In other words, is a scientist responsible for what new Information he gives out to the Puplic ? Should he close abusable loopholes (and/or) develop countermeasures before publishing Research Results?
Questions is in Offtopic, but a serious discussion would be aprecciated...
And yes i´ve heard of the "Physicans" of Dürrematt- and found it not entirly convicing. Sorry.
Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
Information should be made public asap imo
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
No, they should patent it and make a fortune. Duh.
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
Patents are good as long as they are not too big
Patenting ideas or concepts is retarded, the implementation is what should be patented.
The concept around which the implementation is designed should be made public imo
Patenting ideas or concepts is retarded, the implementation is what should be patented.
The concept around which the implementation is designed should be made public imo
Last edited by Comp1337 on 28 Dec 2007, 17:09, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
the information wants to be free
"It can be taken merely as an expression of an amoral fact of information-science: once information has passed to a new location outside of the source's control there is no way of ensuring it is not propagated further, and therefore will naturally tend towards a state where that information is widely distributed."
"It can be taken merely as an expression of an amoral fact of information-science: once information has passed to a new location outside of the source's control there is no way of ensuring it is not propagated further, and therefore will naturally tend towards a state where that information is widely distributed."
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
So thermonuclear BombBlueprints for everyone ? Or first find a DefensiveSystem to get Rockets down, when your distributed Information Backfires ? Sorry, im just a partime free information flow enthusiastic - a certainly good thing if sb poor can learn all the stuff in the wiki for free... however it is questionable if some of the dangerous stuff gets freely distributed, without a antidot around the world, or ?
Thx for all the Anwsers Pic
Thx for all the Anwsers Pic
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
End pharmaceutical patents.
"open-source" and modularise vehicle manufacture and components
etc etc etc
Throughout history a monopoly on knowledge and learning has been abused to allow a particular clique to subjugate the remaining local population. The subjugation may not be directly apparent (ie through force) in fact it has often been the case that it is instead through social institutions, particularly religious enclaves, that this power has been accrued.
From a purely pragmatic standpoint, an open development model is often a more efficient one. Decentralised production often carries far lower overheads, both physical and beurocratic.
Obviously without a profit incentive providing a potential return on the investment, many feats of human ingenuity would not occur, and proprietary attitudes towards particular pieces of information are at the core of modern capitalist democratic societies, but in a conversation discussing such abstract hypothetical situations as this, I felt free to ignore such mundane constraints on the evolution of the species, and concentrate on my utopian dream of a future where we all actually collaborate and make something awesome.
Yay for rambling drunk posting
"open-source" and modularise vehicle manufacture and components
etc etc etc
Throughout history a monopoly on knowledge and learning has been abused to allow a particular clique to subjugate the remaining local population. The subjugation may not be directly apparent (ie through force) in fact it has often been the case that it is instead through social institutions, particularly religious enclaves, that this power has been accrued.
From a purely pragmatic standpoint, an open development model is often a more efficient one. Decentralised production often carries far lower overheads, both physical and beurocratic.
Obviously without a profit incentive providing a potential return on the investment, many feats of human ingenuity would not occur, and proprietary attitudes towards particular pieces of information are at the core of modern capitalist democratic societies, but in a conversation discussing such abstract hypothetical situations as this, I felt free to ignore such mundane constraints on the evolution of the species, and concentrate on my utopian dream of a future where we all actually collaborate and make something awesome.
Yay for rambling drunk posting
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
The question is if there should be a right to rewards for the guys coming up with ideas or if the reward should simply go to the one who best implements the ideas (via normal captialism). In my opinion there arn't many truly original ideas and if there are they always build on thousands of other ideas. Mostly just lawyers/beurocrats/corporateashols etc profiteering with those artificial patent rules...
There's no patents in the pure science business, only reward you get is honor.
There's no patents in the pure science business, only reward you get is honor.
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
In short, yes.PicassoCT wrote:So thermonuclear BombBlueprints for everyone ?
-
BlackLiger
- Posts: 1371
- Joined: 05 Oct 2004, 21:58
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
Already know how to build a nuke.
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
Nuclear bomb blueprint, in ASCII!! Perfect for all your terrorist needs.
Code: Select all
/\
/ \ <---------------------------[1]
/ \
_________________/______\_________________
| : ||: ~ ~ : |
[2]-------> | : ||: : |
| : ||: : |
| : ||: : |
| : ||: : |
| : ||: : |
| : ||: : |
| : ||: : |
| : ||: : |
| : ||: : |
| : ||: : |
| : ||: : |
| :______||:_____________________________: |
|/_______||/______________________________\|
\ ~\ | | /
\ |\ | | /
\ | \ | | /
\ | \ | | /
\ |___\ |______________| /
\ | \ |~ \ /
\|_______\|_________________\_/
|_____________________________|
/ \
/ _________________ \
/ _/ \_ \
/ __/ \__ \
/ / \ \
/__ _/ \_ __\
[3]_______________________________ \ _|
/ / \ \ \
/ / \/ \ \
/ / ___________ \ \
| / __/___________\__ \ |
| |_ ___ /=================\ ___ _| |
[4]---------> _||___|====|[[[[[[[|||]]]]]]]|====|___||_ <--------[4]
| | |-----------------| | |
| | |o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o=o| <-------------------[5]
| | \_______________/ | |
| |__ |: :| __| |
| | \______________ |: :| ______________/ | |
| | ________________\|: :|/________________ | |
| |/ |::::|: :|::::| \| |
[6]----------------------> |::::|: :|::::| <---------------------[6]
| | |::::|: :|::::| | |
| | |::==|: :|== <------------------------[9]
| | |::__\: :/__::| | |
| | |:: ~: :~ ::| | |
[7]----------------------------> \_/ ::| | |
| |~\________/~\|:: ~ ::|/~\________/~| |
| | ||:: <-------------------------[8]
| |_/~~~~~~~~\_/|::_ _ _ _ _::|\_/~~~~~~~~\_| |
[9]-------------------------->_=_=_=_=_::| | |
| | :::._______.::: | |
| | .:::| |:::.. | |
| | ..:::::'| |`:::::.. | |
[6]---------------->.::::::' || || `::::::.<---------------[6]
| | .::::::' | || || | `::::::. | |
/| | .::::::' | || || | `::::::. | |
| | | .:::::' | || <-----------------------------[10]
| | |.:::::' | || || | `:::::.| |
| | ||::::' | |`. .'| | `::::|| |
[11]___________________________ ``~'' __________________________[11]
: | | \:: \ / ::/ | |
| | | \:_________|_|\/__ __\/|_|_________:/ | |
/ | | | __________~___:___~__________ | | |
|| | | | | |:::::::| | | | |
[12] /|: | | | | |:::::::| | | | |
|~~~~~ / |: | | | | |:::::::| | | | |
|----> / /|: | | | | |:::::::| <-----------------[10]
| / / |: | | | | |:::::::| | | | |
| / |: | | | | |::::<-----------------------------[13]
| / /|: | | | | |:::::::| | | | |
| / / |: | | | | `:::::::' | | | |
| _/ / /:~: | | | `: ``~'' :' | | |
| | / / ~.. | | |: `: :' :| | |
|->| / / : | | ::: `. .' <----------------[11]
| |/ / ^ ~\| \ ::::. `. .' .:::: / |
| ~ /|\ | \_::::::. `. .' .::::::_/ |
|_______| | \::::::. `. .' .:::<-----------------[6]
|_________\:::::.. `~.....~' ..:::::/_________|
| \::::::::.......::::::::/ |
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
`. .'
`. .'
`. .'
`:. .:'
`::. .::'
`::.. ..::'
`:::.. ..:::'
`::::::... ..::::::'
[14]------------------> `:____:::::::::::____:' <-----------------[14]
```::::_____::::'''
~~~~~
- Diagram Outline -
---------------------
[1] - Tail Cone
[2] - Stabilizing Tail Fins
[3] - Air Pressure Detonator
[4] - Air Inlet Tube(s)
[5] - Altimeter/Pressure Sensors
[6] - Lead Shield Container
[7] - Detonating Head
[8] - Conventional Explosive Charge
[9] - Packing
[10] - Uranium (U-235) [Plutonium (See other diagram)]
[11] - Neutron Deflector (U-238)
[12] - Telemetry Monitoring Probes
[13] - Receptacle for U-235 upon detonation
to facilitate supercritical mass.
[14] - Fuses (inserted to arm bomb)
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
kk ty. need deutrium plx
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
what on earth forlbctech wrote:kk ty. need deutrium plx
and that schematic is a photoshop, pixels etc
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
Easy going jokes.. as long as somebody else has to take care about - or clean the ashes up. I´m proud pirate supporter, but i think the right to pirate should end if there would be nothing left to pirat further.
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
If nobody pays for information, would any information be created worth paying for?
Its a tricky question. If information were free, what would you end up with? Let see...
Viral marketing and the most cynical ('Coca Cola Powered Robots!') of exploitative entertainment made for commercial interests, all sponsored by advertising (A bit like TV only lower quality as there could be no borders between advertising and content).
Home made music. Honestly i think this would be a good thing for the music industry, as the crap the record companies pump out is terrible compared to what a lot of independent artists produce, but i am betraying a bias here.
What about Cinema though? LoTR would be a bunch of Ren Faire reenacementists with a handy cam. You would get no CG epics. The writing might be a little more adventurous, but you'd have nothing really pushing the technical boundaries.
Government sponsored research and art. Do you trust the government to spend their money wisely? Will it reward the most deserving or only those who know how to play the system? I am appalled to see some of the art that my government has supported (And i mean technically awful, not just artistically awful but just full of technical errors of a rank amateur). Equally, will they research things to enrich our lives, or only brainwashing techniques and new military technology (USA military spending comes to mind).
Open Source software. Okay, no problems, there are open source versions of a lot of programs. But would anyone learn to program if it were even harder to make money doing it than it is now? Would all those small (but necessary) programs get made if there were no way to sell them? More to the point, and here is a distressing idea, would the information boom have taken off at all if not for the dot com bubble and all the money to be made, the investments that were put in? Would we even have the internet?
Software companies could still make money, if they put burdensome and hard to crack anti-piracy software on their programs. Unless denying people information were in fact illegal, which i think is getting into the realms of 1984. Thats a whole new issue there- if a content creator is able to physically deny access to his work (Lock art up in a gallery, never distribute digital copies of anything, etc) who is to say he isnt allowed to?
At the moment, its hard to make money as an information creator- be that as an artist or as a research scientist. Its just not where the money is. So yes, information would still be created/discovered. But what would it do to our society?
Me, ill keep creating free information. But eventually, i hope to take up art as a career (In one form or another- be it game design, or painting, or 3d, or writing, or music). I hope to do what i love and make a living off it. I dont think art is something that should just be a hobby, something to do between the 'productive' hours of the day. Art should be, at least for some people, something you devote your life to mastering.
So, what value information? Isnt information worth paying for?
You have to understand that its not just paying for 0's and 1's. Its paying for blood sweat and tears, too. Its paying so someone can live comfortably and keep making more of what makes your life better.
Its a tricky question. If information were free, what would you end up with? Let see...
Viral marketing and the most cynical ('Coca Cola Powered Robots!') of exploitative entertainment made for commercial interests, all sponsored by advertising (A bit like TV only lower quality as there could be no borders between advertising and content).
Home made music. Honestly i think this would be a good thing for the music industry, as the crap the record companies pump out is terrible compared to what a lot of independent artists produce, but i am betraying a bias here.
What about Cinema though? LoTR would be a bunch of Ren Faire reenacementists with a handy cam. You would get no CG epics. The writing might be a little more adventurous, but you'd have nothing really pushing the technical boundaries.
Government sponsored research and art. Do you trust the government to spend their money wisely? Will it reward the most deserving or only those who know how to play the system? I am appalled to see some of the art that my government has supported (And i mean technically awful, not just artistically awful but just full of technical errors of a rank amateur). Equally, will they research things to enrich our lives, or only brainwashing techniques and new military technology (USA military spending comes to mind).
Open Source software. Okay, no problems, there are open source versions of a lot of programs. But would anyone learn to program if it were even harder to make money doing it than it is now? Would all those small (but necessary) programs get made if there were no way to sell them? More to the point, and here is a distressing idea, would the information boom have taken off at all if not for the dot com bubble and all the money to be made, the investments that were put in? Would we even have the internet?
Software companies could still make money, if they put burdensome and hard to crack anti-piracy software on their programs. Unless denying people information were in fact illegal, which i think is getting into the realms of 1984. Thats a whole new issue there- if a content creator is able to physically deny access to his work (Lock art up in a gallery, never distribute digital copies of anything, etc) who is to say he isnt allowed to?
At the moment, its hard to make money as an information creator- be that as an artist or as a research scientist. Its just not where the money is. So yes, information would still be created/discovered. But what would it do to our society?
Me, ill keep creating free information. But eventually, i hope to take up art as a career (In one form or another- be it game design, or painting, or 3d, or writing, or music). I hope to do what i love and make a living off it. I dont think art is something that should just be a hobby, something to do between the 'productive' hours of the day. Art should be, at least for some people, something you devote your life to mastering.
So, what value information? Isnt information worth paying for?
You have to understand that its not just paying for 0's and 1's. Its paying for blood sweat and tears, too. Its paying so someone can live comfortably and keep making more of what makes your life better.
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
Do you think an environment where art is distributed freely without charge, but a way of reimbursing the creator was attached to the distribution (a la Radiohead's last album for eg) would be viable in the future?
The problems with an artist gaining enough recognition to achieve critical mass of voluntary contributions in order to cover the costs of the production could be a massive hurdle to overcome i suppose...
The problems with an artist gaining enough recognition to achieve critical mass of voluntary contributions in order to cover the costs of the production could be a massive hurdle to overcome i suppose...
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
Radiohead can afford to do that because they are already successful, their members already rich, but its still an admirable act.
Would creative work supported entirely by charity be viable, for an entire society? Do you have that much faith in peoples philanthropy? I dont. One might be able to reimburse the costs of production on a small scale, or feed a starving artist...
There are business models that would still work under a copyright free enviroment. Selling hard copies (which would require self-publishing), advertising supported, and employing artists to create content (Though why buy the cow if the milk is free?).
Im sorry to derail the thread in response to PicassoCT's comment. This isnt really about copyright is it, so ill answer the first question. Personally i believe in the freedom of information because i do not trust anyone (least of all my government) to decide for me what i should be allowed to know. Understanding something is the first step towards preventing harmful consequences of it.
If you are asking whether or not Darwinism led to Hitlerian Eugenics, dont make me get all Godwins Law on you and give you a rant about the history of the persecution of the jews and gypsies, and invalidicide.
Issues of espionage during wartime is a trickier matter, though 'military and state secrets' are a slippery slope and should be restricted wherever possible.
Would creative work supported entirely by charity be viable, for an entire society? Do you have that much faith in peoples philanthropy? I dont. One might be able to reimburse the costs of production on a small scale, or feed a starving artist...
There are business models that would still work under a copyright free enviroment. Selling hard copies (which would require self-publishing), advertising supported, and employing artists to create content (Though why buy the cow if the milk is free?).
Im sorry to derail the thread in response to PicassoCT's comment. This isnt really about copyright is it, so ill answer the first question. Personally i believe in the freedom of information because i do not trust anyone (least of all my government) to decide for me what i should be allowed to know. Understanding something is the first step towards preventing harmful consequences of it.
If you are asking whether or not Darwinism led to Hitlerian Eugenics, dont make me get all Godwins Law on you and give you a rant about the history of the persecution of the jews and gypsies, and invalidicide.
Issues of espionage during wartime is a trickier matter, though 'military and state secrets' are a slippery slope and should be restricted wherever possible.
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
Wow, after seeing the Topic heading I wasn't going to visit, but this is awesome.
First of all pintle, your have a interesting Marxist (not communist specifically) leaning to your information ideals and I have never seen the case presented in this way. Cool.
Effectively you are describing a Bourgeoisie who control the means of production in our society since the information age superseded the industrial revolution. Effectively you have programmers providing worker time that leverages the information currently at the disposal to corporation to create new information which can be traded indirectly with others in order to gain access to more information (sell software for money, buy third party software for money). An this information is currency, and it's losing value in this context whenever it's passed on or someone else gains access to information that serves the same purpose... wow... I'm rambling and just babbling here... lack of sleep or something.
Anyways...
The big questions are always going to come back to "What do you want out of life?" and "Are other people going to agree with you?".
For example, I think that we should replace any human who is doing a job that a robot can do with said robot. I also think that if people aren't needed for any specific purpose they should be provided comfortable living conditions by the government (food, lodgings, some access to entertainment and other "luxuries"). This is because I hate working and I would rather sit on my butt and let it get fat while I drink coke and play video games. And if everyone was doing this the people who do like programming and doing creative/artistic things could produce enough content to keep me entertained instead of sitting around like I would. Some people enjoy working the land, let them be farmers. Some people enjoy being bureaucrats, let them take care of distributing the wealth fairly.
Problem is, we don't want "fair"... we want to get more then we deserve, or at least work hard so we get more then we need. Would there be such a thing as a 72 inch plasma TV if we didn't have rich CEOs working hard to move up the ladder and gain access to more means of production every day?
A lot of people think that entertainment is destroying our society, games ruining your minds, television making us fat and lazy, books an escape from reality to avoid dealing with other people... but isn't that the POINT of our society? The "American Dream" is to work really hard in the middle class levels of society and more up to the upper class, being a business owner or CEO and having enough money to afford things that we don't have time for... so the people who don't want to move up basically have nothing to work toward or achieve... and sometimes they just don't have the skills to move forward or they hate their jobs so much they just want to lose themselves in... okay, I'm babbling again.
I'm going to Make a new topic.
First of all pintle, your have a interesting Marxist (not communist specifically) leaning to your information ideals and I have never seen the case presented in this way. Cool.
Effectively you are describing a Bourgeoisie who control the means of production in our society since the information age superseded the industrial revolution. Effectively you have programmers providing worker time that leverages the information currently at the disposal to corporation to create new information which can be traded indirectly with others in order to gain access to more information (sell software for money, buy third party software for money). An this information is currency, and it's losing value in this context whenever it's passed on or someone else gains access to information that serves the same purpose... wow... I'm rambling and just babbling here... lack of sleep or something.
Anyways...
The big questions are always going to come back to "What do you want out of life?" and "Are other people going to agree with you?".
For example, I think that we should replace any human who is doing a job that a robot can do with said robot. I also think that if people aren't needed for any specific purpose they should be provided comfortable living conditions by the government (food, lodgings, some access to entertainment and other "luxuries"). This is because I hate working and I would rather sit on my butt and let it get fat while I drink coke and play video games. And if everyone was doing this the people who do like programming and doing creative/artistic things could produce enough content to keep me entertained instead of sitting around like I would. Some people enjoy working the land, let them be farmers. Some people enjoy being bureaucrats, let them take care of distributing the wealth fairly.
Problem is, we don't want "fair"... we want to get more then we deserve, or at least work hard so we get more then we need. Would there be such a thing as a 72 inch plasma TV if we didn't have rich CEOs working hard to move up the ladder and gain access to more means of production every day?
A lot of people think that entertainment is destroying our society, games ruining your minds, television making us fat and lazy, books an escape from reality to avoid dealing with other people... but isn't that the POINT of our society? The "American Dream" is to work really hard in the middle class levels of society and more up to the upper class, being a business owner or CEO and having enough money to afford things that we don't have time for... so the people who don't want to move up basically have nothing to work toward or achieve... and sometimes they just don't have the skills to move forward or they hate their jobs so much they just want to lose themselves in... okay, I'm babbling again.
I'm going to Make a new topic.
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
Well this Thread is derailed like a Railgun beaten up with a StoneAxe.. so i feel free to carry it on into unknown territory...
Goverments are made (in democratic countrys at least) on free political markets.. people "buy" (vote) for the product (party) they long for.. so why do you distrust the product you have chosen ? As the Market is phail & flawless, the product should be trustworthy... otherwise... it is just the usual liberal cult, not reachable by reason, that is up and around since "Atlas shrugged"
Goverments are made (in democratic countrys at least) on free political markets.. people "buy" (vote) for the product (party) they long for.. so why do you distrust the product you have chosen ? As the Market is phail & flawless, the product should be trustworthy... otherwise... it is just the usual liberal cult, not reachable by reason, that is up and around since "Atlas shrugged"
Re: Could Darwin have forseen the Ape Hitler ?
No offense.SinbadEV wrote:Stoner rambling
