Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

*** August 2011 low content thread ***

rated by 0 users
This post has 244 Replies | 11 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Just found this interesting.  And sad.  The wikipedia page for the accused Norway terrorist Anders Behring Breivik includes in the infobox a portait of him obtained from his facebook profile.  The photo has been uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons.  Have a look at the sheer amount of time and intellectual energy wasted on discussion of whether or not this photo should be deleted due to copyright laws:

Deletion request nomination

Seriously.  Read through some of that.  Absorb the nature of the arguments.  Then scroll down and realize how long that discussion goes on.  And realize this is just an example for one single photo.  IP advocates argue that without their monopoly priviledges, the world would be poorer because no one would have any incentive to create anything.  I argue the world is poorer because people aren't creating anything because they're too busy arguing over IP laws.

 

Against Intellectual Monopoly

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Cancer Doesn't Count

 

 

Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745

US Debt in nice little piles made of $100 bills:

http://usdebt.kleptocracy.us/

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,249
Points 70,775

http://www.cracked.com/forums/topic/90412/photoplasty-1-8.2.11-how-youd-fix-economy

My humble blog

It's easy to refute an argument if you first misrepresent it. William Keizer

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Mon, Aug 1 2011 8:21 PM

Obama: FDR Was 'Fiscally Conservative'

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,189
Points 22,990

Is Obama trolling?

Freedom has always been the only route to progress.

Post Neo-Left Libertarian Manifesto (PNL lib)
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Tue, Aug 2 2011 2:11 PM

This is how you make politics interesting to a wider audience:

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Tue, Aug 2 2011 2:42 PM

the world ispoorer because people aren't creating anything because they're too busy arguing over IP laws.

QFT!

I compose piano music (amateur), I develop my own freelance software projects (non-paying) and I work on mathematical problems (again, amateur) just to keep myself sharp and focused. I don't get paid for these things. And I know I won't make money off whatever I release to the public. People who complain that they can't create because they wouldn't get paid are just whiny babies. Music artists complain that, without IP, they can't make money selling copies of CD's. I say get a real job, such as actually performing music at venues or as a janitor or dishwasher or something. Quit whining that everyone owes you money because they're making copies of music you recorded and released to the public.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Tue, Aug 2 2011 6:03 PM

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/07/30/national/main20085853.shtml?tag=re1.channel

I feel sorry for the victim but I think this is going to have to happen a lot more before the general public wakes up to the monstrosity we've allowed to spawn within our society.

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 102
Points 1,830

Being anti-IP doesn't mean one should be glad that his work is being copied, there is no problem whatsoever if a video game company uses some DRM scheme that prevents people from copying its games, for example. I don't understand this hostility towards the very fact of legitimately (respecting the NAP) trying to protect an intellectual work.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,118
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Who's hostile against that?

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 65
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 194
Points 4,315
Mike replied on Tue, Aug 2 2011 6:26 PM

''The country is living in debt. It is not living within its means, shifting the weight of responsibility on other countries and in a way acting as a parasite,'' Putin told a group of pro-Kremlin youth in central Russia overnight.


also calling for dollar to lose reserve status................... boy are US citizens in for a world of hurt..
 
 
it would be worth it if the politicians were to suffer like the rest of us - but they never do. it is depressing.

Be responsible, ease suffering; spay or neuter your pets.

We must get them to understand that government solutions are the problem!

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 162
Points 2,455

Don't be depressed or scared.  That is what the controllers want.  Fear is only in your mind; it is there to be overcome.

Can you provide a link for the Russian stiff?

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Tue, Aug 2 2011 6:45 PM

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/08/02/eveningnews/main20087214.shtml?tag=re1.latest

The cover of the New York Times has the same image of the starving Somali child. It's disgusting that our media will shamelessly exploit Somali suffering in order to beat the ("humanitarian") war drums. Take a look at the famine map at the bottom... what a joke! They have these detailed lines demarcating areas that are normal, stressed and famine - but note how the thatch-marks that mean "limited humanitarian access due to violence" covers over highly detailed demarcations between stressed, emergency, famine and normal areas! This is a miraculous map! I hope the miraculous technology with which this information was compiled (ESP?) will be shared with the rest of the world so - for one thing - Somali children don't have to starve any longer. Also note how the regions surrounding Nairobi, Addis and Djibouti (all proper capitols with "functioning governments") are shaded "normal", the least distressed. But the region worst-affected happens to be precisely around the capitol of Somalia - what a coincidence! The famine could have happened 100 miles north or south but, remarkably, it happened right around Mogadishu. Yet the miracle-map clearly demarcates the areas that are merely experiencing emergency conditions against those that are experiencing famine despite limited humanitarian access due to violence. One last miraculous detail: the "emergency" area almost exactly corresponds to the territory occupied by ethnic Somalis. People don't realize that the colonial borders were drawn by white men with a map and straight-edge... backed up by cannons and muskets. So, the political boundary between Somalia and Ethiopia or Somalia and Kenya is almost meaningless. Also note how Somalia is drawn as a monolithic entity even though Mogadishu hasn't exercised the slightest influenced over Somaliland and Puntland (northern Somalia, not marked on the map) for two decades since the end of the Barre regime.

Get ready to start hearing lots of political news out of Somalia. al-Shabab = al-Qaeda is already being drummed through the media. Now, US rules + al-Shabab = preventing aid from reaching famished Somalis. So, the US has to permit aid to go to Somalia and this aid will be used by the Somali Transitional Federal Government as a PR bludgeon against al-Shabab... any Shabab that shoots at any TFG soldier is now "holding up humanitarian aid to starving Somalis."

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 102
Points 1,830

The cartoon that Nielsio posted employs the kind of hostility I was referring to, I don't even know why you are asking me that, as it is clear that whoever drew that cartoon thinks that people should be glad their work is being copied and profits are not a legitimate thing to expect from an intelectual work.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Tue, Aug 2 2011 6:52 PM

profits are not a legitimate thing to expect from an intelectual work.

Of course you are not entitled to profits from "intellectual work". You can charge people money only in exchange for your property. "Intellectual work" is not property, hence, it cannot be exchanged.

Selling a game on a DRM-protected gaming platform is not a sale of "intellectual property", it is best thought of as a sale of a particular SKU of the gaming platform. Of course, the number of possible SKUs is exponential with the number of games available on that platform so no business would ever track it that way, but for the purposes of understanding the property issue at hand, this is how it should be understood. When you purchase a new game title, you are simply paying the game company to upgrade your gaming platform to a higher SKU.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 194
Points 4,315
Mike replied on Tue, Aug 2 2011 9:00 PM

Marky Mark

 

just google, "putin calls US parasite" there are several stories on it.

Be responsible, ease suffering; spay or neuter your pets.

We must get them to understand that government solutions are the problem!

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745

Don't be depressed or scared.  That is what the controllers want.  Fear is only in your mind; it is there to be overcome.

Yay for positivity! I tried using some in another forum I visit, arguing that the corrupt political system can be beaten, but was assailed by ye olde poor liberal proletariat who decries both parties as the same yet repeatedly votes Democrat (note that they wouldn't be hating on both parties if just Dems were in power).

Positivity can go a long way, so thanks for being another small flame in the seemingly-infinite darkness.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 533
Points 8,445

http://www.steampunkmagazine.com/downloads/

Tumblr The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants. ~Albert Camus
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Wheylous:

Don't be depressed or scared.  That is what the controllers want.  Fear is only in your mind; it is there to be overcome.

Yay for positivity! I tried using some in another forum I visit, arguing that the corrupt political system can be beaten, but was assailed by ye olde poor liberal proletariat who decries both parties as the same yet repeatedly votes Democrat (note that they wouldn't be hating on both parties if just Dems were in power).

Positivity can go a long way, so thanks for being another small flame in the seemingly-infinite darkness.

It would be really funny if it turned out he was being sarcastic...

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,008
Points 16,185

This is Bob Murphy singing at Skybar at the last night the MU students were there

My Blog: http://www.anarchico.net/

Production is 'anarchistic' - Ludwig von Mises

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Thu, Aug 4 2011 11:35 PM

You can charge people money only in exchange for your property.

I should retract this, I really misspoke. I mean to say that you can only make a property claim to something that is actually property. I cannot say "I've invented the red square, hence, those who create objects with the red square pattern must pay me a royalty for the use of the pattern, which is my property." The red square example does not differ in quality from any other IP claim. Intel Corp. tried to trademark the number 80,386 because they had a CPU which they called the "80386" or "386" for short. Trademarking a number is no less absurd than claiming intellectual property in all red squares. Anyone familiar with the binary nature of digital information understands that even a digital movie can be thought of as nothing more than a really big number. For example, some cypherpunk came up with a prime number that, when converted into ASCII code, encodes the DeCSS algorithm for decrypting DVDs. Since DeCSS software is "illegal", this is an absurd example of an illegal prime number.

I think the best way to identify what's wrong here is to note that an intellectual property claim is a claim to an entire class of physical objects. You're not saying "this very physical object belongs to me and I may use it in this way." Rather, you are saying that "all physical objects such that [insert some class property here] belong to me and are mine." I cannot say "all titanium belongs to me" because I discovered the element titanium. Only that titanium which I put to use - that is, which I homestead from the earth or mold into a useful object or exchange for with someone else - is mine. All other titanium does not belong to me because I am not putting it to use, I do not have a higher claim to it than another. Similarly, all plastic-coated aluminum discs containing such-and-such pattern (say, the bits corresponding to a song I performed and recorded) do not belong to me. Only those plastic-coated aluminum discs which I am putting to use through homesteading or voluntary exchange are mine.

Information is inherently non-scarce. Reproduction technologies have lowered the costs of copying information to the point where this is painfully obvious. If you release information into the public domain (i.e. you allow it to be seen/heard/operated/etc. outside of your property and without an NDA in place), it is no longer yours. If you record a song, that recording is your property so long as it remains on your hard drive. As soon as you allow someone else to have a copy of it on their hard drive, it is no longer yours.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745

What just came to mind:

I haven't thought this through, but a decent argument against IP would be to ask what about the memory patterns stored in someone's brain when he listens to the music. It is in some way encoded. Can you prevent someone from humming a song to himself to amuse himself? Hmmmm.....

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Fri, Aug 5 2011 9:43 AM

Wheylous: Exactly. I was looking at the FBI warning on a DVD the other day... it prohibits "reverse engineering" of the DVD encoding technology. Now, I'm an engineer. In the very act of watching the DVD, I can formulate in my mind possible means for encoding the DVD data. Does that mean I'm breaking the law while watching the DVD?

Information is non-scarce. Government does not improve things by trying to create an artificial scarcity in information through IP laws.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Fri, Aug 5 2011 9:45 AM

LOL - that gave me another thought... I wonder how many of the Venus Project types believe in IP laws... information is exactly like their sci-fi world of super-abundance... anything can be replicated virtually for free... if they support IP laws, then I can't see how they wouldn't support laws that create artificial scarcity in their sci-fi superabundance world in order to "reward creativity."

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745
Wheylous replied on Fri, Aug 5 2011 10:35 AM

I'm not (yet?) a complete believer in anti-IP, possibly because I can't explain libertarian's hypocrisy in the following:

1) Why and how do we have property rights? Well, we simply have them, chap! They're there and inherently present because we fashion stuff out of nature.

2) Intellectual Property? Rubbish. How can you protect something which is not physically disturbed?

My just-found idea of how to completely avoid the IP debate (I actually think it's 100% brilliant and solves all IP debates ever):

I shall call it ... Information Anarchy:

1) Assume anti-IP as a base. When someone publishes a book, he essentially says "look world, stuff!" Thus, he is exposing himself to copying.

2) Oh, no! He is being copied. What now?

3) Contracts! Whenever someone sells intellectual material, he includes a contract which emulates IP protection - by buying this book you agree to not copy, reproduce, yada yada, blah blah, etc. When you resell this to someone else you agree to also include this contract with the sale.

4) Bam! Problem solved through free market! The prosecution becomes essentially the same as in the current system. If someone is caught with an unlicensed copy of the property, they sue him. If he is at fault, he gets punished. If he just was never provided with the contract by the seller, the seller gets it, and so on back down the chain (to find the root of the contract violation).

I actually think this is completely justified and solves the problem perfectly.

Hmmm... though when I think about it, it only solves IP for books and music, but not for independent discovery of patents. But I guess you could argue that independent discovery is actually a valid way of creating the same service...

Ok, I am satisfied :D

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745

Oh wow, I almost had a heart attack:

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-source-obama-signs-bill-end-faa-shutdown-185820560.html

I read it "Obama signs bill to end FAA" and I'm like "WHAT THE HECK JUST HAPPENED"

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 102
Points 1,830

Clayton:
Of course you are not entitled to profits from "intellectual work".

I didn't say one is entitled to profits from intelectual work, I said that there is nothing wrong trying to profit from them as long as you respect other peoples' properties.

 

Clayton:
You can charge people money only in exchange for your property. "Intellectual work" is not property, hence, it cannot be exchanged.

This is wrong. Compare a blank sheet of paper and one containing Coke's formula. You can be almost 100% sure that you will get millions of dollars more for the second one than for the first one. It is the intelectual work that is adding value to the second sheet of paper.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 102
Points 1,830

Wheylous:

I'm not (yet?) a complete believer in anti-IP, possibly because I can't explain libertarian's hypocrisy in the following:

1) Why and how do we have property rights? Well, we simply have them, chap! They're there and inherently present because we fashion stuff out of nature.

2) Intellectual Property? Rubbish. How can you protect something which is not physically disturbed?

My just-found idea of how to completely avoid the IP debate (I actually think it's 100% brilliant and solves all IP debates ever):

I shall call it ... Information Anarchy:

1) Assume anti-IP as a base. When someone publishes a book, he essentially says "look world, stuff!" Thus, he is exposing himself to copying.

2) Oh, no! He is being copied. What now?

3) Contracts! Whenever someone sells intellectual material, he includes a contract which emulates IP protection - by buying this book you agree to not copy, reproduce, yada yada, blah blah, etc. When you resell this to someone else you agree to also include this contract with the sale.

4) Bam! Problem solved through free market! The prosecution becomes essentially the same as in the current system. If someone is caught with an unlicensed copy of the property, they sue him. If he is at fault, he gets punished. If he just was never provided with the contract by the seller, the seller gets it, and so on back down the chain (to find the root of the contract violation).

I actually think this is completely justified and solves the problem perfectly.

Hmmm... though when I think about it, it only solves IP for books and music, but not for independent discovery of patents. But I guess you could argue that independent discovery is actually a valid way of creating the same service...

Ok, I am satisfied :D

 

Are you serious?

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 200 Contributor
Male
Posts 443
Points 9,245

http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2011/08/cosmos-to-get-a-sequel-hosted-by-neil-degrasse-tyson/

Score!

It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Fri, Aug 5 2011 5:29 PM

Latest blog post:

 

Innovation in the gaming business model: Humble Indie Bundle

http://www.vforvoluntary.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=178

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,118
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Fri, Aug 5 2011 7:51 PM

You can be almost 100% sure that you will get millions of dollars more for the second one than for the first one. It is the intelectual work that is adding value to the second sheet of paper.

You'd be a damn fool to pay one penny for the Coke recipe.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 35
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,288
Points 22,350

In any case, he's still talking about trading for physical property (a piece of paper with specific black markings on it).  If I read the Coke recipe over your shoulder, and then got another piece of paper and wrote the recipe on it from memory, would this be theft?

The Voluntaryist Reader: http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com/ Libertarian forums that actually work: http://voluntaryism.freeforums.org/index.php
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,305
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 102
Points 1,830

Clayton:


You'd be a damn fool to pay one penny for the Coke recipe.

Clayton -


That's not really the point. Replace Coke by gold and tell me if it is not the intellectual work that is adding value to the second sheet of paper.

Aristippus:
In any case, he's still talking about trading for physical property (a piece of paper with specific black markings on it). If I read the Coke recipe over your shoulder, and then got another piece of paper and wrote the recipe on it from memory, would this be theft?


If that is an actual question I'd recommend you read Kinsella's excellent "Against Intellectual Property". If it is not, I have already made myself clear in this very thread.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745

Are you serious?

... yes? *meep*

Please explain.

  • | Post Points: 20
Page 1 of 7 (245 items) 1 2 3 4 5 Next > ... Last » | RSS