Topic: The end of copyright and patent is where we should be headed - page 5. (Read 4014 times)

Nothing, because as you yourself admitted, there's nothing that can be done. The clever reader may note that this is very much NOT THE CASE when it comes to the possibility of egalitarian distribution of resources.

You can do better than weak ad hominem attacks, no?

Capitalism wastes food on an industrial scale. Whatever comes after will by necessity be much more efficient at resource distribution.

The health-profit parasite industry we call "Health Insurance" in this country is widely regarded as toxic mimic of real health care. It's almost darkly comical how bad it is in the USA, and reveals well the dangers of mass indoctrination and mass obedience.

Health Insurance execs are laughing their way to the bank with bloodmoney earned from denying access to healthcare to millions of Americans, including countless dead children. That's the reality you're supposed to accept because "capitalism", dear reader.

I think in the 21st century, the exchange of money is going to become an irrelevant ritual from a bygone era, no more necessary for feeding the children of the world than it is for coercing primates to fuck.

You could say the same for slavery, torture, and rape. Still, I think you'll agree we should seek to distance civilization from these as much as possible given the technology at our disposal.

I don't see how superstition is going to be anything but a hindrance here.

All food on this planet is free until the violence-enforced profit motive builds a big ass barbed-wire fence around it. I have this theory that the more a person talks about human nature, the less they understand about it. Listening to a capitalist preach about human nature is about as useful as listening to a priest talk to you about science. As a civilized primate, the first thing you need to understand about your nature is that it is being held hostage by a lifetime of cultural indoctrination. That is step one on the road to recovery.

I expect everything to change when it comes to human existence. In fact I expect continuous change to be the only constant.

The Royal Navy probably said something similarly fascistic to the men they press-ganged into service aboard their ships. Nevertheless, the militant social movement called piracy blossomed in the face of these lies.

In other news, Foxconn constructed huge nets around their massive factory-dorms to prevent further worker suicides. When you say "that's just life", what you mean is "that's just life for the working poor of the world. The rich don't have to work."

“America touts itself as the land of the free, but the number one freedom that you and I have is the freedom to enter into a subservient role in the workplace. Once you exercise this freedom you’ve lost all control over what you do, what is produced, and how it is produced. And in the end, the product doesn’t belong to you. The only way you can avoid bosses and jobs is if you don’t care about making a living. Which leads to the second freedom: the freedom to starve.”
― Tom Morello

Not for long.

That's precisely why private property has been so difficult to shake. Modern capitalism predates the age of science itself, it's built into the very architecture of our language (e.g. "I don't buy that").

It's no wonder we're at such a loss as to where to go from here, as we stand by helplessly watching capitalism die, as the life support of neverending debt slowly fails.

A very old lie is easily mistaken for the truth. But how feeble does a ten thousand year old lie become the day it first meets the truth? Ask any scientist.
 

Yes, i understand how frustrating it can be knowing that someone "owns an idea", and in some ideal society it would be nonsence to do so, but we live in a capitalist age,
and knowing that it takes money to fund research to bring ideas through trial and error's into a working product, it would be insane to asume that someone wouldnt exploit that.
And without "ownership of bits of earth" you would gain freedom of movement, but there would be alot of people wanting the same spot under the sun, how would you
regulate that, if not by ownership of some sort ?

cheers

Can I walk into your house right now, push you away from your computer, and start using that computer for myself?

You're so privileged that you have the privilege of pretending you're not privileged.

Personal property rights are the foundation of all civilization, and the only people against it are those who want to tear down all of civilization.  



Crowdfunding has no future, too many cultural Marxists have already ruined it by scamming too much.  Too many of your beloved "starving artists" took their $100,000 and produced nothing.

Precisely.

You sound like a spoiled child.  Where will all this food and healthcare come from?  Do you think money, goods, and services automatically appear every time a baby is born?

Throughout human history, starvation and death have been the everyday norm.  Now that we have finally found a system that changes that, you whine because it takes work.




Take it up with God, or nature.  We have to eat, and food isn't free.  If you actually expect that to change, you're an idiot.

Nobody forces anybody to work.  That's just life.  If you don't want to work, then don't.  Most people who call themselves artists have never done a day's work, and they get paid accordingly.

If you want to remove all suffering from all artists, then say goodbye to Van Gogh, Beethoven, Emily Dickinson, and pretty much every good artist.




No, it hasn't. 



Starving artists existed before the modern era, and so did loudmouths who are angry at the world for not giving them everything for free.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starving_artist

The idea that we should tolerate "ownership" of ideas in the information age shows just how insidious and malignant the profit motive has grown in our time. We shouldn't even tolerate ownership of bits of earth, let alone ideas.

Or we could provide decent baseline food, shelter, healthcare, and education to all human beings as a birthright. What would art look like in a world where potential artists aren't forced to work soul-crushing jobs just to survive, their suffering often robbing them of creativity and passion?

You're defending the same capitalism that has systematically defunded the arts over the course of the past three decades, the same system which has made common the use of the phrase "starving artist", the same culture which isn't disgusted by the ubiquity of that phrase.

Yes, most of them are poor, and now you want to take away their right to make money from their work.  

If you actually care about the truth, compare the number of songs and books written in the past 100 years to the number of songs and books written in the rest of human history.

And if you really want to see the majority of songs unsung and books unwritten, take away any chance for people to make a living doing it.

Wouldnt that open up another problem with people who will exploit no copyright laws, and just steal other proples ideas?
Imagine working on a project and investing alot of time and money into research, and someone just copies your findings and uses as their own?
Either im missing out on something or u didnt think this through.

cheers

Private property isn't a human right enjoyed by all, it is an often inherited privilege enjoyed by a fraction of the human population. If you trace back through time you'd find that damn near all property can be linked to past violence.
If we as a civilization are to ever reject violence as a legitimate tool, we must begin by rejecting the over-engineered resource allocation which was forged in the blood of our forebears.

How many songs go unsung, how many books go unwritten, how much genius is wasted because the would-be writers, artists, and authors are instead wasting their lives scrambling to make next month's rent? We'll never know what might have been.

Fortunately for the future denizens of Earth, civilization will continue to socially evolve whether you butthurt capitalists like it or not.

If you guys hate the right to private property, which is the foundation of all freedoms, then go live in the USSR.  Wait, it doesn't exist anymore?

Nobody will spend millions of dollars to cure diseases, if their discoveries can be used equally by people who spent nothing.

Nobody will buy a microphone for $100,000 to record an album, if they can't sell that album because everyone else is giving it away for free.

Nobody will spend 3 years writing a book, if that book will not be their own property.

I entirely disagree. It's in the fact the opposite of what you propose. Copyright laws encourage entrepreneurs to do and create new things(inventions, ideas, and the like). Yes, Bitcoin's open source initiative is great, but you cannot expect everything in life to be open-sourced, just as you cannot expect everything in life to be decentralized(It's way too costly and some things are close to impossible to decentralize and still have a working product, such as a company or school). Alternative energy(If were talking about electricity and others being an alternative for oil as an ex), has been around for a long time, it's just that oil has such a grip and is so profitable for countries and companies, that it's hard for other alternate sources to make a big appearance as of yet.

I agree only upto the point that there are some people that abuse the copyright system, such a the guy who patented SSL(and has been sueing companies and winning for over a decade).But for most people, copyright laws is a protection for them so that their hard work doesn't get ripped of by some fool who copies them. Ending something as needed as Copyright laws would ensure utter chaos(As scammers take advantage and try to pass of other people's products as their own, without fear of being prosecuted). It would be x100 worse than the current haven scammers have with Bitcoin based services(All those ponzi schemes, exchanges stealing coins, etc).