Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Actually it is pretty obvious | 1347 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Actually it is pretty obvious

Authored by: greed on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 12:05 PM EDT

Right; we still don't have a polynomial time solution to Travelling Salesman.

But our satnav systems work well enough... most of the time. Why?

Because an approximation algorithm that took two days on a Commodore
64--assuming you could feed it enough storage--runs in about 17 seconds on a 2.5
GHz quad-core CPU. (Assuming there's enough parallelism to keep all cores
running and similar work-per-clock rates.)

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Actually it is pretty obvious

Authored by: mrisch on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 01:04 PM EDT

Agreed - that's why I say that most software patents are a
specific solution to a specific problem with specific resource
constraints - and that within those constraints they might be
inventive. The question is whether you get the broad solution
when the constraints are lessened. The 20 year patent term is
part of the problem.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Wrong. - Authored by: jesse on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 03:33 PM EDT
Actually it is pretty obvious - Authored by: jonathon on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 05:24 PM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )