That's because if people do anything more than just speak, they'll likely be labeled a terrorist and be indefinitely contained. Funny ho that works, huh?
I know that this was said in jest, but it's not that far off from a real solution. Patents and copyrights are gov's way of attempting to introduce scarcity into an area where it wouldn't otherwise exist (ideas). Would people suddenly stop innovating just because someone else might be able to take and expand upon their idea? Would music stop being created or books stop being written just because those authors wouldn't have artificial monopoly on the distribution of their work?
Is there a real, actual justification for the continued existence of copyrights and patents?
We're inciting far more violence against the US by being involved in the business of all these countries than if we were simply to release the picture of a dead guy.
but wouldn't that lead to a system of tyranny of the majority, aka full democracy? That's why we don't have democracy here -- everyone's voice deserves to be represented, no matter how small
I like the concept, but I would look at it from the perspective that everyone's vote is worth "1", but younger people have a multiplier on top to increase their vote's worth. Maybe then politicians wouldn't look so much at only catering to the senior vote.
Let's say I live in MA or NJ and spend the great majority of my commute driving on the local Turnpike. That is essentially a private road to which I'm paying more money to access. Should I still be taxed on mileage driven?
The fact is there's very little chance for a silver bullet to exist and any tax will adjust incentives and therefore behavior.
And what will it take for him to realize that he's not just wrong, but that he's harming the actual stakeholders?
You (incorrectly, IMO), assume that Biden is ignorant and not deliberate in his use of terminology. I would imagine he understands the difference between stakeholder and beneficiary quite well, it's just that he desires to put up a front to the American people that he's doing something to benefit them, when in fact everything he's doing is to harm them (us). Besides, he can get more money from the Content Industry than the American people.
FDA used to be about making sure the drugs didn't kill people, as if that's somehow a successful business model, but now drugs must also pass an effectiveness test.
Also, how many people does the FDA kill by not allowing drugs to the market? Has anyone done any studies on that?
Chertoff, when asked, did say his scanners would probably not have caught the underwear bomber, so he was being quasi-honest... certainly more honest than the people who swore up and down we needed these devices to stop terrorists from boarding our planes
"They will enter the country as "flight students" and then fly hijacked planes into buildings killing thousands."
- They did that one time, and as tragic as that event was, that many people die EACH MONTH from car accidents.
"They will cross the border from Canada as tourists, with a trunk full of explosives."
- And how many people have they killed that way? NONE
When will you wake up and understand that the intent of the terrorists isn't to kill everyone (that's an impossible goal), but to watch our country go bankrupt trying to swat a mosquito off a hippo's ass; They want us to destroy the very fabric of this country in a feeble attempt to prevent a mosquito from biting us again.
The terrorists are winning precisely because we're reacting exactly as they knew we would -- doing exactly what they knew we would, and they're laughing all the way to the bank.
Imagine if we had saved the horsebuggy industry when cars became commonplace?
An industry should save itself through innovation. If it can't, then it should die and those resources be reallocated in a more efficient manner. As usual, any time the gov interferes in the market, it creates huge inefficiencies. That's not what we need.
Re:
and until the offenders have to pay themselves, they'll keep on offending
Re: Re: Chilling effects
That's because if people do anything more than just speak, they'll likely be labeled a terrorist and be indefinitely contained. Funny ho that works, huh?
Re: Gotta wonder...
Gotta love that sovereign immunity
Re: (as John Gardner)
I know that this was said in jest, but it's not that far off from a real solution. Patents and copyrights are gov's way of attempting to introduce scarcity into an area where it wouldn't otherwise exist (ideas). Would people suddenly stop innovating just because someone else might be able to take and expand upon their idea? Would music stop being created or books stop being written just because those authors wouldn't have artificial monopoly on the distribution of their work?
Is there a real, actual justification for the continued existence of copyrights and patents?
Re: FCC (as John Gardner)
When has the legal status of something ever stopped the police or any governmental agency?
Re: Re: (as John Gardner)
I agree... if property law doesn't exist, IMO freedom does not exist.
(untitled comment) (as John Gardner)
I'm shocked MySpace is worth even that much... what of value do they have to offer? A few million dormant accounts?
Re: Let sleeping dogs lie (as John Gardner)
We're inciting far more violence against the US by being involved in the business of all these countries than if we were simply to release the picture of a dead guy.
Re: What if...? And who? (as John Gardner)
"The guilt would have to fall upon the one requesting the picture."
No, the guilt would be on those who committed the act.
Re: (as John Gardner)
but wouldn't that lead to a system of tyranny of the majority, aka full democracy? That's why we don't have democracy here -- everyone's voice deserves to be represented, no matter how small
(untitled comment) (as John Gardner)
I like the concept, but I would look at it from the perspective that everyone's vote is worth "1", but younger people have a multiplier on top to increase their vote's worth. Maybe then politicians wouldn't look so much at only catering to the senior vote.
Re: Re: Re: Re: (as John Gardner)
Let's say I live in MA or NJ and spend the great majority of my commute driving on the local Turnpike. That is essentially a private road to which I'm paying more money to access. Should I still be taxed on mileage driven?
The fact is there's very little chance for a silver bullet to exist and any tax will adjust incentives and therefore behavior.
(untitled comment) (as John Gardner)
You (incorrectly, IMO), assume that Biden is ignorant and not deliberate in his use of terminology. I would imagine he understands the difference between stakeholder and beneficiary quite well, it's just that he desires to put up a front to the American people that he's doing something to benefit them, when in fact everything he's doing is to harm them (us). Besides, he can get more money from the Content Industry than the American people.
Re: (as John Gardner)
^^ this
FDA used to be about making sure the drugs didn't kill people, as if that's somehow a successful business model, but now drugs must also pass an effectiveness test.
Also, how many people does the FDA kill by not allowing drugs to the market? Has anyone done any studies on that?
Re: Re: *hangs head* (as John Gardner)
Chertoff, when asked, did say his scanners would probably not have caught the underwear bomber, so he was being quasi-honest... certainly more honest than the people who swore up and down we needed these devices to stop terrorists from boarding our planes
Re: Re: (as John Gardner)
"They will enter the country as "flight students" and then fly hijacked planes into buildings killing thousands."
- They did that one time, and as tragic as that event was, that many people die EACH MONTH from car accidents.
"They will cross the border from Canada as tourists, with a trunk full of explosives."
- And how many people have they killed that way? NONE
When will you wake up and understand that the intent of the terrorists isn't to kill everyone (that's an impossible goal), but to watch our country go bankrupt trying to swat a mosquito off a hippo's ass; They want us to destroy the very fabric of this country in a feeble attempt to prevent a mosquito from biting us again.
The terrorists are winning precisely because we're reacting exactly as they knew we would -- doing exactly what they knew we would, and they're laughing all the way to the bank.
(untitled comment) (as John Gardner)
It's dumbass things like this that only prove how useless our gov't has become.
(untitled comment) (as John Gardner)
Next they'll be saying how Blockbuster renting out video games is killing them.
Re: Empty jukebox? (as John Gardner)
don't give them any ideas
(untitled comment) (as John Gardner)
Imagine if we had saved the horsebuggy industry when cars became commonplace?
An industry should save itself through innovation. If it can't, then it should die and those resources be reallocated in a more efficient manner. As usual, any time the gov interferes in the market, it creates huge inefficiencies. That's not what we need.