On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 11:06:20PM -0600, pjfjacks wrote:
> A computer program is much more than an integer - it is a collection of
> Words (translated through many layers) into zeros and ones that represent
> A unique solution to a problem.
No - that's also an important mistake. It's not unique. I printed
out the integer for /bin/arch on my workstation at work. I did the
same here at home. Unsurprisingly, the same "program" has non-unique
representations! The source code, on the other hand may be unique.
A computer doesn't care about your source code anymore than your body
cares about a doctor's "GATAACTGAT.." notation of your DNA. It's
merely notation - in that notated form, the DNA/program is completely
non-functional.
> Nevertheless, they do represent the intent of the author to create a unique
> Solution to some problem.
If you are talking about source code, I do agree. But source code is
as useless to a computer as a picture of a liver is your bloodstream.
It's just not gonna do anything.
I disagree that a computer program and its source code are
identifiable. They are obviously bear some relation to one another,
but that relation is certainly not identity!
> That is like saying no one can patent a piece of electric powered machinery
> because it is all just electrons, and no one has a patent on electrons.
> The patent is not on the electrons, but on the unique way they are used.
No, not at all. A machine is a physical object that functions with
it's non-digital representation. Completely different.
-- Ross Vandegrift ross@email-addr-hidden "The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell." --St. Augustine, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book II, xviii, 37Received on Sun Feb 26 20:19:25 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 26 2006 - 20:19:25 EET