Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #2989
| Path | csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!feeder.news-service.com!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| Return-Path | <debatem1@gmail.com> |
| X-Original-To | python-list@python.org |
| Delivered-To | python-list@mail.python.org |
| X-Spam-Status | OK 0.009 |
| X-Spam-Evidence | '*H*': 0.98; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:: [': 0.03; '(although': 0.05; 'algorithms': 0.07; 'distinction': 0.07; 'infinite': 0.07; 'received:mail-qy0-f174.google.com': 0.07; 'outlined': 0.09; 'pieces': 0.09; 'portions': 0.09; 'satisfying': 0.09; 'this:': 0.11; 'examples': 0.12; 'slightly': 0.12; 'am,': 0.14; 'described': 0.14; 'wrote:': 0.14; '(which,': 0.16; 'agree.': 0.16; 'arithmetic,': 0.16; 'clear.': 0.16; 'computation': 0.16; 'countless': 0.16; 'earlier,': 0.16; 'lambda': 0.16; 'mathematics.': 0.16; 'received:209.85.216.174': 0.16; 'subject:versus': 0.16; 'wind': 0.16; '\xa0using': 0.16; 'argument': 0.16; 'dependent': 0.16; 'mathematics': 0.16; 'ignore': 0.16; 'subject:] ': 0.16; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.20; 'cc:2**0': 0.20; '(which': 0.21; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.22; 'mon,': 0.22; 'solving': 0.22; 'discovery': 0.23; 'encouraging': 0.23; 'joining': 0.23; 'sometimes,': 0.23; 'systems.': 0.24; 'point,': 0.25; 'accepting': 0.26; 'statement': 0.26; 'skip:b 20': 0.27; 'work.': 0.27; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.28; 'definition': 0.29; 'problem': 0.29; 'explicitly': 0.29; 'url:ca': 0.29; 'least': 0.30; 'seem': 0.30; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.31; 'do.': 0.31; 'extremely': 0.31; 'model': 0.31; 'finite': 0.31; 'innovation,': 0.31; 'rigorous': 0.31; 'solved': 0.31; 'does': 0.31; 'it.': 0.31; 'fact': 0.31; "can't": 0.31; 'all,': 0.31; 'anyone': 0.31; 'agree': 0.32; 'bit': 0.33; "isn't": 0.34; 'skip:" 10': 0.34; 'post': 0.34; 'certain': 0.34; 'clearly': 0.34; 'there': 0.35; 'problem,': 0.35; 'suggestion': 0.35; 'difficult': 0.35; 'finding': 0.35; '-0700,': 0.35; 'describing': 0.35; 'fails': 0.35; 'subject:software': 0.35; 'usually': 0.36; 'quite': 0.36; 'too': 0.36; 'doing': 0.36; 'allow': 0.36; 'rather': 0.36; 'ideal': 0.36; 'properties': 0.36; 'getting': 0.36; 'think': 0.36; 'problems': 0.37; 'two': 0.37; 'some': 0.37; 'rest': 0.37; 'should': 0.37; 'received:209.85': 0.37; '(by': 0.38; 'apr': 0.38; 'hardware': 0.38; 'mathematical': 0.38; 'nine': 0.38; 'other,': 0.38; 'steven': 0.38; 'received:google.com': 0.38; 'less': 0.38; 'but': 0.38; 'reasonable': 0.38; 'reasons': 0.38; 'software': 0.38; '2011': 0.62; 'world.': 0.64; 'human': 0.64; 'perfectly': 0.65; 'prove': 0.65; 'believe': 0.66; 'credit': 0.67; 'here.': 0.68; 'discounts': 0.69; 'hand,': 0.72; 'subject:Free': 0.72; 'concept': 0.73; 'physical': 0.74; 'claim': 0.76; '11,': 0.77; '4000': 0.84; 'discourage': 0.84; 'earth.': 0.84; 'forbid': 0.84; 'illustrated': 0.84; 'patents,': 0.84; 'problematic': 0.84; 'remarkably': 0.84; 'sets,': 0.84; 'terminology': 0.84; '\xa0same': 0.84; 'calculus': 0.91; 'existed': 0.91; 'obvious,': 0.91; 'original.': 0.91; 'patents': 0.91; 'reasons:': 0.91; 'absolutely': 0.98 |
| DKIM-Signature | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=mJkTI8RQk0PxM/7123Gl38ON+pfc2vPcTQychcAIXuw=; b=HF9cVWFximCizHfvocvAmf1WOOcuS2WEbl1GDWqPQeZXpd0VeOgBzFJEDtXz0EGt1u yoHVNLbEjf+X3HzTjPHF/vVjRcoSuuMACK2JlEayFBo03MtpWNhX/P5yLAiyONZh1HoF KW7VK+xYO7vyQZA/0oVbSXyYE6t+L/zPK3Y+4= |
| DomainKey-Signature | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=a/3yLdRvO8cXT7TZE49m52qcU4m1b2sYYvrFnoWPGYCAFQgjItMQtd55MxdcNCzzn5 AQgXhU3xMlX7cDodJ4XYLOpGAuUJ7NCTKdzpqOVVVDWYtgGlcLap5TQOby88rJa8IJmp B6E+ZXnXpIoVPC0yCQP7goOXo44pQ3UqIcyuc= |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| In-Reply-To | <4da2c58a$0$29965$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| References | <mailman.65.1302065189.9059.python-list@python.org> <t7Vmp.7632$zn.3197@newsfe19.iad> <mailman.72.1302078388.9059.python-list@python.org> <4d9c5ca5$0$29991$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <87tyebf3r3.fsf_-_@benfinney.id.au> <_Abnp.8356$zn.729@newsfe19.iad> <4d9d6587$0$29992$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <OHlnp.10535$g56.5872@newsfe04.iad> <mailman.121.1302206148.9059.python-list@python.org> <__top.14604$zn.8052@newsfe19.iad> <mailman.209.1302508440.9059.python-list@python.org> <4da2c58a$0$29965$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| Date | Mon, 11 Apr 2011 11:17:09 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents |
| From | geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> |
| To | "Steven D'Aprano" <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | quoted-printable |
| Cc | python-list@python.org |
| X-BeenThere | python-list@python.org |
| X-Mailman-Version | 2.1.12 |
| Precedence | list |
| List-Id | General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org> |
| List-Unsubscribe | <http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe> |
| List-Archive | <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list> |
| List-Post | <mailto:python-list@python.org> |
| List-Help | <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help> |
| List-Subscribe | <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.223.1302545833.9059.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
| Lines | 91 |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 82.94.164.166 |
| X-Trace | 1302545833 news.xs4all.nl 81479 [::ffff:82.94.164.166]:33196 |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@xs4all.nl |
| Xref | x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:2989 |
Show key headers only | View raw
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote: > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 00:53:57 -0700, geremy condra wrote: <snip> >> I am extremely skeptical of this argument. Leaving aside the fact that >> you've randomly decided to drop the "decidable" qualifier here- a big >> problem in its own right- it isn't clear to me that software and >> computation are synonymous. Lambda calculus only models computation, and >> software has real properties in implementation that are strictly >> dependent on the physical world. Since perfectly predicting those >> properties would seem to require that you perfectly model significant >> portions of the physical universe, I think it's quite reasonable to >> contend that the existence of lambda calculus no more rules out the >> applicability of patents to software (which I detest) than it rules out >> the applicability of patents to hardware (which I find only slightly >> less ridiculous) or other meatspace inventions. > > I agree with all of this: I too detest software patents, and find > hardware patents problematic but pragmatic. But if there's a reason for > accepting one and rejecting the other, it's far more subtle than the hand- > waving about mathematics. I believe that the reason falls more to > *pragmatic* reasons than *philosophical* reasons: software patents act to > discourage innovation, while hardware patents (arguably) act to encourage > it. After all, encouraging innovation is what patents are for. > > M Harris' argument fails right at the beginning: > > "Mathematical processes and algorithms are not patentable (by rule) > because they are 'natural' and 'obvious'." > > It's not clear to me how the Banach-Tarski paradox can be described as > 'natural': > > Using the axiom of choice on non-countable sets, you can prove > that a solid sphere can be dissected into a finite number of > pieces that can be reassembled to two solid spheres, each of > same volume of the original. No more than nine pieces are needed. > ... This is usually illustrated by observing that a pea can be > cut up into finitely pieces and reassembled into the Earth. > > http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~alopez-o/math-faq/mathtext/node36.html > > > And I think anyone who knows the slightest bit of mathematics would be > falling over laughing at the suggestion that it is 'obvious'. I'd quibble with you over terminology here. BTP arises naturally- ie, without being explicitly constructed- in certain axiomatic systems. But I get your point. > Of course, some mathematics is obvious, or at least intuitive (although > proving it rigorously can be remarkably difficult -- after 4000 years of > maths, we still don't have an absolutely bullet-proof proof that 1+1=2). Erm. This is getting a bit far afield, but yes, we do. The statement you provide above part of Presbuger arithmetic, which is both complete and decidable. > But describing mathematics as 'obvious' discounts the role of invention, > human imagination, ingenuity and creativity in mathematics. There's > nothing obvious about (say) asymmetric encryption, or solving NP-complete > problems like the knapsack problem, to mention just two examples out of > literally countless examples.[1] Meh. Obvious is in the eye of the beholder, and I doubt we'll wind up coming up with a satisfying and rigorous definition here. I'd therefore rest on the concept of 'natural' I outlined earlier, which would clearly forbid patenting the product of discovery but allow patenting inventions. > If it were just a matter of joining the dots, there would be no unsolved > problems, since Euler would have solved them all 200 years ago.[2] > > Part of the patent problem is that the distinction between discovery of a > fact (which should not be patentable) and invention (which, at least > sometimes, should be patentable) is not clear. The iPod existed as a > Platonic ideal in some mathematical bazillion-dimensional abstract design > space long before it was invented by Apple; does that make it a discovery > rather than an invention? On the other hand, it is doing Apple a great > disservice to ignore their creativity in finding that design point, out > of the infinite number of almost-iPods that suck[3] or don't work. I agree. Of course, your post existed as a billion-point platonic ideal beforehand, so you can't really claim credit (man, Plato figured *everything* out!), but still. Geremy Condra
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Python benefits over Cobra Brendan Simon <Brendan@BrendanSimon.com> - 2011-04-06 14:40 +1000
Re: Python benefits over Cobra harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-06 03:03 -0500
Re: Python benefits over Cobra Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-06 18:26 +1000
Re: Python benefits over Cobra Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-06 12:29 +0000
Re: Python benefits over Cobra Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-06 23:06 +1000
[OT] Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-04-07 07:50 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-07 00:03 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-07 07:19 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-07 11:33 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Mel <mwilson@the-wire.com> - 2011-04-07 17:15 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-08 05:55 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-10 21:49 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-11 00:53 -0700
Re: Free software versus software idea patents rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2011-04-11 01:36 -0700
Re: Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-12 03:53 -0500
Re: Free software versus software idea patents Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-04-12 13:32 -0400
Re: Free software versus software idea patents Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 11:44 -0700
Re: Free software versus software idea patents Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-04-12 15:39 -0400
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-11 09:10 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-11 11:17 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-11 22:28 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-11 15:55 -0700
Re: [even more OT than before] Arithmetic [was Free software versus software idea patents] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-12 11:34 +0000
Re: [even more OT than before] Arithmetic [was Free software versus software idea patents] geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 11:11 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-04-12 10:02 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-12 03:15 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 09:54 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-14 00:35 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 23:36 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-14 02:22 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 09:51 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-16 00:21 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 23:46 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Algis Kabaila <akabaila@pcug.org.au> - 2011-04-16 21:01 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-16 23:36 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-17 10:31 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-16 18:35 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-18 01:29 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-18 00:34 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-04-12 13:43 -0400
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-12 23:56 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 17:05 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-07 07:39 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-07 18:17 +1000
Re: Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra) flebber <flebber.crue@gmail.com> - 2011-04-07 03:51 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-07 10:31 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Benjamin Kaplan <benjamin.kaplan@case.edu> - 2011-04-07 11:50 -0400
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam@whitemice.org> - 2011-04-07 13:55 -0400
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-07 14:37 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-08 01:30 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-08 01:37 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-09 23:55 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-10 19:04 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-11 10:18 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-10 20:48 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Westley Martínez <anikom15@gmail.com> - 2011-04-10 21:01 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-04-11 11:26 -0600
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-12 04:22 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Westley Martínez <anikom15@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 06:59 -0700
Re: Free software versus software idea patents CM <cmpython@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 10:48 -0700
Re: Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 11:13 -0700
Re: Free software versus software idea patents Westley Martínez <anikom15@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 15:56 -0700
Re: Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-14 00:50 -0500
Re: Free software versus software idea patents geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 23:38 -0700
Re: Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-14 02:29 -0500
Re: Free software versus software idea patents Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-04-14 08:42 -0700
Re: Free software versus software idea patents CM <cmpython@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 09:48 -0700
Re: Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-15 23:27 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 13:37 -0600
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-12 23:45 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-14 01:04 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 19:15 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-14 14:02 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 00:11 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Westley Martínez <anikom15@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 13:46 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-15 02:21 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-04-14 22:52 -0400
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Westley Martínez <anikom15@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 13:50 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-04-14 21:36 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 08:01 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-04-14 22:13 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-15 01:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Westley Martínez <anikom15@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 15:23 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-04-14 22:55 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-15 02:09 +0000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 12:31 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-04-14 22:43 -0400
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-04-14 14:20 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 02:28 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 10:49 -0600
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 13:51 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 15:05 -0600
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 03:31 +1000
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-08 01:41 -0500
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Westley Martínez <anikom15@gmail.com> - 2011-04-08 07:14 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-04-08 09:10 -0700
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2011-04-09 07:45 +0100
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra) Ross Ridge <rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> - 2011-04-07 14:18 -0400
Re: [OT] Free software versus software idea patents Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-04-10 11:53 +1000
Re: Free software versus software idea patents (was: Python benefits over Cobra) sturlamolden <sturlamolden@yahoo.no> - 2011-04-12 09:04 -0700
Re: Python benefits over Cobra harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-04-07 00:25 -0500
Re: Python benefits over Cobra Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-07 06:43 +0000
csiph-web