Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> Also, why are we more critical of an Intel-provided
> >>> idea than any other idea we get from the community?
> >> 
> >> Bitter experience with other companies.
> > The problem is we have lots of companies involved, and I bet some we
> > don't even know about (e.g. yahoo/gmail addresses),
> It's not so much that I don't trust Intel as that a CRC algorithm is
> exactly the sort of nice little self-contained thing that people love
> to try to patent these days.  What I am really afraid of is that someone
> else has already invented this same method (or something close enough
> to it) and filed for a patent that Intel doesn't know about either.
> I'd be wondering about that no matter where the code had come from.
> Given the numbers I posted earlier today, the proposal is dead in the
> water anyway, quite aside from any legal considerations.

Agreed.  I just wanted to point out we have other sharks in the water.  :-(

  Bruce Momjian   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to