🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8996@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> chased@rbbb.Eng.Sun.COM (David Chase)
writes:

>  c) but -- there should be some reward for being first and being
>     public about a useful discovery.

Well perhaps there should be in the form of recognition, fame, tenure,
promotions, prizes and so forth.  But why should there be *patents*?
Why should the reward be a government granted monopoly to screw the
public?

Such monopolies aren't granted for discoveries in physics or chemistry.
Why should they be granted for discoveries in computer science?  Oh,
computer science is different, you say?  It's really not a science, but
a business.  Screwing the public is what it's really all about.  And the
government should support that.  It's the American Way.  Yeah.

The sooner we get rid of software patents, the sooner computer science
can become a science.

Charles Geyer
Department of Statistics
University of Chicago
geyer@galton.uchicago.edu