Re: Patents (was Re: Copyrights)

Article View: gnu.misc.discuss

Article #75336

#75336

From: Anton Rang
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 1990 17:10

16 lines
1496 bytes

In article <9008081352.AA16981@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV> de5@STC06.CTD.ORNL.GOV (SILL D E) writes:
>That's naive.  Some algorithms are basic and obvious, others aren't.

  But one person's obvious is another person's abstruse.  Is the
quicksort algorithm obvious or not, for instance?  Or an algorithm
which multiplies binary numbers by searching for '01' or '10'
transitions, rather than doing a straightforward shift-and-add?
(Can't recall the name of this...Booth's algorithm?)

  Who would decide whether an algorithm is 'obvious' or not?

	Anton
   
+---------------------------+------------------+-------------+
| Anton Rang (grad student) | rang@cs.wisc.edu | UW--Madison |
+---------------------------+------------------+-------------+

Technical Details

Message-ID: <RANG.90Aug12121033@jaguar.cs.wisc.edu>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!uwvax!rang

References: <1990Aug7.194930.8788@athena.mit.edu> <9008081352.AA16981@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,a3783b857baac617
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1990-08-12 10:34:43 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!uwvax!rang
From: rang@cs.wisc.edu (Anton Rang)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Patents (was Re: Copyrights)
Summary: Who defines 'obvious'?
Message-ID: <RANG.90Aug12121033@jaguar.cs.wisc.edu>
Date: 12 Aug 90 17:10:33 GMT
References: <1990Aug7.194930.8788@athena.mit.edu>
 <9008081352.AA16981@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV>
Sender: news@spool.cs.wisc.edu
Organization: UW-Madison CS department
Lines: 16
Posted: Sun Aug 12 18:10:33 1990
In-reply-to: de5@STC06.CTD.ORNL.GOV's message of 8 Aug 90 13:52:30 GMT

Reply to Parent Message