From: Spike Jones (spike66@ibm.net)
Date: Tue Dec 22 1998 - 21:48:47 MST
> Tim Bates, writes, regarding software patents:
> > There should be no software patents whatsoever. I argue that there is
> > nothing in software which is not obvious, it is all "obvious".
tim, there is a monster piece of code developed by lockheed in
the 60s that predicts the accuracy of a ballistic missile. it takes
into account the jillions of variables that effect the trajectory, and
by god, it *accurately* predicts where that hummer will land. it
really works. now, that simulation contains hundreds, perhaps
thousands, of person-years of some of the most advanced scientists
and engineers that the cold war could produce. it took in experts
in about every field you can name. it was written back when
memory was scarce, computers were slow, and comment lines
were nonexistant. consequently it is filled with tricky math and
programming hocus pocus, technology which has long been lost.
that code still works, still fortrans away, it has never been improved upon.
ive seen that code, and neither i nor anyone else knows exactly how it
works. i was the last person to find an error in that work, in 1991,
but the error was in the documentation, not the code.
is the information in this code obvious? where does it fit in your
software patent theory? spike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:50:05 MST