Greentext

4454 readers

1527 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

Anon is often crazy.
Anon is often depressed.
Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works

1433

Anon notices what they've taken from us (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 10 months ago by Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works to c/greentext@sh.itjust.works

496 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

That is an entirely valid concern, and I see where you're coming from with that. It would be short-sighted to introduce something revolutionary, only to open the floodgates for everyone else to start implementing it two decades later.

I was thinking of using patents more along the lines of "throw shit at the wall and see what sticks." Rather than trying to come up with every conceivable method for tracking user attention and patenting those, the hypothetical patent troll would create and patent hundreds of different smaller, novel processes that may or may not be needed as part of a larger system for tracking user attention. The overall goal being to make it likely enough for one or more of those patents to be violated that a company would consider it too risky to go anywhere near the idea of commercializing attention tracking software/hardware.