Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MS Seeks To Patent Education-Feedback Software

Posted by timothy on from the patent-system-needs-a-reboot dept.

theodp writes "The USPTO disclosed Thursday that Microsoft is seeking an early childhood education-related patent for Providing instructional feedback to a user, which the software giant says covers the use of computers to teach little tykes to form the letter 'b', make a 'ch' sound, and divide 321 by 17. Let's hope LeapPad-toting preschoolers are indemnified against Microsoft lawsuits." "Unstructured" is the key word in this patent, which (like most) is written in language that does more to obscure than illuminate. Just how structured was Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing? How about GCompris?

21 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. What a Downer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This may be the big one folks. There is so much prior art for this that its not even funny. Not only that, this is the backbone of the world's economy and its rigorous enforcement may well wake up the world to the problem of broad software patents and bring about quick change to the patent system.

    May it be rigorously enforced for the good of humanity.

  2. Oh great! by MeatBlast · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh great now Microsoft is making crappy kids software. I'm waiting for the Mozzila version.

    1. Re:Oh great! by meburke · · Score: 3, Interesting

      OK, I read the patent app and came to the following conclusions:

      First, the biggest threat is to "simulation" education, not regular teaching systems, and it looks like they are trying to patent a simulator. As the world becomes more complex, many things will be better taught by simulation than rote learning. The images didn't work well in Mozilla, but I get the impression that MS is proposing a stand alone unit over the broad scope of the early claims. IBM and Control Data may have the "prior art" for simulated learning systems.

      This should not be a threat to regular "programmed instruction" because PI usually requires specific answers to specific questions. It is a "reinforcement" to structured responses, rather than analog unstructured skill building. Texas Instruments built a great Typing teacher back in the 70's. You painted a child's fingers different colors, and painted the keys the right color for those fingers. The student was reinforced for both getting the right spelling for the words presented, but also for touching the right keys with the right fingers. Most of the typing teachers, type and spell, etc. use this type of PI based on the teachings of Skinner and Crowder. BTW, IBM was using this type of teaching back in the 60's, and I actually learned to program in AUTOCODER from this type of teaching. PI courses are considered inadequate if they do not teach 98% of the subject to 98% of the users, and it typically takes only about 1/6th the time that it would take with a passive presentation. I think that Skinner got such a bad rap that people "threw out the baby with the bathwater" when they de-emphasized PI in the 70's. To be fair though, even though PI is extremely useful for transmitting knowlege, it takes about 5 times as long to produce a good PI course or book as it would take to produce a passive presentation course.

      "Unstructured input" may be challenged by people using fuzzy logic or neural nets in learning devices. It's been done. In the near future, I can certainly envision cameras that will tell a system when a child is holding a pen incorrectly, and certainly it's possible to figure out how a person arrived at their answers, even if it's an incorrect answer. In arithmetic, for instance, accountants have multiple tricks to identify specific types of arithmetic mistakes.

      A lot of CAI is crap these days. It always tics me off when a company produces a multimedia presentation of a lecture and ignores the other things (like PI) that could so well enhance the instruction. If this MS patent would reduce the level of crap I'd be for it, but I'm afraid it's more likely that it will increase the amount of crap as people try to avoid infringement problems.

      It is, however, time to do something about the low level of learning among our children, and the slow process of teaching our adults. (These problems may be related!) Microsoft deserves some of the patents they've produced, and knee-jerk anti-MS responses won't solve the problem of teaching our population. If they have come up with something really new, I'd be delighted to see it distributed throughout our schools and homes.

      Where's Ray Kurzweil when we need him?

      --
      "The mind works quicker than you think!"
    2. Re:Oh great! by NoTheory · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are very very wrong.

      Microsoft is attempting to patent all intelligent systems. Their patent would essentially given them rights to any system that has a robust linguistic system and some sort of task oriented backend that explains things to people.

      As a computational linguist who's interesting in making peoples lives better (through things that would fall under this patent), i think this would be a really horrible stifling idea. As a result i'm glad that the patent is so stupid, because i'm sure i could come up with counter examples.

      --
      There are lives at stake here!
  3. Good move! by EEBaum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope they get the patent and litigate heavily. Then perhaps parents will spend time with their children, rather than plopping them in front of various boxes that they believe will do the work for them.

    If only...

    --
    -- I prefer the term "karma escort."
  4. Sleazy, dispicable, under-handed, and cheap... by eeg3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But, no reason for them to stop if they can get away with it and make money off of it.

    Write your congressman and plead for reform.

    1. Re:Sleazy, dispicable, under-handed, and cheap... by killjoe · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Write your congressman and plead for reform."

      I hate to break it to you but it won't help. Your congressperson doesn't give a shit about you. Read this article. Here is a quote.

      While all 435 seats in the House of Representatives are up for election in November, the truth is that only about 25 to 40 seats are truly contested

      So unless you live in one of those 24 t0 40 districts your congressmen gets re-elected automatically. As they say their only risk is to be caught with a dead girl or a live boy.

      MS is bribing them, they know they will get re-elected no matter what.

      When push comes to shove they will simply say that if you vote for their opponent gays will marry and terrorists will kill you and voila! They will get re-elected. Your neighbors are dumb and are much more concerned with preventing gays from being married then patents.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  5. Another one by FiReaNGeL · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Another stupid software patent. Its an everexpanding mess which shouldn't have existed in the first place... can you really qualify software as an 'innovative invention'? Should it be protected for 20 (or whatever) years so no one can duplicate your code?

    In my opinion, it should be protected like books (and such) by copyright law only. If I can recreate the same effect without seeing your code, I can't see how your patented software is innovative. 'Normal' inventions are a different story altogether; they can be disassembled, reverse engineered, etc. (Ok, Java code too).

    --
    Eureka Science News - automatically updated
  6. No Way by pbooktebo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't believe that this could possibly withstand any attack. Education literature is filled with feedback technologies for learning, from B.F. Skinner's "Technology of Teaching" to attempts to teach vocalists with biofeedback.

    I know little about patent law, but as an educator, the world is filled with many prior attempts (some very successful).

    Anyhow...

  7. This is really funny by oexeo · · Score: 5, Funny

    In a few decades when books have been practically replaced by software, the only education available will be from Microsoft. *Everyone* will be retarded!

  8. Very Prior Art by JohnPerkins · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know there's going to be a raft of prior art examples, but what leaps to mind first is the use of email back in the days when there were only a few universities connected together. Would using email to ask one of your professors fit as prior art in this case? What about using email to ask a question of a fellow student or anyone at another university? For that matter, how old is email itself? How old is the oldest know student-to-professor email?

  9. Speak and Spell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Speak and Spell came out in 1978. This is about as plain an example of "prompt user, wait for reply, respond" as you can get. Is MS claiming they came up with this concept before 78?

  10. Yawn... by nwbvt · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Another evil MS patent story.

    Wake me up when one of these is upheld in court. That will be news. The patent office still hasn't even approved this one (and with its current rate, it will likely take a few years before it is).

    I can apply for a patent for starting a fire with two sticks. Its even possible the patent office will rubber stamp it a few years later. But it is meaningless because there is no way a judge would accept it.

    --
    Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
    1. Re:Yawn... by nwbvt · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Except it will cost MS money to defend it. Whats more, after they lose they no longer have the patent which defeats the point of getting it in the first place.

      I believe the common practice is to use these patents as bargining tools with other companies. Such as "I want your patent for really cool item, so I'll trade you rights for really cool item for the rights to all this crap that I got through the patent system." It really isn't going to be worth it to go after small companies, especially when the patent is such that even a novice lawyer could defeat you. Also they can point to their long list of patents for pride reasons.

      I can tell that while I was working at a certain large company with an extensive patent portfolio (not MS, BTW), they encourage their employees to seek patents for anything they think might be novel. Otherwise someone would likely come up with a real patentable idea but fail to report it thinking that it isn't worth it.

      --
      Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
  11. It's Clippy! by Ptraci · · Score: 3, Funny

    The patent is for the computer responding to "unstructured input" with an instructional response.

    "It looks like you're trying to..."

  12. No prior art.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    next up on the microsoft patent list:

    "Utilization of circular object to limit friction"

    (the wheel)

    Soon to be followed by a public pronouncement by Steve Ballmer that "The governments of many nations should be wary that they may be infringing on MS patents and could be sued".

  13. Example Lesson: by Saeger · · Score: 5, Funny

    Q: 1 + 1 = ?
    A: 2?
    ## We've got a bright bulb here! fork to college-level section.
    Q: In the following sentence, fill in the blank with the word that makes the most sense: "Software patents _________ innovation."
    A: kill
    ## Oh dear, it seems we've got an open source communist on our hands. silently fork to MS re-education section.
    Q: True americans believe in the Constitution, baseball, apple pie, capitalism, private property, and a healthy ecosystem of private intellectual property which promotes progress.
    A: fuck this propaganda!
    ## profanity detected. lost cause. BlueScreenOfDeath(WITH_A_VENGENCE);
    --

    --
    Power to the Peaceful
  14. This is not Speak n Spell by xigxag · · Score: 3, Informative

    This patent app is referring to a (possibly networked) pen and tablet type device used as an educational tool. As this person points out, one can think of possible prior art here. But really, this is just an ordinary straightforward patent. It's not any more evil than any other patent application.

    If anything, it looks to me like MS is trying to end-run some of the Nintendo DS's possible functionality.

    --
    There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
  15. Useful comments please. by northcat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I looked at the slashdot comments for useful information and opinion on the patent, but found some worthless posts meant to better the poster's karma and some humourless funny posts. I don't know how to read patents, so can anyone please make a useful comment about what the patent actually says? Please don't make funny replies to this with posts like "you must be new here".

    1. Re:Useful comments please. by pjt33 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's plenty of opinion. As the summary points out, the important word is "unstructured". Unless it has a technical meaning in the context of patents, it will surely require interpretation by the courts eventually, because anyone sued for infringement will be able to make a good case that all computer IO is structured.

  16. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion