I am not socialist
I am reminded of the dozens of threads on this forum that begin, 'I am not racist, but...'
You propose to remove a means of production from private hands and place it in the hands of the public. That is the very definition of a socialist.
I am a scientist
What is your field? Who are your colleagues?
Have you ever published a peer-reviewed paper?
I'm not the one calling myself a scientist. Have you?
And you claim you're not socialist! Well, give us another word, then, for the idea that individuals are granted the 'privilege' of earning a livelihood by 'society'.
If scientists wish to publish their findings for the public good, they may do so without recourse to a scientific publisher. They can post things on the internet, self-fund publication of a monograph, or simply burn a few hundred CD-ROMs and send them to colleagues. Why don't they do this? Think about it.
None of the above. Galileo, the first scientist, was also something of an entrepreneur. Newton was master of the Royal Mint. Science and money have always been close bedfellows. The world's most avowedly capitalist nation is also the world's leading scientific power. Private enterprise has funded some seminal scientific work, from which the whole world—not just the people who paid for it—have greatly benefited.
the ONLY reason why i said that is because you called me one, not to try and excuse my thinking
not the means of production, the means of learning
i refuse to enter my work into a closed system for someone else's profit over societies benefit
you have intentionally taken my words out of context to skew my point
Did einstein charge for E=MC2?
it is obvious you have simply come to call me names and disrupt my thread, you are attacking me and my publishing record rather than address the op.
the fact that many of the worlds largest universities have open sourced their courses free to the public shows your wrong in the short term, and the fact that many scientists will contribute to this new library will prove you wrong in the long term.
your thinking is out of place in the modern world, and the fact that your on the internet shows you have no problems using a useful art.
You haven't even begun to understand what I'm saying, have you? Social democracy is fine by me; I agree that educating its citizens is one of the responsibility of the state. What I am saying is that the creators and distributors of knowledge deserve to be compensated for their efforts.
Originally posted by darkbake
reply to post by Astyanax
According to Sun Tzu's Art of War, thirst for knowledge is an excellent mechanism of control. This is the way that North Korea is able to keep its population under control, and is probably as effective as sex for motivating men.
Women have been oppressed since the beginning of time by limiting their access to information.
The freedom of information we have now is an important step in freeing human beings from the shackles of their oppressors, as well as a way to keep governments and corporations accountable for their actions. Look at ATS. All of you come here.
Would you rather be limited to the propaganda brought forth to you by a nation or corporation, or be able to research it for yourselves? Which is going to lead to a healthier lifestyle and a better future?
There may be a few barriers to overcome, but it isn't that bad, it might be scary to try something new, but it isn't going to be as bad as what we have now.edit on 8-4-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)
but what you ignore is proportionality...
The very notion that is employed with intellectual property is preposterous. And it doesn't benefit anyone. If i can corner the market because of a novel idea, what impetus do I have to drive further improvements? What I end up seeing is an IPhone that gets rereleased every 12 months with minor changes/improvements that likely should have been present on the very first Iphone to begin with.
Astyanax, i call shenanigans.
You may be talking about Copyright. I am talking about the fallacy of "Intellectual Property", which falls under the legal designations you are parsing.
BTW don't pay any attention to the troll tearing apart your paragraphs sentence by sentence. If they had something important to say they would take the whole paragraph into account so that the context isn't removed or obscured.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Astyanax
You mentioned the term "intellectual property". it is why i responded to you, not the OP.
the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few