The Real Evidence on Patents
The richest most technologically advanced countries are those with the strongest patent laws and those with the weakest patent laws are the poorest, do not create technologies, and the most technologically backward. Admit this and admit that you are arguing against a property right, based on the formulation of property rights that the US was created on, and admit that you are arguing for changing the constitution, which guarantees the rights of inventors to their inventions. No you ignore all the evidence. You are like socialists who complain about sweat shops in capitalism and ignore gulags and mass starvation in socialist countries Failure to acknowledge these basic facts means that you are just being dishonest, which I will not tolerate anymore.
SOURCE URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQppLW4e4f4
Stick to your guns, guy, You make sense out of what should be a simple, straight forward concept; but is made convoluted and complex by non-inventors. The implementation of ideas is the only thing that makes all of our lives better and more fruitful. I pity the man that's never experienced the sense of achievement and even joy of doing so.
I have a related talk that should be up shortly or for a more in depth presentation see my new non-fiction book http://www.amazon.com/Source-Economic...
You keep trying to make this about something that it isn't. I believe in the necessity to protect IP. I think that a vibrant creative industry is important.
I do think that Patents have a flaw with respect to copyrights because a Patent allows you to stop someone from using something they independently thought of.
Your answer to this is the absurd contention that two people can't have the same idea. We ALL know that this can happen.
I don't understand why you can't have a reasonable discussion without calling names.
And, I have always argued for the protection of IP rights for software developers -- via the copyright mechanism which I endorse and use.
And, yes there are many ways to write the same code -- my competitors are welcome to do so and do. The writing of the code and the debugging of it is the essence of programming.
Leaving aside the wiring argument, programming is far more like writing a novel than it is wiring circuits. I've done both and can assure you. When you are writing a novel you don't check to see if there is a patent on a boy having a dog, you put a boy and a dog in your story. There are many ways to do that and your unique way of doing so is your intellectual property.
I can't copy your story but I can have a boy with a dog in mine.
I may not yet have studied all of Ayn Rand's writings but you don't have to look far to realize that the key characteristic she values is reason.
Threats and insults are not a part of a reasoned argument.
You ignore the macro economic evidence
You ignore the constitution
You ignore your position is against Rands
You are DISHONEST.
I continue to say that I believe there is a philosophical problem with patents with respect to independent (not simultaneous) invention.
You continue to cling to the idea that it is impossible for two people to come up with the same idea so that you don't have to address the deprivation of one of them of the fruits of their labor.
You portray yourself as someone who has deeply studied philosophy. I would expect that you would have no trouble with discussing this without insults.