4 ms·

So, now we just have to define what exactly a mathematical algorithm is. Good luck with that.

• muglug 14y ago
  Now we just have to rewrite all "patented" algorithms in lambda-calculus. That should be easy...
  • chimeracoder 14y ago
    It's not that bad. "All" we have to do is implement everything in Lisp, since Lisp can be reduced trivially to the lambda calculus. Once again, Lisp saves the day! ;) EDIT: I'm totally looking forward to experienced Lisp and Haskell programmers like me being in high demand for their legendary skills... at invalidating patents!
    • PENLAND365 14y ago
      This brought lulz. Thanks.
    • deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    • dinkumthinkum 14y ago
      Well if you wrote a program in any Turing complete programming language, you would be done; how "trivial" it is doesn't matter. :)
      • greyfade 14y ago
        Indeed. By the Church-Turing Thesis, any program written for any Turing Machine (including any Turing-complete language) can be translated into the lambda calculus through a rote transformation.
• deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
• cbsmith 14y ago
  I'm pretty sure we're getting a grossly over simplified description of both the patent and the ruling.
• deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
• betterunix 14y ago
  Alan Turing did that already; see his solution to the Entscheidungsproblem.