[buboard]

That's a ridiculous argument. Google has patented way more than this (most recently all kinds of recurrent nets for sequences). As long as these patents belong to alphabet they 're dangerous. Google could have set up a nonprofit for them if they really cared. What if google is bought out in 5 years? What if they get real competition and decide to go full evil?

These patents are overly broad, overly premature. They should never have been granted in the first place.

I think the NN pioneers who are first names in these patents should set up a nonprofit themselves. Hopefully many of them still seem to believe in the ethic of science , having lived decades in which nobody cared about NNs

[0-_-0]

Google is not the only company who accumulated a patent portfolio to be used defensively. If they start suing people they can expect to be sued back. It would also potentially ruin Google's relationship with other companies who would be reluctant to work with them if it could lead to a chance to be sued: e.g. If you sell some technology to Google to use they can discover that it has something that looks like something that they patented, which is enough grounds to sue you. This is too much risk for companies who don't have the money to mount a legal defense, even if they don't actually violate any patents.

The current state is sort of a patent cold war where both sides have weapons but they don't use them. So we get the advantages of patents (disclosure) without many of the potential disadvantages.

[buboard]

If OTOH, USPTO had rejected these applications there would be no need for this cold war

[0-_-0]

Sure, but then a lot of developed technology would remain secret forever.