decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
The effect of programming | 756 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
The effect of programming
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 19 2012 @ 08:59 PM EDT
Obviously, the discussion is pointless, since the author
of the article is not seeking input.

> By basic logic this depends on the statement. If I say my
> cat is white you can't refute this by showing me a black
> cat.

The argument was that programming does not create a new
device. In this thread of comments you have now set a
new limitation (i.e., changed from 'all cats are white' to
'my cat is white'). You now argue that computers with
volatile program storage are not new devices, and I would
agree if you also specify that the reprogramming remains
an option for the user.

Take away that option of modification, and the
memory/processor combination does become a new device.

> Besides I can return the fire because I have just
> given counterexamples to your statement that data
> storage is irrelevant to the 'new machine' argument.

My statement: "Having erasable memory for data storage is obviously
irrelevant for the 'new machine' argument. "

Your answer: "It depends on how the computer is programmed"

I must have missed something, but I see no link between
my statement and your comment.

A typical digital wristwatch (to pick a ubiquitous example)
has volatile storage for storing the current time, date,
and maybe an alarm time. The program that defines how
to react to different button presses and which numbers to
show on the display is in permanent storage. Once the
chip in the watch is programmed to work as a watch,
that's all it can do.


[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )