dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
4
share rss forum feed


ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia
reply to Link Logger

Re: Reddit co-founder Aaron Swartz found dead.

said by Link Logger:

Content creators have every right to their content and if they choose to make it private, then what right does someone else have to decide otherwise.

DNA even gets copy written, and the journals on that for a small price would be o.k. but certain types of knowledge (like DNA) should be free to all those that could do/lead to betterment for us all. Not saying all of it, but some form of change from those that use our/peoples money to do this type of research should have a fairer system in place ahead of their personal profits. I guessing thats inline with how Aaron saw it.
--
Paradigm Shift beta test pilot. "Dying to defend one's small piece of suburb...Give me something global...STAT!


Link Logger
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
Calgary, AB
kudos:3

1 recommendation

said by ashrc4:

said by Link Logger:

Content creators have every right to their content and if they choose to make it private, then what right does someone else have to decide otherwise.

DNA even gets copy written, and the journals on that for a small price would be o.k. but certain types of knowledge (like DNA) should be free to all those that could do/lead to betterment for us all. Not saying all of it, but some form of change from those that use our/peoples money to do this type of research should have a fairer system in place ahead of their personal profits. I guessing thats inline with how Aaron saw it.

Knowledge is often a double edge sword, DNA research, could be a benefit, might not be. For example finding an easy test for DNA markers for some forms of cancer, good, using DNA programming to create a race of super humans, maybe not good particularly if they are intent on enslaving 'lessor' humans. Sometimes its the shear costs of research that is the controlling factor and enables society to determine what research it wants.

The other question always comes down to who gets to decide what is beneficial? Aaron Swartz thought free information would be beneficial, whereas I think it would kill the creation of new information. For every successful inventor who makes a million, there are million inventors who ended fin the red, take away the reward and the remaining untouched risk kills the motivation.

I find it amazing that in our world of run away consumerism that people now expect free knowledge like its going to save them or something. The fact is people just don't value anything anymore as everything is just given to them without any real effort on their behalf and its killing them, society and the the planet. Maybe its time for expectations to change.

Blake
--
Vendor: Author of Link Logger which is a traffic analysis and firewall logging tool


ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia

1 edit
said by Link Logger:

The fact is people just don't value anything anymore as everything is just given to them without any real effort on their behalf and its killing them, society and the the planet. Maybe its time for expectations to change.

I agree with all the of last post and the quote too although as separate from each other???

My ideas may be deemed to radical on the solution side to the quote, so i won't mention them.
--
Paradigm Shift beta test pilot. "Dying to defend one's small piece of suburb...Give me something global...STAT!


ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia
reply to Link Logger
said by Link Logger See Profileq :

The other question always comes down to who gets to decide what is beneficial? Aaron Swartz thought free information would be beneficial, whereas I think it would kill the creation of new information. For every successful inventor who makes a million, there are million inventors who ended fin the red, take away the reward and the remaining untouched risk kills the motivation.

Is it fair that an unsuccessful outgoing CEO gets a 10 million handshake whilst and leader in research only gets profits by tying up copyright on his findings. The brain drain saga continues.
--
Paradigm Shift beta test pilot. "Dying to defend one's small piece of suburb...Give me something global...STAT!


Link Logger
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
Calgary, AB
kudos:3
said by ashrc4:

Is it fair that an unsuccessful outgoing CEO gets a 10 million handshake whilst and leader in research only gets profits by tying up copyright on his findings. The brain drain saga continues.

Fair is a fairy tale, humans work via contracts (formal or otherwise) and even then they are often pooched. That CEO got a golden handshake because someone agreed to it as terms of their employment and no one opposed it (hello shareholders for example), so in the opinion of those making the decision the terms were agreeable. How many people really care that the CEO or owners of Walmart are making buckets of dough, apparently not many as Walmart gives them what they want, cheap stuff, so in a sense everyone is happy with how the system works.

I would agree that our world values are completely screwed and innovation and artist pursuits are vastly undervalued, but again people have proven repeatedly that those things are of little value (ie they don't want to invest in them), or they don't value the work and take them without payment or otherwise ignore the terms of the copyright.

I'm not sure there is a brain drain as I think its just not worth it to be a brain anymore, hence declining involvement/enrollments in those areas.

Blake
--
Vendor: Author of Link Logger which is a traffic analysis and firewall logging tool

Just Bob
Premium
join:2000-08-13
Spring Hill, FL
Once upon a time long ago and far away, universities published the scientific journals. We outgrew that system and the system didn't really work all that well anyhow as the number of journals exploded. What we have now is a continuing privatization, commercialization and monetization of knowledge and the universities themselves.

Those who are connected to universities or have access to major libraries that subscribe to JSTOR have free and easy access. Others can only gain access at great expense. The number of public libraries subscribing to JSTOR has decreased as the cost has increased.

Part of the problems is that one size doesn't fit all. What may work for MPAA and the RIAA doesn't work for all intellectual property. It almost seems as if big money is trying to corner the market on knowledge.

You may see thing differently. That's okay. It's good to have choices.
--
"...an imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics." Plutarch
Judging other people is easy. Understanding them can break your heart.

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
reply to Link Logger
the CEO pay issue is the same as the movie stars make too much issue.

As long as a hand full of employers are willing to pay the millions they will be able to hire those asking the millions.

And really once you exit the banking industry nobody cares what the CEO makes. And people only care about the banks because it was their tax dollars that allowed the banks to not go chapter 11.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


Link Logger
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
Calgary, AB
kudos:3
reply to Just Bob
said by Just Bob:

Once upon a time long ago and far away, universities published the scientific journals. We outgrew that system and the system didn't really work all that well anyhow as the number of journals exploded. What we have now is a continuing privatization, commercialization and monetization of knowledge and the universities themselves.

Simply because the public doesn't want to pay for it, so Universities increasing turn to corporations for funding. Research has been this way pretty much forever. You might have a brilliant idea but who is going to fund your research into that idea? How do you get 'public' money to do your research or is that even possible? Things like »www.kickstarter.com/ are certainly interesting as its a way to fund/build a product/project/etc and have the public fund it and somehow reward those who helped make it possible, but even then its limited as to how much funding can be raised and most kickstarted projects end up not making it.

said by Just Bob:

Those who are connected to universities or have access to major libraries that subscribe to JSTOR have free and easy access. Others can only gain access at great expense. The number of public libraries subscribing to JSTOR has decreased as the cost has increased.

Again I would ask why do researchers subscribe to it at the price they charge, because it provides value for the money. Why do they submit papers to it, because that is where their peers look for qualified papers. Simply it works for their industry, so it continues to be the system of choice.

said by Just Bob:

Part of the problems is that one size doesn't fit all. What may work for MPAA and the RIAA doesn't work for all intellectual property. It almost seems as if big money is trying to corner the market on knowledge.

I'm not sure big money is trying to corner the market, or they are the only ones who can or are willing to invest in research and having multiple processes only tend to make things more expensive and confusing as how do you decide who uses what process and when and how do you make it fair and fair in who's eyes. For example private schools, some feel they are unfair others feel they are fair, but they are a solution to the one size doesn't fit all.

said by Just Bob:

You may see thing differently. That's okay. It's good to have choices.

Choices are good.

Now I used to be a researcher and created ideas that lead to products and companies etc but found out that I hated it, as a researcher my interest was in the product and how it worked for people, however investors/shareholders/etc only cared about how much money they were going to make and so that is what ultimately ends up driving and unless there are people who are willing to pay researchers without expectation of return, that is the system which will remain in place. Certainly people like Bill Gates and his foundation have had some impact, but not enough to change things much.

Now I sit in my office and build little projects that I'm willing to fund myself and I might publish a paper or a blog entry, but likely not as its the idea creation process I love and so I do what makes me happy, but of course that means I don't make money off of these ideas, but making money came at a price I didn't really enjoy.

Blake
--
Vendor: Author of Link Logger which is a traffic analysis and firewall logging tool


ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia
reply to Link Logger
said by Link Logger:

said by ashrc4:

Is it fair that an unsuccessful outgoing CEO gets a 10 million handshake whilst and leader in research only gets profits by tying up copyright on his findings. The brain drain saga continues.

Fair is a fairy tale,.........

Fairer is a reality, fair is often a compromise for fairer..... which means the same......what?.......my last EMU told me that
--
Paradigm Shift beta test pilot. "Dying to defend one's small piece of suburb...Give me something global...STAT!