It is a mistake, in my view, then, to swing too broadly in trying to fix things I feel that a natural line to draw is computability, which rayiner has argued a

It is a mistake, in my view, then, to swing too broadly in trying to fix things I feel that a natural line to draw is computability, which rayiner has argued against in another comment. He cites an old communications patent[1] as well as the ARM architecture patents as examples with protecting. I am not familiar with either, but I feel there needs to be a strong metric for patentability. To that end, I propose that we create a collection of patents that those of us whose innovations in software are supposed to be encouraged, feel are worth protecting. [1|http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=US&NR=3488445&KC=&FT=E&locale=en_EP http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=...]