[FOM] An Explanation of Computation Theory for Lawyers

[Julian Rohrhuber]

Thanks for this link, this is an interesting text and also a 
remarkably intense discussion. I've just finished a paper about this 
and arrive at a similar conclusion. As far as I know the difficulty 
is anyhow that it is not possible to "really" prove the equivalence 
of two algorithms. Then it is also not possible to know whether a 
patent applies to a given algorithm. Would you agree?



>This page, written by an anonymous groklaw contributor, (PolR)
>An Explanation of Computation Theory for Lawyers
>http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20091111151305785
>may be of interest to some FOM readers.
>
>As the title indicates, the page is written to be understood by lawyers,
>not mathematicians or computer scientists. I suspect the page is
>of more of interest to computer scientists, but the paper should
>not be without interest to FOM people. In many places the page discusses
>the history of FOM. Some FOM philosophical questions are mentioned.
>
>The page clearly intends to influence the debate over the patentability
>of software. Is Software Mathematics?
>
>Are there any errors or over simplifications that should be pointed out
>to the author? Any other comments?
>
>--
>Paul Elliott                               1(512)837-1096
>pelliott at BlackPatchPanel.com               PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J
>http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/   Austin TX 78758-3117
>_______________________________________________
>FOM mailing list
>FOM at cs.nyu.edu
>http://www.cs.nyu.edu/mailman/listinfo/fom


-- 





.