3 ms·
Huh, that's interesting. While I'm hesitant to suggest that what the world needs is even more patents, this doesn't make immediate sense to me. Let's say someo
by Wowfunhappy 5y ago
Huh, that's interesting. While I'm hesitant to suggest that what the world needs is even more patents, this doesn't make immediate sense to me.
Let's say someone comes up with a new sorting algorithm, which completes in less cycles than was previously believed possible. Sure, it's math, but isn't that a new, creative expression? Don't we want to encourage them to publish their algorithm (one of the key purposes of patents—this way, anyone can use it after 20 years), as opposed to keeping it hidden from the world?
It makes more sense to me than most software patents (admittedly, a low bar to clear). And if the patent office is doing its job (big if), the patents should only be granted for algorithms which are sufficiently novel.
- denton-scratch 5y agoA new super-fast sorting algorithm (not just a few cycles, but something that actually changes the O-number) would obviously be a fantastic boon - I would want the inventor to benefit from his cleverness. But nowadays I think patent law isn't the right way to do that; trade secrets should be enough. I don't think that what is disclosed to the public in patent applications is of enough value to justify a long monopoly. It's not necessarily a problem with the written law; patents are horrible because of the way courts apply them.