|
Can you prove that you are precisejim?
|
|
|
|
The speed of light might not be the ultimate limit, they still haven't figured out exactly if that neutrino really moved under the known laws or if somthing unexpected took place.
They didn't account for the relative motion of the satellite. http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/27260/?ref=rss |
|
|
|
I shall address the reasons why copyright exists in the Constitution, and why it's there in another post.
Cool! will you start another thread? This one is kind of bloated! I'm pretty sure we are going to end up arguing on the same side. What industry is trying to do to copyright law is completely contrary to why people created it in the first place. However, at the time, and quite probably today, the original intent/consequences of copyright/patent/trademark laws was much better for *everyone* than the consequences of not having them at all. If you want to talk about the original intent of copyright law, you'll have to go back further than the constitution, further than the Statute of Anne. The printing press was allowing faster and easier distribution of information. This worried the church and the state, so the Stationer's guild was given a monopoly on the right to make copies in exchange for an agreement to censor any unwanted materials. This was great for the guild, not so much for anyone else. After a change in parliament, this monopoly was revoked. Shortly afterward, the Statute of Anne was passed, which as its stated prupose was to benefit artists. However, what ended up happening was quite different... "Authors themselves were excluded from membership in the company and could not therefore legally self-publish, nor were they given royalties for books that sold well." Read more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_1709 |
|
|
|
It should. Make online games that are item based where you have to treadmill for items and gold. Then have a system where they buy and sell virtual items, real estate, and characters with bitcoins. The more it is used for commerce, the more buffers keep the Gox stuff from controlling the price.
That's because the designers don't care or understand how real economies work, and mostly care about the game being fun and keeping people playing. You sound a bit like Krugman or Greenspan saying that destroying the excess houses built during the housing bubble would have solved our financial problems (kept home prices propped up). I recommend reading this very interesting article: http://www.pathofexile.com/news/2011-02-08/dev-diary-currency |
|
|
|
Who knows what the next one will be.
I'm thinking 3D chip features. |
|
|
|
You are American and a fair number of your states went to war to defend their "property." Does that mean that all defense of property is wrong? OF course not - I am actively defending the idea of intellectual property.
As I said, saying that the same logic can be used for slavery as for defending IP doesn't make IP wrong.
That's not what you said. The law that forbids you stealing other people's car could also be used to justify slavery. Show us how the law forbidding the theft of physical property also justifies slavery. |
|
|
|
Really? You think at some point we're just going to say "naaaah, computers are fast enough, let's not bother making them better"?
lol
Nope, no one will say it, it will just slow down for the very reasons I have already described.... now c'mon you're just starting to troll now. Are you talking about your flawed idea of how humans research and develop (faster computers, better models will allow us to develop those other fields better and faster), or your flawed understanding of paradigms of accelerating change (when 2d transistors can no longer be shrunk, we'll be on to the next paradigm)? |
|
|
|
Oh, sorry, I thought you were asking for a definition of the non aggression principle, not what the acronym NAP means. |
|
|
|
Interesting! Definately woot worthy. Woot! But can you define NAP for someone dumb as a stump? The initiation of violence is never justified. |
|
|
|
the world will enter a new age where human resources are directed at a new frontier, not straight up computing horse power
Really? You think at some point we're just going to say "naaaah, computers are fast enough, let's not bother making them better"? lol |
|
|
|
Let me be the first to say that slavery is wrong!
Except with robots. I will be the first to own robot slaves. Who's with me!
Screw digital sentience and whatever moron decides that is a beneficial feature to invent. But trust me, someone will invent it. And he is going to screw things up for all of us!
<Honest Troll Post> Just wanting to see who bites!
I think my test for application of the NAP toward robotic life would be the same as organic life. The NAP applies if it (does or is able to) reciprocate in applying the NAP to me. So... roomba? Slave. Cow equivalent sentience? Questionable. Human equivalent sentience? Free. |
|
|
|
The law that forbids you stealing other people's car could also be used to justify slavery.
I've been waiting for this. If it could be used to justify slavery, please show us how. *grabs popcorn* |
|
|
|
I have refuted them. Why repeat it in every thread?
Citation please? |
|
|
|
I have a hard time doing something on this scale without a Carl Sagan ish view of the future and leaving something realistic from which they can grow from.
Do you believe that we will have as much technological progress from now until 2111 as we did from 1911 until now? |
|
|
|
Well we should see plenty movies being made without IP protection then? No change of the law needed.
Well we should see plenty of cotton being picked without slaves then? No change in law needed. Seriously, you make this too easy. Every argument you've come up with for IP law is just as good an argument for slavery. No, the same is not true for all arguments, just the awesome ones you've made. |
|
|
|
Secret stuff leaks. Ask Bradley Manning.
I can't. There are consequences for breaking contracts... |
|
|
|
And to give a broader perspective:  |
|
|
|
if limited to Silicon chips we could be hitting a technology breakthrough barrier sooner than you might imagine since Silicon chips have physical electrical properties that limit how far they can take us.
You must not be aware of the development of three dimensional transistors. They look to bridge the gap to the next major paradigm quite nicely. http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2011/05/intel-re-invents-the-microchip.ars |
|
|
|
The private defence becomes the new state. The chaos is usually an intermediate state.
Thanks for the assertion, now provide some logic to back it up. Start from assumptions and build to the conclusion. Private defense can be as simple as everyone owning a gun. How does that become a monopoly on violence? |
|
|
|
Now you are going over old ground for the sake of it. People won't invest millions in a movie if there is no way to get a return. And its not your place to decide what moview people want. If you personally like low budget flicks, feel free to indulge. Don't presume to take the choice of high budget films away from everyone else though.
So you are saying that people want big budget movies, that there is a demand for them? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
