On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 11:06:20PM -0600, pjfjacks wrote: > A computer program is much more than an integer - it is a collection of > Words (translated through many layers) into zeros and ones that represent > A unique solution to a problem. No - that's also an important mistake. It's not unique. I printed out the integer for /bin/arch on my workstation at work. I did the same here at home. Unsurprisingly, the same "program" has non-unique representations! The source code, on the other hand may be unique. A computer doesn't care about your source code anymore than your body cares about a doctor's "GATAACTGAT.." notation of your DNA. It's merely notation - in that notated form, the DNA/program is completely non-functional. > Nevertheless, they do represent the intent of the author to create a unique > Solution to some problem. If you are talking about source code, I do agree. But source code is as useless to a computer as a picture of a liver is your bloodstream. It's just not gonna do anything. I disagree that a computer program and its source code are identifiable. They are obviously bear some relation to one another, but that relation is certainly not identity! > That is like saying no one can patent a piece of electric powered machinery > because it is all just electrons, and no one has a patent on electrons. > The patent is not on the electrons, but on the unique way they are used. No, not at all. A machine is a physical object that functions with it's non-digital representation. Completely different. -- Ross Vandegrift ross@xxxxxxxxxxxx "The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell." --St. Augustine, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book II, xviii, 37
