On Jun 19, 5:00 am, Oscar Hsieh <[email protected]> wrote: > There is no need to be rude. Cedric is a regular here and I am sure most > people don't consider him a troll.
I said he was trolling, not a troll. > > Use the wikipedia link you provided. Correlation does not imply causation > but correlation can be a "hint" and thus provide reason to do further > research. Yeah, that's what I was getting at. It may be considered "inspiration" for research, but not proof of a theory. That is if you apply academic requirements and not populist rhetoric. In fact, much academic research starts out with some observed correlation peeking a researcher's interest, leading to a study aimed to reveal wether there is a causation. In Cedric's post it was presented as causation though. > Anyway, enough had said on this topic by others in this forum. I do > believe that by now most people already have strong believe one way or the > other (abolish vs fix software patent) so it is rather pointless to argue > here. If only it was that simple. Unfortunately, software patents apply (in the US) both to those that agree with them and those who don't. As long as they do, we have to debate them or they won't change. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
