>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

@MaxWilder


Who me?

I agree with the video. Obama has done nothing substantive on the issue of money buying political power. But as long as he doesn't start talking up war with Iran, I will choose him any day of the week against those warmongering Republitards.

It's simply not possible to do anything substantial from the top down. There are too many bought politicians. If there's going to be change, it must be demanded by us. And as long as the conservatives have half the population duped into being corporate lemmings, that change is unlikely. Things are going to have to get worse before they get better.

We're going to have to have about 75% of the people who understand what the banks, military industry, and pharmaceutical corporations are doing to us before rational minds will be able to overpower the corporate spokes-holes. At that point the politicians will know for a fact that they will be only get elected or re-elected if they make progress re-balancing the economic system.

>> ^ChaosEngine:
Bollocks, ip doesn't stifle innovation, it encourages it. Take pharmaceuticals for instance, without patent protection companies simply couldn't afford the millions required to research new drugs (yes, drug companies are evil, etc, but theyre still kinda important).
As for the difference between physical property and intellectual property, are you really saying that a sculptor deserves compensation for their work, but a writer/musician/programmer doesn't?
That kind of attitude is why idiotic laws like this get written in the first place.


If I want to own your statue I need the physical artifact itself (until 3d printing technology matures...), if I want to listen to your CD I never need to touch the thing. These are real distinctions. This is not a question of what you deserve; it's reality. You cannot cry about it and try to oppose the basic operation of the universe because you want to make your living by singing once into a box. Do gigs, sell tshirts, update your business model and stop crying.

---

Ug hits a couple of rocks together and makes a spark, the spark starts a fire. He shows his innovation off to the rest of his tribe, everyone's very impressed. Soon they learn to copy his technique, now they can eat a wider variety of food, stay warm in winter, keep the god damn flies away - they flourish. Other tribes take notice, so on, pretty soon everyone is using fire.

Ug hits a couple of rocks together and makes a spark, the spark starts a fire. He knows fire is now his intellectual property. He makes a comfortable living starting fires for people, but only if they agree to turn away while he does it. He gets the biggest share of the food, which he never has to bother to hunt for, never mind how hungry the others are. Anyone who accidentally observes his method keeps it to themselves because they know Ug owns the patent to fire, and they're not allowed to know how to make it without his permission. Ug dies. No one is using fire any more.

>> ^gorillaman:

>> ^ChaosEngine:
First up, read my original post. I do not, in any way shape or form support SOPA or PIPA. In fact, I abhor them. So you can leave the childish "government thugs" line out of it.
As to the rest of your arguments, I'm not going to pay you to take a dump, because I don't want your dump. If I did want your "output", I would expect to pay you for it.
As for "extracting the tribute I'm owed", I don't believe I'm owed a damn thing, until you use what I've created, in which case, pay me. If you don't want to use it, fine. But it's still my ip that I worked hard on. It's not "imaginary" property, it is intellectual property and the principal has been around for longer than you would believe (look up the story of Colm Cille copying art works in medieval Ireland).
The quality of the work is irrelevant. If Transformers or CoD or whatever is so shit, don't watch/play it.
As for these posts, I'm pretty sure that when you signed up to this site, we agreed that posts were made under creative commons, or are the property of siftbot or whatever. The point is that there is no expectation of remuneration here. I have no problem with people sharing their content or whatever, but it's still their decision to make.

Do we really have to go over the differences between physical property and indefinitely replicable information?
If you create something, create it for yourself and be satisfied. If I like it, I'm going to use it. That's how our culture advances.
Do you realise how devastating it would have been to human progress if IP had always been around stifling the propagation of new ideas and technologies? I wonder if we'd have made it to the bronze age yet.


Bollocks, ip doesn't stifle innovation, it encourages it. Take pharmaceuticals for instance, without patent protection companies simply couldn't afford the millions required to research new drugs (yes, drug companies are evil, etc, but theyre still kinda important).

As for the difference between physical property and intellectual property, are you really saying that a sculptor deserves compensation for their work, but a writer/musician/programmer doesn't?

That kind of attitude is why idiotic laws like this get written in the first place.

I wrote to my Senator (Orrin Hatch-R., Utah, responsible for the Protect IP Act) about SOPA and its problems and gave them a rather "cool" scathing review about its faults and errors and the public demonstrations that have taken place like GoDaddy and the fact that three major companies had pulled out from the SOPA bill (although their political alliance group is still signed into SOPA--so they can still look good in the public eye and still, really, support the bill) and got the "printing press" release as follows (which has nothing to do with what I wrote, really--I know this bill is coming, but really, an auto-send out letter for pissed constituents?):

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to S. 968, the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property (PROTECT IP) Act.

On May 12, 2011, Senator Patrick Leahy and I introduced the PROTECT IP Act. If enacted, S. 968 would provide law enforcement with important tools to stop foreign websites “dedicated to infringing activities.” In other words, the bill targets the most egregious offenders of online theft who profit from counterfeit products and pirated content. These goods can range from new movie and music releases to pharmaceuticals and consumer products. With this legislation, we send a strong message to those selling or distributing pirated content or counterfeit goods online that the United States will strongly protect intellectual property rights.

The bill authorizes the Department of Justice (DOJ) to file a civil action against the registrant or owner of a domain name that accesses a foreign infringing Internet site, or the foreign-registered domain name itself. However, DOJ officials must first seek approval from a federal court before taking any action. In determining whether an Internet site is “dedicated to infringing activities,” a federal judge must weigh all of the facts carefully in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure – just like what happens today in shutting down an illegal bricks and mortar storefront.

Unfortunately, there seems to be a common assumption with some online users that illegal downloads and purchases online are free and harmless. This is far from true. Fake pharmaceuticals threaten people’s lives. Stolen movies, music, and other products threaten the jobs and livelihoods of many people, and drive up costs for other consumers. Every year, these online thieves are making hundreds of millions of dollars by stealing American intellectual property, and this undermines legitimate commerce.

This also has a direct impact on Utah. As you may know, Utah is considered a very popular state for film and television production activity. Nothing compares to the red rock of Southern Utah or the sweeping grandeur of the Wasatch Mountains. Utah’s workforce is also a draw to filmmakers who come for one of the most highly educated and hardworking workforces in our country. It is estimated that the motion picture and television industries are responsible for thousands of jobs and tens of millions of dollars in wages in Utah. There is no doubt that intellectual property theft has a direct, negative impact on Utah’s economy and its workforce. This same impact can be seen nationwide.

On July 22, 2011, the Senate Judiciary Committee favorably reported S. 968 by unanimous consent. While it is unclear when the bill will be considered by the full Senate, the legislation enjoys strong support with 39 bipartisan cosponsors to date. Please know that my Senate colleagues and I are committed to crafting consensus legislation and welcome suggestions on ways to improve the bill. Unfortunately there has been some misinformation circulated about what the PROTECT IP Act aims to accomplish. In an effort to be of assistance, I have enclosed “Fact vs. Fiction” information about the legislation. I hope this information will be helpful to you.

Again, thank you for writing. I welcome your continued input on issues of concern.



Complete BULLSHIT. I hate my politicians, they're fucking half-wits!

Also from the Wikipedia:

Zolpidem (Ambien) may provide short-lasting but effective improvement in symptoms of aphasia present in some survivors of stroke. The mechanism for improvement in these cases remains unexplained and is the focus of current research by several groups, to explain how a drug which acts as a hypnotic-sedative in people with normal brain function, can paradoxically increase speech ability in people recovering from severe brain injury. Use of zolpidem for this application remains experimental at this time, and is not officially approved by any pharmaceutical manufacturers of zolpidem or medical regulatory agencies worldwide

It is well known that homo sapiens evolved on the grassy plains of Africa, thrived and survived to this day, by consuming well metered doses of engineered pharmaceuticals.

I am so glad they have finally discovered the "missing link" here if you will, the secret to health. I knew all along that the supposed triangle of life - donuts, Coca Cola, and a sedentary lifestyle, were actually three parts of a quadrilateral. This fat killing drug will allow us to ascend the food chain even higher, by killing parts of ourselves to survive.

The only thing that gets me is that many people will refuse to take it. I think it should be added to our water supplies.

So, the whole thing is a PSA for the pharmaceutical-industrial complex? That goes a way to explain the crazy high production value.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter and/or pharmaceutical regimen.

Even if the politicians and judges agree, do you think the pharmaceutical companies and their lobbyists ever will?

Replies within message:

>> ^quantumushroom:

I was 100% against the failouts, but not much you can do against a leviathan government made that way by worshipers of leviathan government as the solution to every problem. You don't create a Kong then act surprised when Kong does what he wants instead of what you want, do you?


If I recall, Bush pushed for the bailout. Here is the Fox News article.


Due to increasingly efficient software and other tech advances, over time a job that once required a thousand workers can be done with only 300. It's called "creative destruction" and yeah, it requires you to be on the ball.


I agree with you. This happened to the TV repairmen in the 80s when the Japanese firms starting making better TVs. It's a problem that we will have to deal with regularly. It happened, and it will happen again. If it wasn't for prescriptions, most General Physicians would be out of the job today as internet self-diagnostics have become extremely popular in the last 10 years. We still subsidize farmers, cotton growers, and steelworkers. I say let's drop them! The same rule should apply to all. If we are willing to support outsourcing, then we should be willing to cut all subsidies to farmers, oil companies, pharmaceuticals, etc. I'm all for that.

I've never been offered a job by a poor man, have you? Unless you're a vote-buying politician, you shouldn't overly concern yourself that someone else has more than you, nor blame them. Economics is not a zero-sum game.

I don't see your point at all here. People do not want to tax the rich more, they just want repeal the tax breaks that Bush implemented. Unless you know otherwise, over the ENTIRE lifespan of these tax breaks, the economy has been on a downhill. How can you justify them then? Remember this is tax breaks over income only, if the rich invest their money into their businesses, they are never taxed on that money anyways.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

There are 34 different pharmaceutical companies in the United States currently. There are 34Not one of them pulls down less than 1.6 billion dollars a year. The average revenue of the bottom ten pharmaceutical companies is 2.4 billion. The top ten make at least 10 billion a year in revenue with Johnson and Johnson pulling down a whopping 70 billion in revenue.


My point exactly. They're making a killing because there's such little competition in the marketplace. 34 doesn't seem like a small number to you? There are more mechanics in your hometown most likely.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

Assuming your figure is correct, even the smallest of the pharmaceutical companies in the US would have access to producing something like the polio vaccine if the current cost to bring drug to market is in fact $802 million.


You're missing the point. Let's remember what this blog was about: what I'm assuming is more than 34 companies or schools have researched the AIDS protein for over three decade and they weren't able to do what the unlimited gamers online did in three weeks. That's opening the market. I know accepting that causes some unsettling cognitive dissonance, but there it is all pink and naked.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

I still don't understand why you think a smaller pharmaceutical company would shy away from production/distribution of a drug if it was all already paid for through a nonprofit like the March of Dimes.


Because instead of spending $800 million for one drug, they could spend $800 million for who knows how many drugs. Ten. Fifty. Maybe hundreds. Thousands? $800 million is a lot of money.

Especially when it's "cost of doing business" the large pharmaceutical companies probably wrote into the law when their lobbyists got the legislators to pass it. I'd much rather pay $800 million as a rich corporation so only the rich investors can compete with me. That ensures less competition. And the less competition, the higher the profits for an inferior product. As one of the 34 I'd prefer that to compete with hundreds of companies.

And private charities won't cover it all. You need investors. And if you're an investor with minimal capital who can't afford the risk of the $800 million price tag, you'll probably not invest. What do you have against competition? Don't you agree that more competition would be better? Isn't that what we've seen with the gamers?

>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^marbles:
Ok pal. Gardasil contains aluminum, polysorbate 80 and sodium borate. [...] According to VAERS – the following reports have been listed for HPV, HPV2 & HPV 4 and "mental disorders." [...] But hey, the government and big business says it's perfectly safe, so all those victims are probably just full of shit.
Aluminum: Exceptionally low toxicity. The LD50 for aluminum is 6.207 g/kg. That comes out to over a pound for a 175lb person.
Polysorbate 80: Not found to be a carcinogen according to this study and this study. Here (PDF) is yet another study that finds no evidence of carcinogenicity. Also noteworthy is that the Gardasil vaccine contains 0.00005g of Polysorbate 80. The average daily intake from food is 2000x that.
Sodium Borate ("Borax"): The LD50 of Borax is 2.66 g/kg. That comes out to .46lbs to kill a 175lb person. This is probably the most "dangerous" chemical of the three but, again, we're talking about 0.000035g. Borax is used as an insecticide specifically because it's virtually harmless to humans. It kills insects via severe dehydration.
Now then... The problem with your VAERS statistics is that they're unverified, self-reported, and potentially self-diagnosed. Even if all the diagnosis were correct, they are correlation only with no research into causation. They are useless as evidence on their own.


I how the evil government is trying to poison us with vaccines! How do I know this? I looked it up on a government website! While entirely failing to understand how methodological research works! Yay!

Look there are plenty of legitimate problems with the pharmaceutical industry that don't rely on ridiculous notions. Read up on patent ever greening for a start. It's the same with that 9/11 bullshit. When you focus on the ridiculous, you make it harder for people with legitimate grievances to be taken seriously.

Hmmm, perhaps I misinterpreted you when you used the word "still" in that sentence. I thought you were suggesting something else; that was my mistake. Regardless, this ingenuity was made possible by state institutions and not surprisingly didn't come from the University of Phoenix or similar for-profit schools.

I never said that the state university fully funded his research (you must read, grasshopper), I said it was discovered at a state university. Surely the university loaned him a hand here and there.

There are 34 different pharmaceutical companies in the United States currently. Not one of them pulls down less than 1.6 billion dollars a year. The average revenue of the bottom ten pharmaceutical companies is 2.4 billion. The top ten make at least 10 billion a year in revenue with Johnson and Johnson pulling down a whopping 70 billion in revenue.

Assuming your figure is correct, even the smallest of the pharmaceutical companies in the US would have access to producing something like the polio vaccine if the current cost to bring drug to market is in fact $802 million. ESPECIALLY when you factor in that all of the research and development costs will be privately funded by charitable donations like the March of Dimes, as in your polio example, the costs would be minimal. I still don't understand why you think a smaller pharmaceutical company would shy away from production/distribution of a drug if it was all already paid for through a nonprofit like the March of Dimes.

Oh shit did I just blow up your whole argument? Boom motherfucker.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

Nevermind the fact that Washington University, the school that created the Foldit program, is a public (that is to say, funded by the state; a.k.a. statist) institution.


Right, and I'm sure the researchers there are fantastic. Still, they opened the market to allow more people to work on what they themselves and others weren't able to succeed at.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

Nevermind the fact that healthcare, up until very recently, has been privatized (excluding medicare and medicaid) for a substantial time now; yet the lifetime cost of HIV medications and treatment is roughly $385,000.


And available only from big pharma. And that's thanks to government regulations. Jonas Salk developed the polio vaccine privately and offered it without patent. If he were to bring the same drug to market today by FDA restrictions he'd have to pay millions.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

Shouldn't free market generic meds have landed in your local Wally World for $5 a month by now? Why is the free market dictating these insane prices where how much you can pay is directly relational to how long you get to live.


The pharmaceutical industry is heavily regulated. I think you're erroneously conflating corporatism with free market.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

Now, as we know, if the market was not worthy, pharmaceutical businessmen would not get involved with it and essentially let the project die. The logical solution to these huge dilemmas in cost then is to create a larger customer base. All they need now is a furtive way to deliver the virus to a sect of the population that is either expendable and large or rich and small.


Again, you're claiming the current market is free. If it was, people like Salk could enter and compete (much like the gamers in the article above) without retribution from government. What you have today is a limited amount of pharma companies that can compete in the market, and because there's less competition, you have higher prices.

>> ^Ryjkyj:

I don't see where the "market" part comes in. Just the "free" part.


The market is just a system of exchange. Look at my example of Salk above. He developed and released a cure to polio, but today the restrictions on the market makes this kind of charitable action illegal. But in regards to the article specifically, Wash. Univ. opened their system of exchange and asked the online gaming community to help in figuring out a complex structure of an AIDS protein. The exchange was charitable. That's the free market.

Now if there was a regulation against this sort of thing because the online gamers weren't "licensed" for instance, then that would be a restrictive market. Right?

Nevermind the fact that Washington University, the school that created the Foldit program, is a public (that is to say, funded by the state; a.k.a. statist) institution.

Nevermind the fact that healthcare, up until very recently, has been privatized (excluding medicare and medicaid) for a substantial time now; yet the lifetime cost of HIV medications and treatment is roughly $385,000.

Shouldn't free market generic meds have landed in your local Wally World for $5 a month by now? Why is the free market dictating these insane prices where how much you can pay is directly relational to how long you get to live.

Maybe if these drugs were mass produced... but herein lies a new problem: New HIV infections have been reduced by 17% over the past eight years! Urgh that's what you get with big government. Free market thinkers know the bigger your customer base is, the better it is for business, and the consumer therefore is the ultimate winner.

Now, as we know, if the market was not worthy, pharmaceutical businessmen would not get involved with it and essentially let the project die. The logical solution to these huge dilemmas in cost then is to create a larger customer base. All they need now is a furtive way to deliver the virus to a sect of the population that is either expendable and large or rich and small.

What's that little Timmy? Blankfist's bullshit posts give you AIDS of the eyes when you read them? Well it's a start. FREEDOM!