"The biggest challenge of all this is scale," Clark said. "If we can find breakthrough technology that enables us to bridge the gap between start-up technologies and utility scale on an industrialized basis where we can rapidly move technologies into place, then that's the killer application."
Remember the sister patent 521? Remember how the “guts” or the kernel of the 521 process is a virtual computer built out of markup language able to process and produce markup language? Such markup language construction is able to build an abstracted construct around any data encountered whether content data (your name here) format data (your presentation here) or functionality data (your workflow here) so each compartment may contain all (any) content, all (any) format, and all (any) functionality from any resource (reachable via internet) to achieve all (any) computing purpose.
Each compartment is managed separately while each compartment element combined with other elements (of same compartment or different compartments) are likewise managed and arbitrated into an abstracted construction, transparent to the user and kept as a construct by the ecology.
How is that possible? There are a finite number of resources in any number of computers interconnected with each other. There are thus a finite number of possible configurations any application may be required to take. Within the body of a “program” there will be a finite number of possible components to affect a finite number of operational actions or functionalities.
A finite state machine (a deterministically transacting machine) is able to compute all possible combinations for all possible states and deliver the required combination to the particular use requirement at specific states.
All this is made possible because the inner workings of 744's virtual machine and abstracting language are based on markup extensibility just as 521 virtual machine and native programming language is made up of markup extensibility. AND such extensibility is dynamic as the markup is a script and may be compiled for ultimate package use at the client but may live forever in the ecology as a malleable script... which may be repurposed as desired for multiple uses... given the component nature of the compartmentalized content/format/functionality.
These kinds of statements make programmers angry because they are the attainable goals everone has said is an intuitively reachable goal, but McAuley and Davison are the first to build solid and demonstrable constructs to achieve these lofty “intuitions” wished for by IT heads. I don't think the patent office patents intuitions and wishes. I do know they patent solid and demonstrable first art constructions.
That's why VCSY owns these two lawfully granted patents. That is why programmers everywhere are likely angry at VCSY. Possible angry enough to say some very stupid, libelous and tragic things.
I realize it sounds like magic just as Forth programming sounded like magic to traditional language programmers in the 70's and 80's. Because FORTH used a tiny virtual machine as the interpreter for all FORTH primitives built into vocabulary words, the programmer could fashion the application to do whatever he liked by defining words (objects) in a vocabulary (library) into compilers and interpreters which were thus used to construct the program. Then, the program is assembled by placing the words from each vocabulary in an appropriate sequenced position in a newly defined word. This word (procedure) was likewise placed in the vocabulary (library) allowing the developer to now use an abstracted form of the workflow he was attempting to achieve. Thus, Forth could evolve to become human language syntax which was the basis for further programming construction.