The concept of the patent office is a genuine one if too idealistic. Having been through the process it did feel like they pushed back for revisions with the sole intention of squeezing some more money out of the filer. Perhaps like insurance companies rejecting every claim initially.
The protection it affords is questionable. It’s really just a 1st place ribbon you can bring to court if you have the money to sue somebody copying you… A lot of that is glorified brand warfare: if you’re too similar to WD40 they’ll sue you regardless of what’s in your can.
Though originally encouraged to be layman friendly it now strongly uses overly technical jargon to obscure the invention while still legally protecting it.
That said, it holds a lot of collective knowledge that us nerd types can reference when innovating. Otherwise that knowledge is locked up in private corporate data stores or college curriculums. It’s the original open source repo. It eeks out a win in the big picture despite the abuses capitalism inflicts on it.
This is wonderful and detailed advice but you can combine the circumcized and uncircumcised points. Studies on circumcision having any medical or protective benefit have been highly influenced by religious interests. The biggest ones by the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation in the 2000s look like pure philanthropy on the surface but people involved were calling for mass circumcision before they did the study. They draw a correlation with questionable methods that people who received free circumcisions in Africa had less cases of AIDS, which could be from any number of social or economic factors even if the data could be trusted. Medical organizations do not consider it to be a benefit.