Github is a US company, they should not lobby the EU.

My PC in 1996 had 32mb RAM, i could have X and a browser.

I ran Linux 2.4.20 on 4MB RAM with LinuxAP.

"Patents themselves are a good idea, because inventive people should be rewarded for their contributions to the economy."

No, they are not a good idea.

Redhat is way too old software to be considered secure, even if their business is selling security.

Only "managers" who want to cover their ass are buying into that scheme.

About "Ransomware", it's mostly a Microsoft Windows problem, so don't be surprised if your Windows machine get ransomwared.

I have seen companies giving a Windows "secure laptop" to their employees, just to learn few month afterwards that 75% of their parc has been ransomwared.

"But if they can't collect taxes who is going to pay?"

You can still pay taxes, just the government has no way to check how much you earn.

I don't like this banking system where it is 1984.

In a blob universe, a binary blob is fixed by another binary blob.

That would be fun to exploit this one, and reflash the BIOS from a compromised OS, which can reflash the BIOS chip with the flashrom tool.

Intel has not learned from the debacle they had years ago.

Normal they think their binary blobs are not the problem.

"Windows" is not an open source program.

"Its actually a valuable process in the sense it is like documentation and code review."

Software patents are spam for software developers. They are an insult to what developers can and cannot write on their keyboard. We don't need inventors to tell us what we can or cannot write.

"technical" is a black hole.

That's a good idea to create a company that can be bought by Microsoft!

There is also a dispute over the interpretation of the withdrawal agreement, which redéfines what is EU Law, including international agreements. While the European Commission and Germany interprets it as including treaties that were signed but not into force, others say it incluses only treaties not into force, like the UPC. How can you respect laws which are not into force?

A specialized patent court would be free to adopt the EPO weird interpretation of the exclusion of computer programs, like they do with the 'as such' or their invention of the 'technical effect' doctrine. We are not against the creation of a European patent court 'as such', but against the fact that they have the last word over software patentability, and not the European Court of Justice. This would be similar to suppressing the Supreme Court in the United States, and leave the power to décide to the specialized patent courts of the CAFC.

The final vote in the Bundesrat is next friday the 18th. Our complaint is ready, but we still miss some euros to pay the lawyer.