Computer H Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Computer H - Essay Example The statutes and charters in these industries do not distinguish the variations in such technologies. This advocates for the frequent lawsuits between companies and transnational organizations. Moreover, the patent laws in the industry emphasis on flexibility due to the vast growth and development of new technologies (Jordan, 2012). Competition is always a significant element in all industries but in computer technology production sharing ideas on areas such as graphic user interface and operating systems is not a major issue because novelty and innovation are the key determinants of success in such an industry. Relatively, the flexibility aspect of the patent laws and system in general only give protection on a neutral perspective hence making it easy for a company such as Apple to sue Samsung (Grandoni, 2013). Due to the constant lawsuit in the last decade, some of the recent advancements in the computer industry entailed the expansion of a wide scope of the patent laws in different technologies. A good example is on software development where firms like Apple, Microsoft or even Google have no idea on the patents they overstep because they operate at an international level (Goldman, 2012). The patent laws in the United States might not be the same in places like India or Japan. Currently, statistics show that software patents are in hundreds of thousands especially with over 30,000 new ones developed in 2014 alone. With such as wide scope, most of the infringement companies involve in is usually unintentional (Jordan, 2012). Additionally, the multi-billion dollar companies such as Google, IBM and Microsoft have their own patents based on their products; not software development. This patents or charters act as a threat towards their competitors and it is the duty of all these companies to know the regulations/ patents set by competing rivals in the industry or else it can lead to lawsuits (Megan, 2012). For instance, Yahoo has around a thousand patents

Rationalism (Rene Descartes) and Empiricism (David Hume) Essay

Rationalism (Rene Descartes) and Empiricism (David Hume) - Essay Example According to the research findings there are two contrastive schools of thought; while one gives premium to reason, the other gives premium to experience. The first school of thought that gives premium to reason is the rationalist school of thought. The second school of thought is the empiricist school. While the major proponent for rationalism is Rene Descartes, the major proponent of empiricism is David Hume. Lacey states that rationalism is â€Å"any view appealing to reason as a source of knowledge or justification.† Instead of appealing to emotions and their sensory organs, rationalists appeal to the intellect. Like all things, there are extremes in rationalism. While the opinion of some rationalists tends to fall largely in line with empiricism, meaning that they share many links with empiricism; the opinion of others see no reasons with empiricism at all. The former category of rationalists is not absolute in the beliefs they hold about the power of reason. The latter c ategory of rationalists is of those that may safely be described as extreme rationalist. They are the ones that believe that all things can be resolved through reasoning. Although, empiricism as a philosophy has already been broached in this essay, it is yet important to explain further. Unlike rationalism which states that most truths and ideas can be attained mainly through reason, empiricism states that all ideas, knowledge and truths can be attained through experience and what can be sensed by using human senses. The typical empiricist will ask 'How do you believe what you've not experienced?' So, for the empiricist, experience is all. It is through experience that one gets evidence to substantiate whatever opinion one clings to. Empiricists believe that there is no just reason to believe a thing or an opinion which one is not able to test. They do not see reasons why anyone would rely solely on abstract reasoning without applying sense-based experiments (Markie 233). To such em piricist who questions why anyone would trust what they have not seen, rationalists would argue that before that which is seen and witnessed (experience and experiments) came to being, there was that which was not seen (reasoning). Asides David Hume, other philosophers that can be categorized as empiricists are Francis Bacon, John Stuart Mill and Thomas Hobbes. Before one assumes any stance in philosophy, one must have premises that back up the point one makes. One must also be sure to know that all those who have held one opinion or the other about any issue have reasons, most times cogent, for sticking to their opinion. Yet, based on arguments that have been advanced overtime, it won't be wrong to assume that rationalsim carries the day. In putting up a paper like this together, it is important that one lends credence to objectivity. By some yardsticks, one may say that empiricists are right. This is because when rationalists carry out what they believe is the key thing—rea soning, one must note that they do not think in abstract, they almost certainly think about things that have been