18567490 #
mirimir ◴[] No.18567490[source]
True, but I didn't see that she identified herself, or her gender, in the article. So what's a commenter to do? That's an honest question. Mangle to use "they"? Use some genderless pronoun that'll piss off x% of readers?
replies(5): >>18567518 #>>18567640 #>>18567878 #>>18567914 #>>18568115 #
1. danso ◴[] No.18568115[source]
1. Use “they”

2. Take the time to use a search engine to look up her name, which is referenced at least two times in screenshots of emails she provides.

3. Click-through to the blog post she links, also written by herself: https://patentpandas.org/stories/crowdfunding-backer-patente...