ntagonism to software patents has come from many credible directions, including Nobel Laureates. It's amazing that even programmers are often ignored in this debate because they favour copyrights, which enable them to still code freely, as in free of worries. They don't want patents, based on polls, studies and surveys. Even the EPO has articulated this conundrum and Glyn Moody remarks:
As the EPO says, software does not distinguish "between technical and non-technical processes". The reason it doesn't distinguish is because it is a completely factitious distinction: it doesn't exist. Software is just a bunch of algorithms working on data, outputting data; it doesn't solve "technical" problems, it solve mathematical ones. Software is mathematics.
Needless to say, the 'inventor' du jour believes that any spontaneous idea can be turned into a patent (especially given a skillful patent lawyer), no matter how generic or lacking in value it is. Watch the following new video. At first sight it looks like a joke but it's not. ⬆
Many sites will go offline and many social control networks will shut down once they realise or even openly admit they spend money and time gardening a bunch of bots and slop
it would rightly seem like the era of centralised "social" sites (they're not social, they're about controlling the users) is ending, not overnight but gradually
The next few years will be interesting because if Microsoft lays off tens of thousands of workers each year, there won't be much left except mountains of debt and dying brands
