Truly? You came back for more?
The Niggers traded labor, goods and slaves using sea shells for two fucking thousand years, until the late 17th century. They still would be trading sea shells today if the Colonial powers did not slap them to their senses!
You are the stupidest person I met in the last few months. You do not belong on the Fedi, go to Reddit or Bluesky. I get stupider just by replying to you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_money
The Niggers traded labor, goods and slaves using sea shells for two fucking thousand years, until the late 17th century. They still would be trading sea shells today if the Colonial powers did not slap them to their senses!
You are the stupidest person I met in the last few months. You do not belong on the Fedi, go to Reddit or Bluesky. I get stupider just by replying to you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_money
@FourOh-LLC @Godsend @amerika @SirAnthony @truthbait How is that related to what happened since XIX century to now?
You are only trying to mislead the topic to feel "right", avoiding the main topic because "muh china is always bad" and using a shtty fallacy because you are scared of thinking out of your bubble. You have no real arguments 🤣
You are only trying to mislead the topic to feel "right", avoiding the main topic because "muh china is always bad" and using a shtty fallacy because you are scared of thinking out of your bubble. You have no real arguments 🤣
@waltercool @Godsend @SirAnthony @truthbait @FourOh-LLC
I enjoy reading @FourOh-LLC
Always has something to think about
Does China suck? It strikes me as a dangerous type of nation: the one that seizes power first and later finds out it cannot wield it.
I enjoy reading @FourOh-LLC
Always has something to think about
Does China suck? It strikes me as a dangerous type of nation: the one that seizes power first and later finds out it cannot wield it.
@amerika @Godsend @SirAnthony @truthbait @FourOh-LLC China is not a country I sympathize. However, it's a country who can build whatever 90% cheaper than USA due their terrible working condition, lack of humanity (people are just numbers) and no freedom of speech/thought.
Said that, I think China provides good value for third world countries, so poor people can get technology and overall goods for a good value. Not every nation can afford an iPhone, iPad, European/American car, etc.
Also Chinese markets don't give a F about software/manufacturing patents, leading to cheaper prices without necessarily impacting quality.
The main issue of China is their lack of innovation and creativity. This is a consequence of controlling speech and thought, mostly.
Said that, I think China provides good value for third world countries, so poor people can get technology and overall goods for a good value. Not every nation can afford an iPhone, iPad, European/American car, etc.
Also Chinese markets don't give a F about software/manufacturing patents, leading to cheaper prices without necessarily impacting quality.
The main issue of China is their lack of innovation and creativity. This is a consequence of controlling speech and thought, mostly.
>> The main issue of China is their lack of innovation and creativity.
He plainly wrote STEALING, and ROBBING, and COUNTERFEIT, for those who do not write or read plain English.
He plainly wrote STEALING, and ROBBING, and COUNTERFEIT, for those who do not write or read plain English.
@FourOh-LLC @Godsend @amerika @SirAnthony @truthbait Intellectual property is a social construct.
But yeah, I meant basically that.
But yeah, I meant basically that.
Like innies and outies are a "social construct"?
You are some mental midget. Online exchanging you cannot hide. I see you as you truly are, 100% useless.
You wrote nothing worth of attention.
You are some mental midget. Online exchanging you cannot hide. I see you as you truly are, 100% useless.
You wrote nothing worth of attention.
@FourOh-LLC @Godsend @amerika @SirAnthony @truthbait You are not adding anything useful to the discussion, but ton of ad hominem instead.
If you want to do any criticism, feel free to attack my argument.
Intellectual property is just a legacy from the Industrial Revolution, and can only exist by force. It's idiotic to believe you cannot manufacture something by yourself because a patent prevents that. It's a technological barrier that limits innovation and free-markets overall
If you want to do any criticism, feel free to attack my argument.
Intellectual property is just a legacy from the Industrial Revolution, and can only exist by force. It's idiotic to believe you cannot manufacture something by yourself because a patent prevents that. It's a technological barrier that limits innovation and free-markets overall
I will attack your argument.
How come its always the broke-ass peasants who want to equalize, its never the have-ones?
How many times you see protest on the streets, demanding "TAKE OUR WEALTH OR DEATH!"
You see why you are a mental midget, not worth "debating"?
How come its always the broke-ass peasants who want to equalize, its never the have-ones?
How many times you see protest on the streets, demanding "TAKE OUR WEALTH OR DEATH!"
You see why you are a mental midget, not worth "debating"?
@FourOh-LLC @Godsend @amerika @SirAnthony @truthbait > How many times you see protest on the streets, demanding "TAKE OUR WEALTH OR DEATH!"
Marxists are not people.
Said that, it doesn't make you entitled to "own" an idea. It goes against the free market ideals, where businesses have to compete each other to provide low cost for the consumer.
In the IP world, a company just say "you can't do that because I own a patent for it". That's not competition, that just lawfare against other business and startups.
Marxists are not people.
Said that, it doesn't make you entitled to "own" an idea. It goes against the free market ideals, where businesses have to compete each other to provide low cost for the consumer.
In the IP world, a company just say "you can't do that because I own a patent for it". That's not competition, that just lawfare against other business and startups.
>> it doesn't make you entitled to "own" an idea
That's why Society invented the concept of Patents. It took a long time, and its not a perfect invention but its the best we currently have.
By DISRESPECTING IT out of the gate does not make you right.
You can DISAGREE all you want, but if you want to change the rules of the game you must qualify as a Player.
You ARE nobody, you cannot change the rules. Now sit down and shut the fuck up, or become a Player.
These are the Rules.
That's why Society invented the concept of Patents. It took a long time, and its not a perfect invention but its the best we currently have.
By DISRESPECTING IT out of the gate does not make you right.
You can DISAGREE all you want, but if you want to change the rules of the game you must qualify as a Player.
You ARE nobody, you cannot change the rules. Now sit down and shut the fuck up, or become a Player.
These are the Rules.
Follow
@FourOh-LLC Akshully - patents are for implementations, NOT ideas. Similarly, copyright is for a book/other creative work, NOT for an idea for such. Rowling shouldn't win a suit against copycat works with boy wizards (that don't substantially copy plot etc).
The most egregious example of patent abuse is software patents. These are explicitly prohibited in the law. BUT, after a (correct) ruling where the mere presence of software did not invalidate patents (on an oil refinery implementation), Big Tech discovered they could "patent" software by simply appending "but on a general purpose computer". These are "patents" on ideas. Software implementations are already covered by copyright - no need for patents.
That said, there are numerous examples of small inventors getting real patents, and Big Corp ignores the patent. One famous example is the intermittent wiper setting for automobiles.
