Am I evil, or is killing patents just plain fun? • Hacker News Board

Re: Am I evil, or is killing patents just plain fun?

#121

Post by cushychicken » Fri, Apr 25, 2014, 3:26 AM UTC

darkmighty wrote: post #106

yebyen wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can completely describe a crucial innovation without which your product would not be original or compelling, without completely describing your product and giving an instruction manual to start from nothing and build a better competitor to your business. In that case your "whole" business process or product would not be protected, but it is possible that by identifying the one thing you do better than your potent…

I really doubt that in 20 years something would not be reversed engineered or trivial by then. Moreover, patents are usually functional specifications, not algorithmic. In the rare cases where the description is vital, like perhaps crypto or coding patents, the published software already allows reverse engineering. Isn't the actual intention of patents to publicize the invention after the 20 years has gone by?

>In the rare cases where the description is vital, like perhaps crypto or coding patents,

This is a bit of a nitpicky thing, but patenting crypto isn't really a great way of protecting your secrets - hiding away the algorithm is basically security by obscurity. Crypto has historically been one of those things that's made stronger by more scrutiny.

Re: Am I evil, or is killing patents just plain fun?

#122

Post by sirdogealot » Fri, Apr 25, 2014, 3:54 AM UTC

namenotrequired wrote: post #102

sirdogealot wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't even require machine learnign imho. From the first example: generating, using a processor = calculating a plurality of images = images clusters = groups It's more of a translation software than machine learning. Perhaps the translation software could suggest 3-4 variations of the legalese sentence and allow users to vote for the best translation?

Isn't translation software trained with machine learning?

If lots of people are helping to translate, it could be. It depends.

Re: Am I evil, or is killing patents just plain fun?

#123

Post by TophWells » Fri, Apr 25, 2014, 10:48 AM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #109

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re your last sentence - how do you know, they could be using it for email or for a private internet app, VPN, or something. You don't have to use domains for public web services.

Here's a clue: http://imgur.com/FcyIc4P (I wonder if the HN traffic spike drives up the "value"?)

Almost certainly. Supply, demand, and so on.

Re: Am I evil, or is killing patents just plain fun?

#124

Post by pbhjpbhj » Sat, Apr 26, 2014, 5:20 PM UTC

cushychicken wrote: post #121

darkmighty wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt that in 20 years something would not be reversed engineered or trivial by then. Moreover, patents are usually functional specifications, not algorithmic. In the rare cases where the description is vital, like perhaps crypto or coding patents, the published software already allows reverse engineering. Isn't the actual intention of patents to publicize the invention after the 20 years has gone by?

>In the rare cases where the description is vital, like perhaps crypto or coding patents, This is a bit of a nitpicky thing, but patenting crypto isn't really a great way of protecting your secrets - hiding away the algorithm is basically security by obscurity. Crypto has historically been one of those things that's made stronger by more scrutiny.

But patenting it requires that you disclose the method; it is an opposite position to keeping it secret.