Copying is natural. It is what our DNA does and it drives evolution: descent (copy) with modification. All cultures with rich oral traditions require copying for survival of their culture. Prevention of copying is totally unnatural.
Look at patents for the proper term. Patent terms are the result of corporations fighting corporations and have stayed at 20 years. Copyright terms are the result of corporations fighting ... who? Captured regulators, that's who.
This is why empowering the government in business leads to more corruption, not less. How about we get governments out of business, and leave it to businesses? No more monopolies!
3D printing allows niche manufacturing, just like the internet allows niche content. I went into an auto parts store last week and looked at all the boxes on shelves. This is just stupid. (The same stupidity of the bookstore with random books, and a record store with random CDs.) How do they know what is going to be in demand tomorrow? Having small store with a 3D printer and a million part files is the future. There is still room for corporations, but they need to adapt!
I agree. Copyright and patents are similar, but patents have stayed at 20 years and copyright has escalated. The reason is companies can either benefit or be hurt by patents, depending on which side they are on, so the term stays near the sweet-spot of around 20 years. Copyright has been hijacked by corporations, and hence the terms have steadily increased.
Software patents are idiotic. Could someone copyright a story written in Tolkien's Elvish language? Of course not. So patenting code makes no sense, because code is simply a derivative of the programming language. Copyrighting code is the only thing that sort of makes sense.
Software patents make no sense, because they are written in a computer language. At best, software patents are a derivative work of the original software language. At worst, they are patenting of an idea. In either case, software patents should not exist.
The only thing that might make sense is software copyrights.
This drives me crazy. There is a cure for deaths due to cigarettes, and idiots in the government make them illegal to import (at least, in Canada). It is not the nicotine that is harmful, but the smoke.
I hope they hold those government officials accountable for the preventable death, just like they held cigarette manufacturers accountable.
Since when has the 1st sale doctrine required I know who I lend to? Does a library "know" everyone they lend to?
> defending bit torrent
I'm not saying they aren't illegal, but I'm saying is the losses are minimal, and certainly don't deserve the penalties meted out.
> some of those people actually WOULD buy
... but many more could be convinced NOT to buy if everyone lent out their movies. Right now, the content creators earn from our laziness. If I stood at a RedBox with a bag of movies to share, I don't think Hollywood would be happy, but they couldn't do a thing about it.
What is a reasonable amount of spending? 60% of your income? So the math is:
Salary * percent spent on consumption * consumption tax =
$100K * 60% * 50% = $30K
Yes, if you spend 100% of your income, then the consumption tax would equal your income tax. But that is usually not the case.
Copyright maximalist should be careful how much they clamp down. The 2 hour DVD sitting on my shelf, gathering dust, can be LEGALLY lent to other people (due to the First Sale doctrine). In a year, over 4000 people could LEGALLY watch my copy of that movie. Assuming a $20 initial cost, that is about half a cent per person per year. It is only due to physical restrictions (e.g., mailing the DVD), not legal restriction, that we can't do this. This is why people think this clamp down on piracy is bullsh!t. A downloader is depriving a content creator of a few cents, not $20, because he could just have easily borrowed it from a friend, neighbor, etc. We just don't, right now, because the police aren't knocking at our door. If they start, then community collectives, libraries, online personal streaming and mail swapping services will spring up which will accomplish the exact same level of "file lending", but all legal.
Microsoft and Apple are anticompetitive. Google is probably our only saviour in this ridiculous locked-down, walled-garden, DRM, licensed-not-owned nightmare we are living in.
What? So the government tries to pick winners in the alternative fuel race, picks wrong, and you think we should have doubled-down? How about we let the market sort it out? Or should we go back to having committees decide the price of bread tomorrow?
Letting businesses do the 'investment' is win-win. Tax money doesn't go to politicians' pet projects (ethanol?!?), and the people who actually know what hell is going on (e.g., engineers) lead the charge.
> 5 out of 6 problems with the economy have to do with taxes
The economy is created by businesses, not the government. The government creating jobs is like your dad hiring you to mow his lawn for the summer. It is inefficient.
The government can help the economy by getting out of the way. The 2008 bust was created, in part, by the government "encouraging" home ownership, funding stupid loans through Freddie and Fannie, requiring the *seller* (not the buyer?!?) to get ratings on their mortgage backed securities, etc.
You wouldn't let a government employee do open heart surgery on you, so why would you let them try and manage the economy? Do people think running a business is easy?
> That's just working out so well for the Eurozone.
The PIGS are in trouble because they spend more than they earn. Of course the public doesn't like reining in spending. I, too, would like to retire at 50 with a full pension.
The nice thing is they will get austerity whether they like it or not. Either they tighten their belt to receive bailout funds, or they don't and go broke. Frankly, I think they should give the bird to German banks and just go bankrupt and leave the Euro. This is what Iceland did. But they may be info a few years of hyperinflation while their currencies get back on their feet.
Either way, the population will be squeezed. THERE. IS. NO. ESCAPE.
> Taxing our current life blood (fossil fuels) with no reasonable alternative currently in place
Right now, the solution seems to be subsidize alternative energy sources. We all know how well that worked. Many alternative energy companies that Obama invested in are busto.
If we truly believe that cutting fossil fuel emissions is required, then the only sane solution is to tax carbon. Then alternative fuels that work will rise to the top. Leave the business of figuring out what is going to replace fossil fuels to businesses, not governments.
CANADIAN LUTHERAN WORLD RELIEF
Total revenue: $6,733,891
Expenses: Management and administration: $312,230 (5%)
Expenses: Charitable program $6,051,976 (91%)
Looks good, right? Not so much where you look at the full return.
Right off the bat, the "management expense" ignores the $1,461,838 in salaries it paid out. If you look further at their 2011 return, you see the magic of accounting, where
-Advertising and promotion $ 184,856
-Travel and vehicle expenses $ 292,594
-Licenses, memberships, and dues $ 67,641
-Office supplies and expenses $ 163,810
-Professional and consulting fees $ 39,550
-Education and training for staff and volunteers $ 29,602
all count as "expenditures on charitable programs".
Give me a break. You want to do something good, volunteer in your community. But don't think that the majority of the $100 you send to a charity goes to those in need.
On a related note, I read a paper that looked at all 4 combinations: start nice stay nice, start nice turn mean, start mean stay mean, start mean turn nice. They found that the combination that made people like you the most was the last one. If you are a dick, then soften up, please like you more than if you are just nice all the time. That is why when you meet a cute girl, you should be aloof.
Dude, enough! Nobody pays for news. We never have. Why do you try and reinvent the past? The nightly TV news has ALWAYS been free. ALWAYS. The 50 cents you throw into a newspaper box pays for the distribution, not the journalists' salaries. It has been this way for a 100 years.
That explains why people hate paywalls, more than anything else.
On the post: Copyright Enforcement Bots Seek And Destroy Hugo Awards
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why Does Copyright Last 70 Years After Death... But Licenses Expire At Death?
Patents ...
This is why empowering the government in business leads to more corruption, not less. How about we get governments out of business, and leave it to businesses? No more monopolies!
On the post: DailyDirt: Will Refill Cartridges For Food Printers Be Insanely Expensive?
Re: 3D Printing Could Change the World
On the post: Two Years Later, Lobbying By Microsoft & IBM Creates Loophole In New Zealand To Allow Software Patents
Re:
Software patents are idiotic. Could someone copyright a story written in Tolkien's Elvish language? Of course not. So patenting code makes no sense, because code is simply a derivative of the programming language. Copyrighting code is the only thing that sort of makes sense.
On the post: Intellectual Ventures Still Giving Tours Of The Sizzle To Distract Journalists From The Lack Of Steak
Software patents aren't worth the paper ...
The only thing that might make sense is software copyrights.
On the post: DailyDirt: Thank You For Not Smoking
Re: Electronic cigarettes
I hope they hold those government officials accountable for the preventable death, just like they held cigarette manufacturers accountable.
On the post: The Stupidity Of The 'Just Go Without' Argument
Re: Re: Infringement worth a few cents
Since when has the 1st sale doctrine required I know who I lend to? Does a library "know" everyone they lend to?
> defending bit torrent
I'm not saying they aren't illegal, but I'm saying is the losses are minimal, and certainly don't deserve the penalties meted out.
> some of those people actually WOULD buy
... but many more could be convinced NOT to buy if everyone lent out their movies. Right now, the content creators earn from our laziness. If I stood at a RedBox with a bag of movies to share, I don't think Hollywood would be happy, but they couldn't do a thing about it.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Re: Whoa...
Salary = $100K
Tax = 30% = $30K
What is a reasonable amount of spending? 60% of your income? So the math is:
Salary * percent spent on consumption * consumption tax =
$100K * 60% * 50% = $30K
Yes, if you spend 100% of your income, then the consumption tax would equal your income tax. But that is usually not the case.
On the post: The Stupidity Of The 'Just Go Without' Argument
Infringement worth a few cents
On the post: Debunking The Myth That The Internet Generation Doesn't Buy Or Read Books
Re: Re:
E-books. Plus, you don't kill a tree.
On the post: Seven Reasons Why Google Is Making A Mistake In Filtering Searches Based On DMCA Notices
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not in my best interests
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2405442,00.asp
Microsoft and Apple are anticompetitive. Google is probably our only saviour in this ridiculous locked-down, walled-garden, DRM, licensed-not-owned nightmare we are living in.
On the post: Craigslist Demands 'Exclusive License' On Your Posts
Re:
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: regarding 2 of the proposals
What? So the government tries to pick winners in the alternative fuel race, picks wrong, and you think we should have doubled-down? How about we let the market sort it out? Or should we go back to having committees decide the price of bread tomorrow?
Letting businesses do the 'investment' is win-win. Tax money doesn't go to politicians' pet projects (ethanol?!?), and the people who actually know what hell is going on (e.g., engineers) lead the charge.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Bad writing.
The economy is created by businesses, not the government. The government creating jobs is like your dad hiring you to mow his lawn for the summer. It is inefficient.
The government can help the economy by getting out of the way. The 2008 bust was created, in part, by the government "encouraging" home ownership, funding stupid loans through Freddie and Fannie, requiring the *seller* (not the buyer?!?) to get ratings on their mortgage backed securities, etc.
You wouldn't let a government employee do open heart surgery on you, so why would you let them try and manage the economy? Do people think running a business is easy?
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Whoa...
I've read 50%, in order to make up the loss in income tax.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Whoa...
The PIGS are in trouble because they spend more than they earn. Of course the public doesn't like reining in spending. I, too, would like to retire at 50 with a full pension.
The nice thing is they will get austerity whether they like it or not. Either they tighten their belt to receive bailout funds, or they don't and go broke. Frankly, I think they should give the bird to German banks and just go bankrupt and leave the Euro. This is what Iceland did. But they may be info a few years of hyperinflation while their currencies get back on their feet.
Either way, the population will be squeezed. THERE. IS. NO. ESCAPE.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: regarding 2 of the proposals
Right now, the solution seems to be subsidize alternative energy sources. We all know how well that worked. Many alternative energy companies that Obama invested in are busto.
If we truly believe that cutting fossil fuel emissions is required, then the only sane solution is to tax carbon. Then alternative fuels that work will rise to the top. Leave the business of figuring out what is going to replace fossil fuels to businesses, not governments.
On the post: Two-Cent Doughnuts Breed Decades Of Bad Blood: It's Not So Easy Going From Free To Paid
Re: The Red Cross hating started long before WWII
If you look at the "Quick View", you get:
CANADIAN LUTHERAN WORLD RELIEF
Total revenue: $6,733,891
Expenses: Management and administration: $312,230 (5%)
Expenses: Charitable program $6,051,976 (91%)
Looks good, right? Not so much where you look at the full return.
Right off the bat, the "management expense" ignores the $1,461,838 in salaries it paid out. If you look further at their 2011 return, you see the magic of accounting, where
-Advertising and promotion $ 184,856
-Travel and vehicle expenses $ 292,594
-Licenses, memberships, and dues $ 67,641
-Office supplies and expenses $ 163,810
-Professional and consulting fees $ 39,550
-Education and training for staff and volunteers $ 29,602
all count as "expenditures on charitable programs".
Give me a break. You want to do something good, volunteer in your community. But don't think that the majority of the $100 you send to a charity goes to those in need.
On the post: Two-Cent Doughnuts Breed Decades Of Bad Blood: It's Not So Easy Going From Free To Paid
Re: Old King, Two Sons
Guess which one made people hate you the most.
On the post: Two-Cent Doughnuts Breed Decades Of Bad Blood: It's Not So Easy Going From Free To Paid
Re: Sorry, but people will pay for news
That explains why people hate paywalls, more than anything else.
Next >>