You mean like negative vs positive electrical charge? Or perhaps a 1.5 volt
charge vs a 2.0 volt charge? As opposed to electrical charge vs lack of
electrical charge?
As you yourself say:
converted to sets
of charge signs
Call it a stream1, a set, a
grouping, a pattern. It's still interpreted abstract information that has
meaning only to the particular "language" it's set in. The concept of
interpretation is abstract. The most common and widely used such interpretation
being that of Languages.
In both cases of audio cds and software cds the
cds have absolutely zero physical difference. They are both made of plastic and
such. They are both etched with data in the form of an interpreted physical
binary mark.
The only difference is the particular pattern of the
interpreted mark3.
Begining of Audio CD:
100110001011001000001100101
Begining of SFTWR CD:
100110001011001000001100100
We can describe "Audio" software quite
concisely as "an abstract language that is designed to "understand"2
the particular stream/pattern that humans interpret as sound".
Meanwhile,
"software" software can be concisely described as "an abstract language that is
designed to "understand" the particular stream/pattern that humans interpret as
'machine language'".
In both cases, they are nothing more to humans and
computers as the English language is. The standard that defines a particular
audio set/pattern/stream/combination is to software as the Rosetta Stone was to
the Egyptian Heiroglpyhs.
Given the audio cd does absolutely nothing
physically different to the computer that the software cd does: Is digital audio
patentable "as applied to the computer"?
Is a book that outlines how to
build a cabinet - also contains an interpreted language with instructions that
can be followed to produce a particular output - patentable?
Is a sheet
of hole-punched paper as applied to a player piano to "play a particular piece
of music" patentable?
I think once the Supremes see through all the
obfuscation and realize what software really is:
Nothing more then an
interpretive language!
I think the Supremes will likely agree at that point
Software - whether applied to a device or not - is not patentable subject
matter.
1: That's how I used the particular term stream
by the way. Not indicate a "stream of electricity" but the "particular pattern
of the interpreted {choose whatever word(s) you want to use to identify the
actual physical binary state}".
2: I use the term "understand" in this
instance extraordinarily loosely. The hardware "understands" nothing. The
humans design the hardware so the human feeding the hardware with input get the
same result. 2+2 always equals 4 both from the perspective of the individual
designing the calculator and the individual who just punched the calculators
keys.
3: Like the pattern of marks that create a mystery novel vs the
pattern of marks that are on a book of instructions of how to build a spice
rack. It's still the physical aspect of "ink on paper" (or equivalent) with the
only change being the abstract human interpretation.
I would find
it truly interesting if someone created a duo language. A single "software
language" that could:
Be run to produce mathematical results
AND
Be
run to produce music
I wonder if someone did that and gave a physical
demonstration to the Supreme's if the understanding of "software" being nothing
more then an interpreted language would click.
What would be even better
(I think) is if they modified an input mechanism into the computer to accept the
"electric signals" of a telegraph key as input. Then program - live in front of
the Supremes - a simple software set which would then be run both as a
mathematical formula as well as music.
Maybe program the simple interest
formula with inputs. That would allow different values to be fed into the
formula for the interest rate and principal. This would both:
A: produce
the correct interest amount
and:
B: dynamically change the music piece
that is played
That'd be pretty cool. Other then the "telegraph key as
input" part - it could be totally done with any computer hardware that has a
programmable aspect, a display and a sound producing system. That might also
help with the understanding:
Dig out that old Amiga, Apple IIe,
286
Get a modern day device (whether tablet, pc, or whatever)
And
do the same to all of them.
Even more impressive is if someone created a
hydrodynamic pipe organ whose components were used to perform the simple
interest formula - the sounds of the "music" of said "software" coming from the
pipes all the while the particular pattern ended up producing the interest
paid.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
