Is the interleaved marker idea patentable ?

[Skybuck Flying]

Hi,

Has anyone of you in these newsgroups ever filed for a patent ?

I really like my marker idea... etc...

Data:
dddddeeeeefff <- bits of different fields d, e, f
Marker:
000010001001 <- markers to identify fields.

Finally these bits are interleaved:
d0d0d0d0d1e0e0e0e1f0f0f1

It seems nothing like this has ever be done before.

The only ones which came close where IBM... 1401 machine...

It used 1 bit per BCD decimal digit. Something like that.

If somebody is going to be filthy rich from my marker idea for bits... it
might as well be me the original inventor

However I have never ever patented anything before =D

And I don't life in the United States of America...

I life in the Netherlands/Europe.

So... I am reading this website:

"How to get a patent"

http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/howtopat.htm

It says:

1. File a Utility Patent Application.
2. File a Design Patent Application.
3. File a Plant Patent Application.
4. File a Patent Application electronically.

Which one fits best ?

Somewhere else it said the patent needs to be filled in the USA.

First I thought this ment, maybe I need to live in the USA ?

But it doesn't say that does it ? Maybe it just means it needs to be
"filled" = requested in the USA ?

So can anybody in the whole world ask/fill for a patent in the USA ?

That would be cool =D

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Robert Baer]

Hi,

Has anyone of you in these newsgroups ever filed for a patent ?

I really like my marker idea... etc...

Data:
dddddeeeeefff <- bits of different fields d, e, f
Marker:
000010001001 <- markers to identify fields.

Finally these bits are interleaved:
d0d0d0d0d1e0e0e0e1f0f0f1

It seems nothing like this has ever be done before.

The only ones which came close where IBM... 1401 machine...

It used 1 bit per BCD decimal digit. Something like that.

If somebody is going to be filthy rich from my marker idea for bits... it
might as well be me the original inventor

However I have never ever patented anything before =D

And I don't life in the United States of America...

I life in the Netherlands/Europe.

So... I am reading this website:

"How to get a patent"

http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/howtopat.htm

It says:

1. File a Utility Patent Application.
2. File a Design Patent Application.
3. File a Plant Patent Application.
4. File a Patent Application electronically.

Which one fits best ?

Somewhere else it said the patent needs to be filled in the USA.

First I thought this ment, maybe I need to live in the USA ?

But it doesn't say that does it ? Maybe it just means it needs to be
"filled" = requested in the USA ?

So can anybody in the whole world ask/fill for a patent in the USA ?

That would be cool =D

Bye,
Skybuck.

Obviously it is not a plant.
A design patent is crap; it is mor like a patent on artwork, and one
can make a small change for either another patent or public domain use.
So you are left with a utility patent; filing method up to you.
BUT.
You put your idea into the public domain when you disclosed it on the
net, so the patent, *if* awarded could be dis-allowed in court.

 

[Ken Taylor]

Hi,

Has anyone of you in these newsgroups ever filed for a patent ?

I really like my marker idea... etc...

Data:
dddddeeeeefff <- bits of different fields d, e, f
Marker:
000010001001 <- markers to identify fields.

Finally these bits are interleaved:
d0d0d0d0d1e0e0e0e1f0f0f1

It seems nothing like this has ever be done before.

Okay, here's a bit stream:

000001000000100000001000001

what was the original data?

Ken

 

[Don Taylor]

Has anyone of you in these newsgroups ever filed for a patent ?

I really like my marker idea... etc...

"Patent It Yourself" by Pressman, published by Nolo Press
has a lot of very good advice about the U.S. patent process.


Other, non-patent, things you could consider doing:

Write a software simulator for your CPU design.

Write a compiler for a simple language for your CPU design.

Both those are things that a newcomer could feasibly do
and which would likely provide a lot of learning in the
process.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

Obviously it is not a plant.
A design patent is crap; it is mor like a patent on artwork, and one
can make a small change for either another patent or public domain use.
So you are left with a utility patent; filing method up to you.
BUT.
You put your idea into the public domain when you disclosed it on the
net, so the patent, *if* awarded could be dis-allowed in court.

That is very interesting.

The following text is from the United States Patent and Trademark Office
website:

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/index.html

"
Novelty And Non-Obviousness, Conditions For Obtaining A Patent
In order for an invention to be patentable it must be new as defined in the
patent law, which provides that an invention cannot be patented if: "(a) the
invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or
described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the
invention thereof by the applicant for patent," or "(b) the invention was
patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country
or in public use or on sale in this country more than one year prior to the
application for patent in the United States . . ."

If the invention has been described in a printed publication anywhere in the
world, or if it was known or used by others in this country before the date
that the applicant made his/her invention, a patent cannot be obtained. If
the invention has been described in a printed publication anywhere, or has
been in public use or on sale in this country more than one year before the
date on which an application for patent is filed in this country, a patent
cannot be obtained. In this connection it is immaterial when the invention
was made, or whether the printed publication or public use was by the
inventor himself/herself or by someone else. If the inventor describes the
invention in a printed publication or uses the invention publicly, or places
it on sale, he/she must apply for a patent before one year has gone by,
otherwise any right to a patent will be lost. The inventor must file on the
date of public use or disclosure, however, in order to preserve patent
rights in many foreign countries.

Even if the subject matter sought to be patented is not exactly shown by the
prior art, and involves one or more differences over the most nearly similar
thing already known, a patent may still be refused if the differences would
be obvious. The subject matter sought to be patented must be sufficiently
different from what has been used or described before that it may be said to
be nonobvious to a person having ordinary skill in the area of technology
related to the invention. For example, the substitution of one color for
another, or changes in size, are ordinarily not patentable.

"

Notice this line of text:

"
If the inventor describes the invention in a printed publication or uses the
invention publicly, or places it on sale, he/she must apply for a patent
before one year has gone by, otherwise any right to a patent will be lost.
The inventor must file on the date of public use or disclosure, however, in
order to preserve patent rights in many foreign countries.
"

So according to this piece of a text I have one year to file for patent
since the date of publication. (which was a few days ago on usenet )

I do not care as much about foreign countries.

USA is probably biggest for software and hardware.

Other interesting countries/states might be Europe, Japan, Taiwan.

But the USA is the land of money, law and intellectual property and is
highly respected lol. By the court/lawyers/judges/juries at least.

Many lawsuits and settlements and stuff. At least that's what I am seeing

So why do you think the patent *if* awarded would be dis-allowed in court ?


Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

Okay, here's a bit stream:

000001000000100000001000001

what was the original data?

If this is the interleaved data + marker then it's invalid.

A bitstream encoded with my interleaved marker idea will always have a even
number of bits.

Yours is 27 bits.

Let's see how far we get.

I am going to split up each data + marker pair on a seperate line.

00
00
01

So far the data is zero.

00
00
00
10
00
00
00
10
00
00
1

There is no end marker so data is either corrupt or incomplete.

Pls provide more data

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

"Patent It Yourself" by Pressman, published by Nolo Press
has a lot of very good advice about the U.S. patent process.

But I am not a lawyer or an expert in these kinds of things...

I have no idea what parts have to be described or how etc.

How can I be certain I described it well so it will hold up in court

I think it's better if a lawyer or legal expert writes the document or at
least looks at a document.

I have done my best to describe the idea in this newsgroup...

What do you think ? Would such a description be enough or totally bogus ?

Other, non-patent, things you could consider doing:

Write a software simulator for your CPU design.

Yes I am working on that

Though I have to investigate how hardware/gates and such work to do it
realisticly

Write a compiler for a simple language for your CPU design.

This will probably be the hardest part

Both those are things that a newcomer could feasibly do
and which would likely provide a lot of learning in the
process.

Yup I agree with that.

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

Okay, here's a bit stream:

000001000000100000001000001

what was the original data?

You know something I am going to write a little tool, to help you and me to
create these kind of bitstreams and also read them

But not now, since I have to go do other stuff

But give it one or two days and you ll see it

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Matthias Melcher]

Hi,

Has anyone of you in these newsgroups ever filed for a patent ?

I really like my marker idea... etc...

Data:
dddddeeeeefff <- bits of different fields d, e, f
Marker:
000010001001 <- markers to identify fields.

Finally these bits are interleaved:
d0d0d0d0d1e0e0e0e1f0f0f1

I'd suggest that you check out MFM and RLE encoding of bitstreams.
Though they are not exactly what you did, they come very very close. I
am sure that if you do a little more research, you'd find your pattern
somewhere published as well. We did something quite similar during
computer science courses at university some 20 years ago.

 

[Keith Williams]

Obviously it is not a plant.
A design patent is crap; it is mor like a patent on artwork, and one
can make a small change for either another patent or public domain use.

A "topology" patent is usually not worth much, but a data-format patent
might be useful, if it's use is widespread. ;-)

So you are left with a utility patent; filing method up to you.

In this case, I'd agree.

BUT.
You put your idea into the public domain when you disclosed it on the
net, so the patent, *if* awarded could be dis-allowed in court.

Not so. At least in the US, he has one year to file for a patent after
the idea is "published" or used for "commercial advantage". Europe
doesn't have the one-year bar date (I.e. it's barred on disclosure).

 

[Don Taylor]

But I am not a lawyer or an expert in these kinds of things...

That book is FOR people who are not lawyers or expert patent filers.
That was why I recommended it to you.

I have no idea what parts have to be described or how etc.

That book tells you HOW to learn to determine how much of a
patent you can do yourself and how much you want someone
else to do, and whether you want to do a patent or not.

How can I be certain I described it well so it will hold up in court

My opinion is, if the patent is worthless to any competitor
then you won't ever be bothered with court problems and if
it is worth something to a large well funded competitor
then you won't win. But some people patent things for their
own reasons, rather than some deranged idea that they are
going to crush Intel in the courtroom.

I think it's better if a lawyer or legal expert writes the document or at
least looks at a document.

The book has very good advice on that subject.
That was why I recommended it to you.

I have done my best to describe the idea in this newsgroup...

What do you think ? Would such a description be enough or totally bogus ?

Read the book. That was why I recommended it to you.
I'm certainly not competent to advise you, even though
I've read the book a few times in years past
and concluded I'll never file a patent myself.

Yes I am working on that

Though I have to investigate how hardware/gates and such work to do it
realisticly

A software simulator can deal with things like
registers rather than deal with individual gates.
But the simulator should perhaps include some sort
of diagnostic information to give some idea of how
many operations are needed to execute a program.

This will probably be the hardest part

I think there will be other much harder parts than this.

But a compiler for an interesting, but simple language
and a simulator to execute the resulting compiled code
would let other people really see how your ideas might
work in something closer to practice.

If you wanted to discuss ideas for features of a language
that would show off the features of your CPU then you could
toss me email, address is valid, and we could do this without
annoying people who might not care about this. I might even
be able to dust off my ancient compiler writing brain cell
and see if I could remember how to do some of that again.

Yup I agree with that.

There are introductory books that teach students things
like "Register Transfer Language", used to describe
hardware in things like CPU's. Somewhere buried here I
have one or two of those but I'll never find them again.

 

[Ken Taylor]

If this is the interleaved data + marker then it's invalid.

A bitstream encoded with my interleaved marker idea will always have a
even
number of bits.

Yours is 27 bits.

Let's see how far we get.

I am going to split up each data + marker pair on a seperate line.

00
00
01

So far the data is zero.

00
00
00
10
00
00
00
10
00
00
1

There is no end marker so data is either corrupt or incomplete.

Pls provide more data

Bye,
Skybuck.

The 'original data' was coming to you in a stream, which you missed the
start of. If your 'markers' were useful then you should have been able to
deduce this and extract whatever data was available, or maybe even corrected
it. Your markers are sweet, but unless you have perfect data coming in then
IMHO they're not much use, and if the data is perfect why bother with them?

Cheers.

Ken

 

[John Larkin]

Hi,

Has anyone of you in these newsgroups ever filed for a patent ?

I really like my marker idea... etc...

Data:
dddddeeeeefff <- bits of different fields d, e, f
Marker:
000010001001 <- markers to identify fields.

Finally these bits are interleaved:
d0d0d0d0d1e0e0e0e1f0f0f1

It seems nothing like this has ever be done before.

The only ones which came close where IBM... 1401 machine...

It used 1 bit per BCD decimal digit. Something like that.

The 1401 was a decimal, digit-serial machine. It represented decimal
digits in various forms in different parts of the logic paths: BCD,
1-of-10, and in some places as a 2-of-5 code, that in a circuit they
called "main star." I can't imagine why they did all this. I suppose
that IBM still thought they were building card tabulation machines and
hadn't yet figured out that they were a computer company.

It had something like 4000 6-bit characters of memory, and they
managed to write a Fortran compiler that ran in it!

I interfaced an ADC to a 1401 once, fudging it into the realtime clock
option circuits, which the guy didn't have. The RTC was an actual
clock motor that drove a bunch of rotary switches.

John

 

[Bob Monsen]

Hi,

Has anyone of you in these newsgroups ever filed for a patent ?

I really like my marker idea... etc...

Data:
dddddeeeeefff <- bits of different fields d, e, f
Marker:
000010001001 <- markers to identify fields.

Finally these bits are interleaved:
d0d0d0d0d1e0e0e0e1f0f0f1

It seems nothing like this has ever be done before.

Sorry, I haven't been following this thread.

Look at X.409, which is a specification for self-encoding data streams.
It is commonly used in network management applications. It is quite
useful, because semantic tags of the fields (and size info, I believe)
are transmitted along with the data.

Another similar scheme is sun's RPC, which can be used to transfer data
between dissimilar architectures (different endian, different wordsize,
that kind of thing.)

Finally, the original arpanet interface protocol was a bit-oriented
protocol, because they couldn't depend on the size of bytes for the
machines they were connecting up. BBN, who wrote much of the software
and ran the arpanet until it turned into the internet, used 10 bit bytes
for their "C-Machine" architecture minicomputer... I think the
specification was called ???-422, but it's been too long, and those
particular neurons appear to be on some kind of forced retirement. Or
perhaps it's simply a labor strike. Not enough chocolate. Hard to say.

--
Regards,
Bob Monsen

If a little knowledge is dangerous, where is the man who has
so much as to be out of danger?
Thomas Henry Huxley, 1877

 

[Ben Bradley]

Hi,

Has anyone of you in these newsgroups ever filed for a patent ?

I didn't do the filing, but my name, along with the other
"co-inventor" is on two patents. I hesitate to even mention it, as it
was "the company" that did the patent (people above me hired the
attorney, filed the papers, even decided what part of the device to
patent).

I really like my marker idea... etc...

Data:
dddddeeeeefff <- bits of different fields d, e, f
Marker:
000010001001 <- markers to identify fields.

Finally these bits are interleaved:
d0d0d0d0d1e0e0e0e1f0f0f1

It seems nothing like this has ever be done before.

The only ones which came close where IBM... 1401 machine...

It used 1 bit per BCD decimal digit. Something like that.

If somebody is going to be filthy rich from my marker idea for bits... it
might as well be me the original inventor

However I have never ever patented anything before =D

And I don't life in the United States of America...

I life in the Netherlands/Europe.

So... I am reading this website:

"How to get a patent"

http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/howtopat.htm

It says:

1. File a Utility Patent Application.
2. File a Design Patent Application.
3. File a Plant Patent Application.
4. File a Patent Application electronically.

Which one fits best ?

You surely want 1, a patent on a device that 'does something'
useful. As whoever else stated, a design patent is generally on an
artistic pattern or shape. It says "ornamental design" and that's what
it means.
I have never heard of a Plant Patent as a separate type, but now
that I read "Plant patents may be granted to anyone who invents or
discovers and asexually reproduces any distinct and new variety of
plant" and think about it for a half second, this category was surely
invented for Monsanto.
Item 4 would seem to be a method of applying for a patent over the
Internet, rather than being a type of patent, which 1 through 3 are.

Somewhere else it said the patent needs to be filled in the USA.

First I thought this ment, maybe I need to live in the USA ?

But it doesn't say that does it ? Maybe it just means it needs to be
"filled" = requested in the USA ?

So can anybody in the whole world ask/fill for a patent in the USA ?

I think so, but if granted, a US patent only protects you from
infringement (or, gives you the right to sue over infringement) in the
USA. For protection in other parts of the world, you must apply for a
patent in each of the appropriate countries (though perhaps the
European Union counts as 'one country' for patents) to get
infringement protection there.

For a slightly cynical view, read Don Lancaster's patent writings
on tinaja.com. From what I've seen, he's right on, it's almost
exclusively larger companies that profit from patents. Anyone can get
a patent, but the real problem is making money off the patent, and
defending it if someone bothers to challenge it. It appears to me
you're better off starting a company to make money off the product (or
off something else, if, as in this case, it's not a fully designed
and finished 'product'), regardless of whether you have it patended or
not.

Every once in a while I see a news story like the guy who did the
intermittent circuit on windshield wipers, or Nicely on the
microprocessor (or was it the integrated circuit?) getting big awards
for their patents (after long, expensive legal battles), but those
probably get into the news because of their rarity.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

The 'original data' was coming to you in a stream, which you missed the
start of.

No the start was not supplied.

If your 'markers' were useful then you should have been able to
deduce this and extract whatever data was available,

Did that, extracted data was zero.

or maybe even corrected it.

Impossible to determine without extra error correcting information.

Your markers are sweet, but unless you have perfect data coming in then
IMHO they're not much use, and if the data is perfect why bother with

them?

That's not fair I can give you a stream of 2x32 bit data = 64 bit integer in
serial/parallel and not supply the start.

Last 32 bits: 00000000000000000000000000000000

What was the 64 bit integer ?

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

I'd suggest that you check out MFM and RLE encoding of bitstreams.
Though they are not exactly what you did, they come very very close. I
am sure that if you do a little more research, you'd find your pattern
somewhere published as well. We did something quite similar during
computer science courses at university some 20 years ago.

Yes I have done runtime length encoding as well.

The difference is with run time length encoding the same character gets
repeated many times.

Me and you guys probably did it at the byte level or BCD level like IBM

Since at the bit level it would make no sense at all. Runtime length
encoding is about compression.

How are you going to compress a 1 bit value with RLE ?

How are you going to compress a 10 bit value with RLE ?

At the bit level RLE doesn't make any sense since you would end up using the
same ammount of bits or even more

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Ken Taylor]

No the start was not supplied.


Did that, extracted data was zero.


Impossible to determine without extra error correcting information.

them?

That's not fair I can give you a stream of 2x32 bit data = 64 bit integer
in
serial/parallel and not supply the start.

Last 32 bits: 00000000000000000000000000000000

What was the 64 bit integer ?

Bye,
Skybuck.

Not my protocol so I don't know. I assumed with my stream, for the sake of
argument, that your data line was zero before data was sent down it. Drop
the first few zero's and some data emerges. My point is, apart from being
obstreperous, that I don't see any value being added by adding markers to
data that you have to be sure of in the first place before the markers show
anything. Just what is it you are trying to achieve with them?

Cheers.

Ken

 

[Skybuck Flying]

I didn't do the filing, but my name, along with the other
"co-inventor" is on two patents. I hesitate to even mention it, as it
was "the company" that did the patent (people above me hired the
attorney, filed the papers, even decided what part of the device to
patent).


You surely want 1, a patent on a device that 'does something'
useful. As whoever else stated, a design patent is generally on an
artistic pattern or shape. It says "ornamental design" and that's what
it means.

Ok, thanks for this advice. I have read halfway through option 1.

I think I could write such a document myself but as it says on the website
it would be good
to have someone look at it

I think it would be great fun and cool to place the document on a website

I have never heard of a Plant Patent as a separate type, but now
that I read "Plant patents may be granted to anyone who invents or
discovers and asexually reproduces any distinct and new variety of
plant" and think about it for a half second, this category was surely
invented for Monsanto.

Hmm, I didn't even read what it was about. I thought they ment a "plant
factory maybe for computer chips"

Item 4 would seem to be a method of applying for a patent over the
Internet, rather than being a type of patent, which 1 through 3 are.
yeah.


I think so, but if granted, a US patent only protects you from
infringement (or, gives you the right to sue over infringement) in the
USA. For protection in other parts of the world, you must apply for a
Yes.

patent in each of the appropriate countries (though perhaps the
European Union counts as 'one country' for patents) to get
infringement protection there.

Not quite, but I think that it's possible to file a patent and have it
patented in 7 or 8 countries
in europe but the costs are high.

I don't know what the costs yet are for the USA but I think it's much lower
than in Europe

Also I have contacted some dutch patent experts (?) and maybe it's still
possible to patent it in Europe... though maybe not since Europe doesn't
allow an inventor
to publicated any possible new invention to discuss if it's new with people
in the field... So in europe it has to be kept secret before publication. At
least it seems like that... but who knows but to be honest... the costs
are high and europe is divided and not as big as the USA market I guess

For a slightly cynical view, read Don Lancaster's patent writings
on tinaja.com. From what I've seen, he's right on, it's almost

No thx, I like to think positive

exclusively larger companies that profit from patents. Anyone can get
a patent, but the real problem is making money off the patent, and
defending it if someone bothers to challenge it. It appears to me
you're better off starting a company to make money off the product (or
off something else, if, as in this case, it's not a fully designed
and finished 'product'), regardless of whether you have it patended or
not.

Yes that's a true challenge like putting a man on the moon maybe even
harder since NASA doesn't really have to earn there money.

Actually I realized USA is best of both worlds. It's super communistic (the
goverment finances many projects/research) those people don't really have to
earn their money but maybe are required to publish their work for free ?
and It's super capatalistic big investors, etc.

Then again when making a product with this data format it would feel good to
have the patent in the pocket

The reality is somebody else could patent it right now and then what ?
hmm I remember now reading something about that. In case that it can be
proven that he/she is not the original inventor he/she could even be sued
for criminal stuff etc... cool =D I do hope I can still get a patent then

It seems like a nice, fun adventure =D

Every once in a while I see a news story like the guy who did the
intermittent circuit on windshield wipers, or Nicely on the
microprocessor (or was it the integrated circuit?) getting big awards
for their patents (after long, expensive legal battles), but those
probably get into the news because of their rarity.

Yes, I have read also stories about companies specializing in acquiring
patents and then sueing companies to get money

Who knows if it ever comes to fighting a court battle maybe a company can do
the fighting for me... but I think it would be better to be there as well...
or maybe it doesn't matter if they understand the patent well... and are
hungry for money =D hehe.

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

Sorry, I haven't been following this thread.

Look at X.409, which is a specification for self-encoding data streams.
It is commonly used in network management applications. It is quite
useful, because semantic tags of the fields (and size info, I believe)
are transmitted along with the data.

Nothing special

Protocol X.409 is just another example of a fixed bit integer based
protocol.

General stuff:

http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/solaris/sun_docs/C/solaris_9/SUNWdev/ONCDG/p69.html#XDRPROTO-37592

Detailed stuff about the variablility / flexibility:

http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009629799/chap3.htm

It says so in the documentation:

"
Variable-Length Array
Counted arrays provide the ability to encode variable-length arrays of
homogeneous elements. The array is encoded as the element count n (an
unsigned integer) followed by the encoding of each of the array's elements,
starting with element 0 and progressing through element n -1. The
declaration for variable-length arrays follows this form:
type-name identifier<m>;

or:


type-name identifier<>;

The constant m specifies the maximum acceptable element count of an array;
if m is not specified, as in the second declaration, it is assumed to be
232 -1.

"



"The array is encoded as the element count n (an unsigned integer)" <- 32
fixed bit unsigned integer which would mean this protocol is limited to
2^32 -1 elements.

As it also says in the last line

This means the protocol is limited to byte arrays of 4 Gigabyte.

Not too shabby for now lol

Another similar scheme is sun's RPC, which can be used to transfer data
between dissimilar architectures (different endian, different wordsize,
that kind of thing.)

From the same documentation:

"
Protocols such as RPC (Remote Procedure Call) and the NFS (Network File
System) use XDR to describe the format of their data.
"

I think RPC and NFS can work over many different protocols... examples are
TCP/UDP/NETBIOS, etc.

So it could look like RPC/TCP/IP etc... or maybe the X.409 layer is always
required like:
RPC/X.409/etc

However since x86 cpu's are fixed bit cpu and software is also fixed bit to
fit perfectly onto the cpu, it's highly likely that most if not all software
has fixed bit limitations

Finally, the original arpanet interface protocol was a bit-oriented
protocol, because they couldn't depend on the size of bytes for the
machines they were connecting up. BBN, who wrote much of the software
and ran the arpanet until it turned into the internet, used 10 bit bytes
for their "C-Machine" architecture minicomputer... I think the
specification was called ???-422, but it's been too long, and those
particular neurons appear to be on some kind of forced retirement. Or
perhaps it's simply a labor strike. Not enough chocolate. Hard to say.

Lol, ok, only one protocol analysis allowed per day per user

So no more cookies for you

Bye,
Skybuck