4 ms·

"a processing unit coupled to the input device, the output device, and the memory for controlling the execution of the program routines." That sounds like you

by bodski 15y ago

"a processing unit coupled to the input device, the output device, and the memory for controlling the execution of the program routines." That sounds like you have just described pretty much any user facing computer ever built. Can you explain how this narrows the claims of the patent in any significant way?

tptacek 15y ago
Every computer ever build has a processing unit coupled to input, output, and memory that includes an analyzer server for detecting structures and an action processor that controls the execution of program routines on that computer? Is this trivial to build with COTS parts? Of course it is. Does it describe a web app? No. Web apps do not comprise input, output, memory used to store program routines, a processor coupling them, a server running on that very processor for that uses patterns to recognize structures such as phone numbers, and an action processor that executes specific code stored in that memory based on the structure the analyzer server found. In a web app, half that stuff happens on a server on a different computer, and half happens in the web browser. If they wanted their patent to describe web apps, they would have said the server was communicatively coupled to the input/output processor, resided on a computer that may be different from the computer with the input/output processor, and that the subroutines run in response to user selections might run either on one computer or the other, &c. This is not an awesome patent. That's not the point I'm making.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- zoips 15y ago
  I'm a bit confused about how a web app doesn't infringe. Your claim is it doesn't because it's split between two machines, but that's merely a function of one use. A web app can be used from a single machine, with the server portion and the client portion executing on the same processor. You could even jerry-rig it so the browser and the server communicated via a shared memory map, if using the same memory locations is an issue.

by bodski 15y ago

tptacek 15y ago

Every computer ever build has a processing unit coupled to input, output, and memory that includes an analyzer server for detecting structures and an action processor that controls the execution of program routines on that computer? Is this trivial to build with COTS parts? Of course it is. Does it describe a web app? No. Web apps do not comprise input, output, memory used to store program routines, a processor coupling them, a server running on that very processor for that uses patterns to recognize structures such as phone numbers, and an action processor that executes specific code stored in that memory based on the structure the analyzer server found. In a web app, half that stuff happens on a server on a different computer, and half happens in the web browser. If they wanted their patent to describe web apps, they would have said the server was communicatively coupled to the input/output processor, resided on a computer that may be different from the computer with the input/output processor, and that the subroutines run in response to user selections might run either on one computer or the other, &c. This is not an awesome patent. That's not the point I'm making.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
zoips 15y ago
I'm a bit confused about how a web app doesn't infringe. Your claim is it doesn't because it's split between two machines, but that's merely a function of one use. A web app can be used from a single machine, with the server portion and the client portion executing on the same processor. You could even jerry-rig it so the browser and the server communicated via a shared memory map, if using the same memory locations is an issue.