|
| Authored by: celtic_hackr on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 09:29 AM EST |
| Although, I've yet to see a three year old that understands what math is. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 09:33 AM EST |
your argument is not very logical. First you assume that a 3
year old not only knows what mathematics is, but has the
reasoning capability to equate abstract concepts.
In addition we can follow your reasoning with even a 3 year
old knows that a car is not pieces of metal, but that does not
mean that is not what it is made of.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: designerfx on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 09:36 AM EST |
"What is lacking on this blog is an understanding of the
legal and business worlds."
Based on which part, exactly? The part where business aware
people such as Stallman, comment? The part where the website
is run by a legal professor and a paralegal? Or the part
where an anon trolls with random statements.
Software patents do not live up to their promise as they
cannot be implemented via the patents described and are
therefore, invalid. See: Canada pfizer situation.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: PolR on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 10:13 AM EST |
> Contrary to the apparent assertions in this blog, software
> patents cannot be infringed by merely performing steps in
> one's mind.
Don't trust the apparent assertion. Read the article to find out what the real
assertion is. You obviously didn't.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 10:57 AM EST |
"Your assumption that the lawyers do not understand
computers is incorrect. Many
of the patent attorneys involved in patent litigation
involving software have
advanced degrees and extensive industry experience in
software. What is lacking
on this blog is an understanding of the legal and business
worlds. "
With all due respect sir, the people in our industry don't
care what the legal or business world thinks about our
industry. You guys make stuff up, ignore plain realities
and just generally act like parasites on our efforts to
improve the world around us. Go away.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 12:03 PM EST |
"Many of the patent attorneys involved in patent litigation involving
software have advanced degrees and extensive industry experience in
software."
...and are willing to overlook logic and reason, which would affect their income
in a dramatic way. NO patent attorney is EVER going to admit that software
patents are a joke, and a drain on the economy. THEY are the ones who make
money from this mess.
THAT'S the bottom line. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 12:14 PM EST |
Any specific piece of software is nothing more than an idea.
You will be familiar with dealing with a written form of these ideas, rather
than the idea in the abstract, due to your job.
But writing a story down in a book does not stop it being a story.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 12:24 PM EST |
I was going to run through your claims one by one and ask you to substantiate
the claims you make. But I gave up on that pretty fast, as I realised your aim
isn't a debate borne by valid and logic argumentation. You merely want to make a
point, supported by fabricated evidence (three-year olds??) and broad claims (no
government in any country on earth agrees with you). Just like a software patent
suit, in fact.
And that's the point you missed.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 02:01 PM EST |
| And yes, Virginia, software is mathematics. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Gringo_ on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 02:30 PM EST |
| lol! [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 02:36 PM EST |
Thanks for this post!
I had a great laugh, nearly every sentence consists of provably counter-factual
statements, and you struck just the right tone of indignance, ignorance and
moral superiority.
Keep up the righteous work!
(oh, P.S. as a professional programmer with a background in both computer
science and mathematics, I can say with some certainty that PolR is completely
correct, and that software definitely is mathematics.)[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 30 2012 @ 05:32 PM EST |
Okay, so Shakespeare is no great writer because, eventually,
monkeys randomly hitting keyboards would have reproduced his
all his works in the hypothetical "mathematical" future. Got
it!
Why do you continue to post this drivel?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, December 02 2012 @ 08:09 PM EST |
"Even a three year old child knows that software is not mathematics."
Then perhaps we should ensure that patent lawyers have the mental capacity and
mathematical understanding of, AT MINIMUM, a four year old.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
