|
|
|
| Authored by: PolR on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 01:46 AM EDT |
It's not hard to show that software is a subset of mathematics.
Turing
completeness certainly shows that an algorithm (by the old definition, a
program
which eventually halts) is isomorphic to an object in maths (a suitably
defined
Turing machine).
This is correct but I have something to
add.
It can also be shown that software that may run into into infinite
loops is also isomorphic to Turing machines. Partial recursive functions and
lambda-calculus and Turing machines are all models of computations that may run
into infinite loops and this is part of the same series of theorems of
computation theory you allude to. The focus on termination is driven by the
desire of mathematicians to have algorithms that eventually gives an answer. But
mathematics isn't always so generous. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 12:41 PM EDT |
The trouble, as we've seen with software and "business methods", is
that patents on abstractions are *unenforceable*. Everyone just ignores the
patents unless the patent trolls decide to harass them.
If the courts continue to allow patents on abstractions, after a while, the
legal system will lose credibility. What mechanisms does it have to enforce
bogus judgements? It can take money from bank accounts and it can send police
on raids. We would see how long the government can raid innocent computer
programmers until it got overthrown (not long), and as for money, it will just
lead to a much larger and more active use of "hidden money".
Trying to enforce unenforceable monopolies simply causes the legal system and
the government to lose public support. This is not a good road to go down.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
