Patenting an algorithm, ie a logical machine built solely on maths, is pretty much like patenting a natural law of physics. Not to mention the workflows in the

Patenting an algorithm, ie a logical machine built solely on maths, is pretty much like patenting a natural law of physics. Not to mention the workflows in the patent are obvious statement, after obvious statement, after obvious statement. This is absurd beyond description, and of course doesn't help innovation one bit. Kudos to the patent examiners for their deep analytical skills. On a side note, the cost of a book being described as being electricity and hardware, it has only two logical conclusions: - open source licences are getting abused as pointed out by belorn - authors are getting their contents used and sold as if the "author" was that system