Hacker News Reader

Almost certainly invalid today (as to all claims). Even before recent decisions, the method claims in particular were pretty much rejected as a matter of course (see e.g., https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=143311033686351...) (specifically the claim appendix at the bottom)

Because it is patenting math. Which is a law of nature, which gets discovered. And the patent statute says that laws of nature (such as E=MC^2) can't be patented.

He is patenting logical gate scheme that can produce average of two int in a single instruction. You can average two ints any way you want and not owe royalties ...

> Am I missing something?

Yes, you're missing the fact that it's trivial and demonstrates virtually no creativity.