Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem • Hacker News Board

Re: Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem

#51

Post by casiotone » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #42

Tenobrus wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Under a different system that doesn't incentivize holding back global progress for small amounts of individual enrichment. There's a reason Linux and GNU utilities are so massively widely used, and overall they've probably provided billions in economic value. They do that freely, for any human to use, and in fact that's part of their main value proposition. Both were born out of the legal nightmare that was UNIX at t…

> Under a different system that doesn't incentivize holding back global progress for small amounts of individual enrichment. Patents don't hold back global progress any more than capitalism keeps people in poverty. If we went back a few hundred years and impose alternatives, would we be better off today? I doubt it. The whole point of the patent system is to foster innovation, and free exchange of ideas. Without the…

> Patents don't hold back global progress any more than capitalism keeps people in poverty.

Thanks. I was worried I would go the whole day without spitting out my drink.

Re: Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem

#52

Post by f4rker » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

turc1656 wrote: post #5

speps wrote: post #2

And immediately patents it... so no one else can use it. EDIT: and for some other methods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unum_%28number_format%29 , particularly the latest one being the Posit method: http://superfri.org/superfri/article/download/137/232 EDIT2: of course other people can license it, but the other way to bring a new floating point to the scene would be through the same process that happened with IEEE 7…

He's an inventor. Inventors usually work towards patents. Also, it's not so "no one else can use it". It's so that he can license out his work to a company like Intel. The patent is to protect him from a company like Intel going "sweet, thanks for the fix." And then profiting off his work. Or do you expect this guy to work for free?

>"Or do you expect this guy to work for free?"

Yes. Remember, we're on The Peoples Republic of the Internet. Capitalism and money are the worst thing ever.

Re: Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem

#53

Post by wolfgke » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #45

bringtheaction wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the whole patent system is broken and everyone who partakes in it shares blame.

This is an absolutist position that permits no subtlety. But the patent system is a subtle incentivization which seeks to balance a number of forces (in particular, it incentivizes people to invent new things that they can profit from, while also avoiding trade secrets).

> This is an absolutist position that permits no subtlety.

Where is the problem with such positions?

Re: Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem

#54

Post by msla » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

speps wrote: post #2

And immediately patents it... so no one else can use it. EDIT: and for some other methods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unum_%28number_format%29 , particularly the latest one being the Posit method: http://superfri.org/superfri/article/download/137/232 EDIT2: of course other people can license it, but the other way to bring a new floating point to the scene would be through the same process that happened with IEEE 7…

Also, keep in mind that patents don't mean the invention works, and they certainly don't mean the invention is useful for anything.

https://ploum.net/working-with-patents/

> Note that by « valid », I mean that the Patent Office didn’t found a trivial prior art for this. It doesn’t mean that there is no prior art or that I’m the real inventor or that my invention works.

An example of an insane patent:

https://www.google.com/patents/US6960975

> Space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state US 6960975 B1

(via https://www.metabunk.org/do-patents-mean-the-invention-works... )

Re: Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem

#55

Post by Chaebixi » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

HarryHirsch wrote: post #33

api wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the downside, but how else would he ever get paid for this?

They could have used trade secrets. Konrad Zuse tells the story that back then, optical equipment manufacturers used to contract him for computations. Instead of rooms full of mechanical calculators operated by humans (the original "computers") they would supply his company with data and algorithms and he would reply back with results. Apparently, there were design reasons why for electronic calculations a different…

Trade secrets are worse because then the design never gets disclosed, and has to be rediscovered. Time limited patents are a good and explicit trade off between the personal benefit of the inventor and the benefit of society.

> Michael Hanack (the materials chemist) used a different strategy: he would not patent anything so his inventions could be used my any market participant, and he would consult for all of them.

That won't work if the invention is easily copied. Chemistry is tricky and there's probably plenty of money to be made in consulting in it. A lot of industries aren't like that.

Re: Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem

#56

Post by vec » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:23 PM UTC

turc1656 wrote: post #5

speps wrote: post #2

And immediately patents it... so no one else can use it. EDIT: and for some other methods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unum_%28number_format%29 , particularly the latest one being the Posit method: http://superfri.org/superfri/article/download/137/232 EDIT2: of course other people can license it, but the other way to bring a new floating point to the scene would be through the same process that happened with IEEE 7…

He's an inventor. Inventors usually work towards patents. Also, it's not so "no one else can use it". It's so that he can license out his work to a company like Intel. The patent is to protect him from a company like Intel going "sweet, thanks for the fix." And then profiting off his work. Or do you expect this guy to work for free?

I don't expect him to work for free, but I do want Intel (and AMD, ARM, NVIDIA, TI, and anyone else who makes a floating point module) to go "sweet, thanks for the fix" as quickly and, almost more importantly, as collectively as possible.

I want this guy to be compensated, but I'd prefer this guy be compensated in a manner that doesn't prevent third parties from fixing their hardware. In general, I think bounties are a good solution to this. Failing that, there are plenty of trade groups and nonprofits and regulatory bodies that could be tasked (and funded) with acquiring and freely redistributing this class of innovation if we wanted to.

Re: Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem

#57

Post by dekhn » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:23 PM UTC

wolfgke wrote: post #49

dekhn wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patents don't necessarily mean nobody else can use it. For example, he could license the technology which means people have to pay to use it.

And what about programmers that care about free as freedom?

What about them? You're free to discover new things, and not patent them, instead publishing them. If you have a problem with patents, take it up with the legislature and the judicial system, but there's no reason to attack inventors for using a common legal system for protecting their intellectual property.

Re: Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem

#58

Post by exabrial » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:23 PM UTC

ben11kehoe wrote: post #35

Mathematica has the cool ability to do symbolic tracking of numerical precision, for the ability to tell you when, for example, your differential equation solver is giving you meaningless results.

Is there a reason why we can't have that as a compiler warning?

Re: Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem

#59

Post by Joe-Z » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:24 PM UTC

turc1656 wrote: post #5

speps wrote: post #2

And immediately patents it... so no one else can use it. EDIT: and for some other methods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unum_%28number_format%29 , particularly the latest one being the Posit method: http://superfri.org/superfri/article/download/137/232 EDIT2: of course other people can license it, but the other way to bring a new floating point to the scene would be through the same process that happened with IEEE 7…

He's an inventor. Inventors usually work towards patents. Also, it's not so "no one else can use it". It's so that he can license out his work to a company like Intel. The patent is to protect him from a company like Intel going "sweet, thanks for the fix." And then profiting off his work. Or do you expect this guy to work for free?

>Or do you expect this guy to work for free?

Apparently he did up until now, didn't he?

I agree he should get a percentage of the profits other companies make off of his invention, but it's not like he's entitled to any payments just because he liked to tinker around. Inventor's not a real profession.

Re: Inventor Claims to Have Solved Floating Point Error Problem

#60

Post by DonaldFisk » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 4:24 PM UTC

chmike wrote: post #15

This looks so obvious. How could this be patented ? The real question is why no one already implemented it ? It wouldn't surprise me if it already exist.

If no one's thought of it before, how can it be obvious? If they have thought of it, the prior art can be brought to the attention of the patent office and the patent invalidated.