Intellectual Property - In All Fairness!

[fergalish]

Take you suitcase of $200,000,000, go to Iran or North Korea, or the Chinese black market, and buy a nuke. Post pictures when you're done. No need to export it or take it anywhere there there are regulations on them. Just buy it where there are no regulations and nuclear materials are available.
Until you do, I'll be laughing at you.

Oh, I'm trying to calm down and think about this, somehow without falling off my chair. Tell me, Rassah, why are nukes so expensive?  Because they're rare and highly illegal.  If they weren't highly illegal, then there'd be plenty of them, the market would supply, and the price would drop.  There's PLENTY of fuel for them - the world could probably have a few million nuclear weapons if it really wanted, and that's just considering *fission* weapons.  Fusion weapons... well, whaddya know, they use HEAVY HYDROGEN.  Do you know how much heavy hydrogen there is in the sea?  Go fishing man, ask the fish.

[1714164213]

1714164213

[1714164213]

1714164213

[1714164213]

1714164213

[AyeYo]

Take you suitcase of $200,000,000, go to Iran or North Korea, or the Chinese black market, and buy a nuke. Post pictures when you're done. No need to export it or take it anywhere there there are regulations on them. Just buy it where there are no regulations and nuclear materials are available.
Until you do, I'll be laughing at you.

Oh, I'm trying to calm down and think about this, somehow without falling off my chair. Tell me, Rassah, why are nukes so expensive?  Because they're rare and highly illegal.  If they weren't highly illegal, then there'd be plenty of them, the market would supply, and the price would drop.  There's PLENTY of fuel for them - the world could probably have a few million nuclear weapons if it really wanted, and that's just considering *fission* weapons.  Fusion weapons... well, whaddya know, they use HEAVY HYDROGEN.  Do you know how much heavy hydrogen there is in the sea?  Go fishing man, ask the fish.

You've just gotta laugh when they don't understand the very market forces they worship.

[AyeYo]

How hard can it be to make one?

Pretty goddamn hard because everyone and their mother has the raw materials, it's actually building the bomb that's difficult BECAUSE OF THE REGULATIONS.

Is there regulation in Korea? Iran? Somalia? Saudi Arabia? Hell, many of those countries will pey you to build one for them.question is money and difficulty, and threat of pissing everyone else off. This won't somehow be different in libertyville.

I'm really at a loss here.  I don't know what way to say this to make you understand that the difficulty of obtaining and building a nuclear weapon is entirely due to the international regulations on nuclear weapons and technology.  It's like there's something in your brain that doesn't allow you to comprehend that fact.  What other way can I word it that will make you understand?

[Hunterbunter]

Wtf would the wealthy want to own nukes, which are very dangerous, risky, toxic, and expensive to maintain devices, if they can just pay specialist teams to wipe out specific targets in secret, and manipulate the market through media, for WAY CHEAPER? Actually, what's the point of manufactoring nukes in a libertopia, anyway?

Power.  A nuke gives you ultimate power of life and death over millions and as such the bad and the mad will always want it.

Sorry, but your imagination at how to be a supervilain kinda sucks. How many nukes does Rupert Murdoch own? How about the Walton family (of WalMart?) There are way better weapons and systems of control than just blowing everything up indiscriminately.

Not having a nuke doesn't mean you don't want a nuke.

Also, how do you know they don't have any? Seeing as most govts would frown on private citizens having any...wouldn't they keep it a secret?

As for crazy countries selling their nukes...why would they? If you were north korea, you could sell a nuke to the walton family and smuggle some food into the country, or you could hold on to it and say "fuck you" to the world that won't trade with you, and NK seems to be siding with the latter. Even Kim Jong-il is smart enough to realize using it would remove him from his ultimate power position in NK, and selling it would mean someone could then use it against him.

[Rassah]

Take you suitcase of $200,000,000, go to Iran or North Korea, or the Chinese black market, and buy a nuke. Post pictures when you're done. No need to export it or take it anywhere there there are regulations on them. Just buy it where there are no regulations and nuclear materials are available.
Until you do, I'll be laughing at you.

Oh, I'm trying to calm down and think about this, somehow without falling off my chair. Tell me, Rassah, why are nukes so expensive?  Because they're rare and highly illegal.  If they weren't highly illegal, then there'd be plenty of them, the market would supply, and the price would drop.  There's PLENTY of fuel for them - the world could probably have a few million nuclear weapons if it really wanted, and that's just considering *fission* weapons.  Fusion weapons... well, whaddya know, they use HEAVY HYDROGEN.  Do you know how much heavy hydrogen there is in the sea?  Go fishing man, ask the fish.

You think the cost of the item is determined solely by the cost of materials? OK, fine. Forget a nuke. Go buy some flourine gas. It's not heavily regulated, is used in production of PVC, plastics, and fabrics, is rather abundant, and is fairly cheap and easy to make. Should be no problem for anyone with money! Granted it will also kill you before you hit the ground, or if you're not lucky, will disolve you from the inside while you're laying there, and is extremely difficult to store and safely transport. But hey, it's not rare or highly illegal, there's PLENTY of it, and if used correctly can be just as effectiveas a small nuke at wiping out a small town if used in large enough quantities, such as in a tanker truck (assuming you can drive it to your target before whatever tiny amount that leaks out kills you), so obviously anyone can afford it.
Why am I having to tell you that mining and obtaining uranium is cheap, but concentrating, handling, tooling, and storing it without irradiating everything around you or accidentally setting it off is stupid expensive?

[Rassah]

Is there regulation in Korea? Iran? Somalia? Saudi Arabia? Hell, many of those countries will pey you to build one for them.question is money and difficulty, and threat of pissing everyone else off. This won't somehow be different in libertyville.

I'm really at a loss here.  I don't know what way to say this to make you understand that the difficulty of obtaining and building a nuclear weapon is entirely due to the international regulations on nuclear weapons and technology.  It's like there's something in your brain that doesn't allow you to comprehend that fact.  What other way can I word it that will make you understand?

So, just to double-check, there is international regulation, and thus there is also regulation in Korea, Iran, Somalia, and Saudi Arabia? And if there isn't why wouldn't this "international regulation" apply to libertville?

[AyeYo]

Take you suitcase of $200,000,000, go to Iran or North Korea, or the Chinese black market, and buy a nuke. Post pictures when you're done. No need to export it or take it anywhere there there are regulations on them. Just buy it where there are no regulations and nuclear materials are available.
Until you do, I'll be laughing at you.

Oh, I'm trying to calm down and think about this, somehow without falling off my chair. Tell me, Rassah, why are nukes so expensive?  Because they're rare and highly illegal.  If they weren't highly illegal, then there'd be plenty of them, the market would supply, and the price would drop.  There's PLENTY of fuel for them - the world could probably have a few million nuclear weapons if it really wanted, and that's just considering *fission* weapons.  Fusion weapons... well, whaddya know, they use HEAVY HYDROGEN.  Do you know how much heavy hydrogen there is in the sea?  Go fishing man, ask the fish.

You think the cost of the item is determined solely by the cost of materials? OK, fine. Forget a nuke. Go buy some flourine gas. It's not heavily regulated,

LOL

Do you research or just pull stuff out of your ass?  ALL dangerous materials are heavily regulated.

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/healthguidelines/hydrogenfluoride/recognition.html

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements for emergency planning, reportable quantities of hazardous releases, community right-to-know, and hazardous waste management may change over time. Users are therefore advised to determine periodically whether new information is available.

* Emergency planning requirements

Employers owning or operating a facility at which there are 100 pounds or more of hydrogen fluoride must comply with EPA's emergency planning requirements [40 CFR Part 355.30].

* Reportable quantity requirements for hazardous releases

A hazardous substance release is defined by EPA as any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging, injecting, escaping, leaching, dumping, or disposing into the environment (including the abandonment or discarding of contaminated containers) of hazardous substances. In the event of a release that is above the reportable quantity for that chemical, employers are required to notify the proper Federal, State, and local authorities [40 CFR 355.40].

The reportable quantity of hydrogen fluoride is 100 pounds. If an amount equal to or greater than this quantity is released within a 24-hour period in a manner that will expose persons outside the facility, employers are required to do the following: - Notify the National Response Center immediately at (800) 424-8802 or at (202) 426-2675 in Washington, D.C. [40 CFR 302.6].

- Notify the emergency response commission of the State likely to be affected by the release [40 CFR 355.40].

- Notify the community emergency coordinator to the local emergency planning committee (or relevant local emergency response personnel) of any area likely to be affected by the release [40 CFR 355.40].

* Community right-to-know requirements

Employers who own or operate facilities in SIC codes 20 to 39 that employ 10 or more workers and that manufacture 25,000 pounds or more of hydrogen fluoride per calendar year or otherwise use 10,000 pounds or more of hydrogen fluoride per calendar year are required by EPA [40 CFR Part 372.30] to submit a Toxic Chemical Release Inventory form (Form R) to EPA reporting the amount of hydrogen fluoride emitted or released from their facility annually.

* Hazardous waste management requirements

EPA considers a waste to be hazardous if it exhibits any of the following characteristics: ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity as defined in 40 CFR 261.21-261.24. Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) [40 USC 6901 et seq.], EPA has specifically listed many chemical wastes as hazardous. Hydrogen fluoride is listed as a hazardous waste under RCRA and has been assigned EPA Hazardous Waste No. U134. This substance has been banned from land disposal until treated by venting compressed gases into an absorbing or reacting media, followed by neutralization.

Providing detailed information about the removal and disposal of specific chemicals is beyond the scope of this guideline. The U.S. Department of Transportation, EPA, and State and local regulations should be followed to ensure that removal, transport, and disposal of this substance are conducted in accordance with existing regulations. To be certain that chemical waste disposal meets EPA regulatory requirements, employers should address any questions to the RCRA hotline at (703) 412-9810 (in the Washington, D.C. area) or toll-free at (800) 424-9346 (outside Washington, D.C.). In addition, relevant State and local authorities should be contacted for information on any requirements they may have for the waste removal and disposal of this substance.

[Rassah]

Not having a nuke doesn't mean you don't want a nuke.

Also, how do you know they don't have any? Seeing as most govts would frown on private citizens having any...wouldn't they keep it a secret?

As for crazy countries selling their nukes...why would they? If you were north korea, you could sell a nuke to the walton family and smuggle some food into the country, or you could hold on to it and say "fuck you" to the world that won't trade with you, and NK seems to be siding with the latter. Even Kim Jong-il is smart enough to realize using it would remove him from his ultimate power position in NK, and selling it would mean someone could then use it against him.

Either you are saying that current government regulations won't stop private citizens from owning nukes anyway, or you are describing how things will likely work in a libertarian country, too. Likely both.

[AyeYo]

Is there regulation in Korea? Iran? Somalia? Saudi Arabia? Hell, many of those countries will pey you to build one for them.question is money and difficulty, and threat of pissing everyone else off. This won't somehow be different in libertyville.

I'm really at a loss here.  I don't know what way to say this to make you understand that the difficulty of obtaining and building a nuclear weapon is entirely due to the international regulations on nuclear weapons and technology.  It's like there's something in your brain that doesn't allow you to comprehend that fact.  What other way can I word it that will make you understand?

So, just to double-check, there is international regulation, and thus there is also regulation in Korea, Iran, Somalia, and Saudi Arabia? And if there isn't why wouldn't this "international regulation" apply to libertville?

None of the countries you've listed own nukes, so I have NO fucking idea why you keep bringing them up.


International reguations would not apply to libertardland because THERE ARE NO REGULATIONS IN LIBERTARD LAND.  If it relied on international law and regulations to be sustainable... then liberarianism is not viable, because it needs outside restrictions to survive.

[Rassah]

Take you suitcase of $200,000,000, go to Iran or North Korea, or the Chinese black market, and buy a nuke. Post pictures when you're done. No need to export it or take it anywhere there there are regulations on them. Just buy it where there are no regulations and nuclear materials are available.
Until you do, I'll be laughing at you.

Oh, I'm trying to calm down and think about this, somehow without falling off my chair. Tell me, Rassah, why are nukes so expensive?  Because they're rare and highly illegal.  If they weren't highly illegal, then there'd be plenty of them, the market would supply, and the price would drop.  There's PLENTY of fuel for them - the world could probably have a few million nuclear weapons if it really wanted, and that's just considering *fission* weapons.  Fusion weapons... well, whaddya know, they use HEAVY HYDROGEN.  Do you know how much heavy hydrogen there is in the sea?  Go fishing man, ask the fish.

You think the cost of the item is determined solely by the cost of materials? OK, fine. Forget a nuke. Go buy some flourine gas. It's not heavily regulated,

LOL

Do you research or just pull stuff out of your ass?  ALL dangerous materials are heavily regulated.

Sorry, looked it up on Wikipedia. Manufacturing doesn't look that difficult. Go to any Middle Eastern or African country without a strong government and you'll likely be able to make it without a hastle. Doesn't look like there are international regulations for it, either, and a large compressed tank of liquid flourine gas with an attached explosive can be one hell of a deterrent. Again, assuming you survive. I am willing to bet if you don't know what you are doing, even if you buy plutonium and try to build a bomb on the cheap, you won't survive either.
bit, of course, according to you guys, for some reason nukes will be mass produced on assembly lines and everyone will be able to buy one. For the life of me I have no idea why anyone would want that, either citizens or manufacturing companies.

[Rassah]

Is there regulation in Korea? Iran? Somalia? Saudi Arabia? Hell, many of those countries will pey you to build one for them.question is money and difficulty, and threat of pissing everyone else off. This won't somehow be different in libertyville.

I'm really at a loss here.  I don't know what way to say this to make you understand that the difficulty of obtaining and building a nuclear weapon is entirely due to the international regulations on nuclear weapons and technology.  It's like there's something in your brain that doesn't allow you to comprehend that fact.  What other way can I word it that will make you understand?

So, just to double-check, there is international regulation, and thus there is also regulation in Korea, Iran, Somalia, and Saudi Arabia? And if there isn't why wouldn't this "international regulation" apply to libertville?

None of the countries you've listed own nukes, so I have NO fucking idea why you keep bringing them up.
[/quite]

Because they all have the materials, and all can have technology imported to make the nukes. Why doesn't anyone go and make them there? Let me guess, "international regulations?"

International reguations would not apply to libertardland because THERE ARE NO REGULATIONS IN LIBERTARD LAND.  If it relied on international law and regulations to be sustainable... then liberarianism is not viable, because it needs outside restrictions to survive.

There are no regulations in a lot of countries, including some I have mentioned. Why are they different from "libertardland?" Do any of those countries depend on outside restrictions to survive?
And why do you keep believing that, despite people just in general not liking the idea of nukes being owned by random strangers, that just because there is no central government with regulations, the exact same people with the exact same wants and values will suddenly let people own nukes? Seriously, you've built up an entire continent-sized straw man to argue against. No wonder you're laughing. Whatever the hell you yourself came up with to argue against is ridiculous.

[FredericBastiat]

Sorry, but your imagination at how to be a supervilain kinda sucks. How many nukes does Rupert Murdoch own? How about the Walton family (of WalMart?) There are way metter weapons and systems of control than just blowing everything up indiscriminately.

GOD FUCKING DAMNIT!!  THEY DON'T OWN ANY BECAUSE IT'S ILLEGAL!!
[/quote]

It's illegal to murder too. So much for that theory. It's most likely that, as any nuclear physicist will tell you, it's very difficult to compose a nuclear weapon, because it takes so much energy and expertise to refine the radioactive materials that comprise such a weapon, and not kill yourself in the process. But then we all knew that didn't we?

Flame on. Don't let any logic and reason stop you. It hasn't yet.

[Hunterbunter]

Not having a nuke doesn't mean you don't want a nuke.

Also, how do you know they don't have any? Seeing as most govts would frown on private citizens having any...wouldn't they keep it a secret?

As for crazy countries selling their nukes...why would they? If you were north korea, you could sell a nuke to the walton family and smuggle some food into the country, or you could hold on to it and say "fuck you" to the world that won't trade with you, and NK seems to be siding with the latter. Even Kim Jong-il is smart enough to realize using it would remove him from his ultimate power position in NK, and selling it would mean someone could then use it against him.

Either you are saying that current government regulations won't stop private citizens from owning nukes anyway, or you are describing how things will likely work in a libertarian country, too. Likely both.

I don't actually understand what you're trying to say here, could you elaborate?

I think the market's already as free as its going to get, and if people can indeed procure nukes, then your ideals may have already been met. My point was that people hide stuff and lie about having stuff, because there is advantage in both. I don't know enough about how a libertarian country would work to comment on that viability.

Do libertarian countries have a government? isn't there an oxymoron in there somewhere?

[NghtRppr]

Do libertarian countries have a government? isn't there an oxymoron in there somewhere?

Libertarians aren't against government as long as there is consent to be governed.

[AyeYo]

Sorry, looked it up on Wikipedia. Manufacturing doesn't look that difficult. Go to any Middle Eastern or African country without a strong government and you'll likely be able to make it without a hastle. Doesn't look like there are international regulations for it, either, and a large compressed tank of liquid flourine gas with an attached explosive can be one hell of a deterrent.

Cool.  So what started out as an example of how easy it is to obtain dangerous gases has turned into a trip to the other side of the planet, has-mat suits, and etc.  Great example.  

[Rassah]

Not having a nuke doesn't mean you don't want a nuke.

Also, how do you know they don't have any? Seeing as most govts would frown on private citizens having any...wouldn't they keep it a secret?

As for crazy countries selling their nukes...why would they? If you were north korea, you could sell a nuke to the walton family and smuggle some food into the country, or you could hold on to it and say "fuck you" to the world that won't trade with you, and NK seems to be siding with the latter. Even Kim Jong-il is smart enough to realize using it would remove him from his ultimate power position in NK, and selling it would mean someone could then use it against him.

Either you are saying that current government regulations won't stop private citizens from owning nukes anyway, or you are describing how things will likely work in a libertarian country, too. Likely both.

I don't actually understand what you're trying to say here, could you elaborate?

I think the market's already as free as its going to get, and if people can indeed procure nukes, then your ideals may have already been met. My point was that people hide stuff and lie about having stuff, because there is advantage in both. I don't know enough about how a libertarian country would work to comment on that viability.

Do libertarian countries have a government? isn't there an oxymoron in there somewhere?

Argument going on here is government with legal regulation versus libertarian free-market anarchy with voluntary community-imposed regulation. I think you and I are in agreement that government regulation will not stop all instances of "bad," and libertarian organizations (companies, communities) would not sell nukes to random people or use them for same reasons that corrupt unregulated dictators won't.

[Rassah]

Sorry, looked it up on Wikipedia. Manufacturing doesn't look that difficult. Go to any Middle Eastern or African country without a strong government and you'll likely be able to make it without a hastle. Doesn't look like there are international regulations for it, either, and a large compressed tank of liquid flourine gas with an attached explosive can be one hell of a deterrent.

Cool.  So what started out as an example of how easy it is to obtain dangerous gases has turned into a trip to the other side of the planet, has-mat suits, and etc.  Great example.  

Isn't it pretty easy to obtain nukes if you live in an unregulated country? I mean things like global travel, hazmat suits, hazmat sensors, and specialized storage equipment are dirt cheap, aren't they? You guys said if I lived somewhere where there is no regulation, like, say, in Sealand, it would be easy for everyone to have nukes. Is it or isn't it?

[Hunterbunter]

Do libertarian countries have a government? isn't there an oxymoron in there somewhere?

Libertarians aren't against government as long as there is consent to be governed.

Fair enough, but in which universe will people agree on enough things for this to be practical?

[AyeYo]

Do libertarian countries have a government? isn't there an oxymoron in there somewhere?

There sure is.  It's right here...

Do libertarian countries have a government? isn't there an oxymoron in there somewhere?

Libertarians aren't against government as long as there is consent to be governed.

Seems common sense.  No one wants government forced on them, that's tyranny.  But then it leaves you wondering... then what do they object to in the current system?  People ALREADY consent to be governed.  If they don't like they're free to leave.  If they stay, they're voluntarily agreeing to abide by the rules.  So where's the objection and crying coming from?

Well what he actually means when he says that, is that all laws and rules must be voluntary: i.e. you only follow them if you want to.

Everyone with a functioning brain knows that voluntary laws aren't laws, they're suggestions.

[AyeYo]

Sorry, looked it up on Wikipedia. Manufacturing doesn't look that difficult. Go to any Middle Eastern or African country without a strong government and you'll likely be able to make it without a hastle. Doesn't look like there are international regulations for it, either, and a large compressed tank of liquid flourine gas with an attached explosive can be one hell of a deterrent.

Cool.  So what started out as an example of how easy it is to obtain dangerous gases has turned into a trip to the other side of the planet, has-mat suits, and etc.  Great example.  

Isn't it pretty easy to obtain nukes if you live in an unregulated country? You guys said if I lived somewhere where there is no regulation, like, say, in Sealand, it would be easy for everyone to have nukes. Is it or isn't it?

Dude... like... seriously...  please explain to me what part of this statement you don't understand, so I can help you to understand it:

YOU CAN'T GET NUKES IN OUR CURRENT WORLD BECAUSE THEY AND THEIR DETAILED MANUFACTURING METHODS ARE HEAVILY, HEAVILY CONTROLLED BY THE HALF-HANDFUL OF NATIONS THAT OWN THEM.


It DOES NOT FUCKING MATTER that nukes are unregulated in Sealand BECAUSE SEALAND DOESN'T HAVE ANY NUKES BECAUSE OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED REGULATION.

That's like saying if I go to Sudan, where unicorns aren't regulated, I should be able to buy a unicorn.  THEY DON'T HAVE AN UNICORNS TO BUY, SO IT MATTERS NOT THAT THERE IS NO UNICORN REGULATION.


What part of that is confusing you?