Sounds like someone's got a lot to gain from the patent system staying the way it is.
All I was saying is that this definition doesn't really fit.
I don't necessarily agree with Myhrvold, but I don't think this guy is giving him enough credit.
The problem Myhrvold gives is real: large companies with lots of resources can, if they choose to, steal your idea and try to compete. This problem comes up on HN periodically, and I think the canon is to simply have the better product. I would call this playing field more level than the one where entrepreneurial teams can't compete at all.
The "canon is to simple have the better product?" What happens when you're a small developer and a company like Microsoft or Lodsys or Intellectual Ventures holds some ancient patent to an obvious feature you just happened to include in your product? Having the best product in the world isn't going to help you very much.
Company A has $1 billion in cash and some high level exeprts in implementing CMS
Company B has $1 million in cash..
..that is not stealing ..that is just one is better prepared than the other to execute the idea..
Myhrvold would have better argument if he stuck to the patent context..ie the public good part in long term later is balanced by in the short-term with the invent0or getting some cash via patent royalties
The situation I described above is right from MS's past playbook..
The first para in Wikipedia would give him a clue.
"Myhrvold attended Mirman School, and began college at age 14. He studied mathematics, geophysics, and space physics at UCLA (BSc, Masters). He was awarded a Hertz Foundation Fellowship for graduate study and he chose to study at Princeton University, where he earned a master's degree in mathematical economics and completed a PhD in theoretical and mathematical physics by age 23. He also attended Santa Monica College. For one year, he held a postdoctoral fellowship at the University of Cambridge working under Stephen Hawking, studying cosmology, quantum field theory in curved space time and quantum theories of gravitation."
So if this is his level of research why on earth would anyone in their right minds who is not already a patent hater take this chump seriously?
You can be a genius and still have an anti-innovation business model.
Stronger patents on every little technique you can use on the Internet, held by people like Myrhvold, aren't very likely to help hackers at startups.
Those startup hackers who have real innovation that needs IP protection, don't need help from patent trolls.
I have a hunch he’s 1980s Microsoft-smart, which is to say he’s about as much fun to be with as a talking Wikipedia page, but hey, some people like that.
While Myhrvold has only done things like created the most prominent computer science research institution in the world, written what is now heralded as one of the finest cooking books ever written, co-authored a NY Times #1 best-seller, and was amongst the most highly regarded young physicists of his time -- among other things.
And this guy Kedrosky apparently does finance and apparently nothing of merit in or beyond that. As they say, those in glass houses should not drop huge boulders on their toes.