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
Welcome to the Dark Side. | 756 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Welcome to the Dark Side.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 20 2012 @ 11:47 AM EDT
A computer with any particular piece of software has no *capabilities* that the
same computer without that software has.

A car is pretty useless when it's in neutral, right? So it's an improvement to
put it in 5th?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Welcome to the Dark Side.
Authored by: PolR on Friday, July 20 2012 @ 02:44 PM EDT
How many layers of abstraction do you have to go through before you are able to justify that conclusion to yourself?
All it needs is knowledge of some of the fundamental principles of computer science: the mathematical notion of algorithm and the stored program architecture.

Computers don't work according to your simplistic understanding. Computer science is what it is. Here you are arguing with some of the experts in the field dismissing the principles of computer science as "complex" and "many layers of abstraction". These arguments don't refute the facts of computer science.

You advocate a view where software works by "configuring" the hardware. It doesn't. Software is data given as input to an algorithm. It is not possible to be technically correct when calling software a configuration of the computer without simultaneously calling all data a "configuration" and dismissing the fact that data is changed billions of time per second while the computer is running. The technical evidence has been presented.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

How many layers of abstraction ...
Authored by: Wol on Monday, July 23 2012 @ 04:07 PM EDT
BUT THAT IS THE POINT.

ALL SOFTWARE IS AN ABSTRACTION.

ABSTRACTIONS ARE NOT PATENTABLE SUBJECT MATTER.

So installing software on a computer cannot be patentable, because
"patentable object + abstraction" != "new patentable
object".

Cheers,
Wol

[ 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 )