Re: "Numbers to be patentable"
From: Jan Panteltje (pNaonStpealmtje_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 11/24/03
- Next message: Adam O'Brien: "Re: Security elements about Feistel ciphers"
- Previous message: Jan Panteltje: "Re: "Numbers to be patentable""
- In reply to: Tom St Denis: "Re: "Numbers to be patentable""
- Next in thread: Bradley Bungmunch: "Re: "Numbers to be patentable""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 18:48:51 GMT
On a sunny day (Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:29:14 GMT) it happened "Tom St Denis"
<tomstdenis@iahu.ca> wrote in
<Kdrwb.19357$X2W1.8135@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>:
>
>"Lassi Hippeläinen" <lahippel@ieee.orgasm-research.invalid> wrote in message
>news:3FC20E89.254DD829@ieee.orgasm-research.invalid...
>> "In a move that has surprised naïve observers, the US Patent Office has
>> announced that from now on it will consider 'serious' applications to
>> patent specific integer numbers."
>>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/28/34148.html
>>
>> Note that only 'serious' applications will be considered. The procedure
>> will include a personal visit to the examiner. Those who can't keep a
>> straight face will be rejected.
>
>How do you invent an integer? Sure you could invent an algorithm [e.g. DH
>over safe primes] but a specific integer?
>
>This is obviously a hoax as USPTO can't possibly be this stupid.
>
>Tom
Integers is simple, but now I come in:
'I want to patent Pi'.
'OK sir, just write the number down here on this form'.
- Next message: Adam O'Brien: "Re: Security elements about Feistel ciphers"
- Previous message: Jan Panteltje: "Re: "Numbers to be patentable""
- In reply to: Tom St Denis: "Re: "Numbers to be patentable""
- Next in thread: Bradley Bungmunch: "Re: "Numbers to be patentable""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|