Is this any different than Mathematicians doing research on complex mathematical proofs? Or Physicists researching elementary particles?

Is it really in the interest of the public if Fermilab was able to patent the Top Quark?

How about if Pi or e or c were patentable?

The genes existed before and would continue to exist and do its thing long before and after these researchers discovered it.

A Sewing machine however didn't exist before Thomas Saint made one.

It has always been a possibility that secret research is profitable. The recipe of Coke and Pepsi are secrets and both products of possibly thousands of hours of research and both Coca Cola and Pepsi make money hand over fist for their "Secret" research. It's called a Trade Secret. It has special protections and rules under patent law.

If some company wants to leaves a small sequence of genes as their "Secret Sauce" to discovering Breast Cancer then all the power to them.

But nothing stops me from trying to imitate Coke or Pepsi and nothing would then stop me from trying to imitate their discovery of the Breast Cancer Gene.

~Zehaeva

The free care that Americans get is billed to the patient, If they can not pay they go into bankruptcy. Then the costs are absorbed by the corporations. Except the corporation will see a drag on their bottom line, and increase the prices to their products (Insurance, cost of medicines and care). And as an end user I have to perform a cost/benefit analysis when said megarich corporation raises my rates, and if I am the breaking point I will drop my coverage or decline service and I doubt that I would be alone.

Now the corporations will see that less people are purchasing their services and will have to raise their prices a bit more to cover their costs.

And now that there are just a few more people who are out of the system they will get sick and go to the ER, and be billed for the services incurred. Being unable to pay they will, eventually, file for bankruptcy and leave the corporation with the vast majority of the bill.

If this were a flow chart I would say go back to the point where the corporation has to raise rates.

This is a feed back loop with the main cause being the law that was signed in the 1986 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Medical_Treatment_and_Active_Labor_Act ).

Now really, as a good capitalist, should we really be providing free care to so many people? They should be required to pay, or demonstrate the ability to pay, ER's before they, the ER, treats them. Should we really let people shrug off their financial obligations upon the rest of us unwillingly?

Shouldn't you only receive services that you are able to pay for? If I have not saved for those chemo treatments, should I receive them? If I do not have to ability to pay for, either through insurance or my private finances, should I receive the services of an ER after a car accident? Remember if I can't pay for it, then eventually you will pay for it through higher insurance premiums and higher hospital costs.

If I buy insurance I am volunteering to share the cost burden with those who I am pooling my money together with. But to be forced to cover people who do not contribute anything is a horrible idea. It leads only to the products that my insurance should cover increasing in price. It essentially gives insurance to those who have not paid for it.

This is unfair for the 250 Million (it's more depending on who you ask) Americans who pay for their insurance.

~Zehaeva

One quibble, Class II & IIIa lasers,which is the highest power laser that can legally be marketed as a "Laser Pointer" in the US and UK are under 5 milliWatts, not 1-1,000 MegaWatts,

You make quite a few good points, I disagree that SCOTUS is completely in coo-hoots with Congress, there is nothing congress can threaten SCOTUS with to enforce compliance with Congress's will. This point I don't think we could resolve with discussion.

For the red herring you have misunderstood what I have said. I agree that the most populous states would want to legalize marijuana. However you over look that that 50% of the US population is in 11 states, that leaves us with 39 states (the less population a state has seems to correlate to how conservative the state is) that I would bet WANT marijuana to be illegal and thus would not end allow the repeal of such laws.

While this Obamabill, as you put it, is being pushed on all of us by Congress, Mass. has already pushed it upon its citizens, nothing stops your state from doing the same.

I am quite upset myself with being forced to purchase a product from a private company. Being taxed and having the proceeds go to line the pockets of shareholders leaves a horrible taste in my mouth. But the States just may do the same thing. I'd be much happier with a socialized health care than handing my money over to wall street. I like a little bit of honesty in taxation. At least the system seems to work reasonably well in other counties.

No matter what you, and I, will have limits placed upon us by the government. Pushing all the power into the hands of State Legislatures will not change this.

~Zehaeva

Not all States had direct representatives, a few pushed for it, and to be honest I think thats okay, if the people in the state are okay with that then I'm okay with that.

I think you maybe a bit blind with the thought of "Only my way can save the Union!"

If you wanted all legislation to abide by the US Constitution then you could force ALL legislation passed by Congress to be reviewed by SCOTUS allowing only legislation that passes Constitutional muster to be signed into law by the president.

There, yet another alternative.

Pushing the US into a Heinlien (I love heinlien and his ideas but I don't think "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress" style government is good here) sort of government probably wont work out the way you think.

There is a reason why the Articles of Confederation were abandoned. If you give the Federal Government too little power the Union will fall apart, Too much and the States themselves become nothing more than puppets. We need a real balance. Giving the 25 least populous states (which accounts for less than 25% of the population) the ability to remove any and all legislation that the 25 most populous states want is not what a democracy is about.

What we have now is not terribly better, those same Senators can hold up most legislation as it is now, but they are not repealing every law they can.

I think you may want to think about your solution a bit more.

~Zehaeva

Why not then just repeal the 17th amendment? Give the State Legislators the ability to choose the Senators to honestly represent the State's rights and then there is no need for some silly NEW amendment to the constitution.

At least I am not the only one who thought 'cousin' as another meaning for the abbreviation 'cuz'. I wish I had mod points for you sir.

~Zehaeva

Why is this really necessary for the UK? Don't you folks have like 1 camera for every 10(or is it 15?) people? Is that not enough? Do you really need more surveillance? Why not better utilize the surveillance you currently have? Why add under utilized surveillance on top of under utilized surveillance? I don't understand. ~Z

As an avid blackberry user and enthusiast on Verizon, in an office full of blackberry addicts, I will tell you you are dead wrong sir.

I can not change the default search provider on my Storm 2, I have tried.

I did not install it either. When I purchased the Storm 2 Google was the default search engine, literally over night it was changed, with out my permission and against my wishes. The same happened to every single blackberry in my office.

The only option I have is to type google into my blackberry's browser to use it. That is hardly an option at all.

Also I did not want the Bing application installed to my blackberry and yet it was done for me over the air. I have not been able to uninstall it either. It does not show up in the applications in the options at all.

What option is this?

~Zehaeva

Founded by deeply religious people? Like Thomas Jefferson who rewrote the bible and removed all mention of the divinity of Jesus? Why would these deeply religious people write explicitly in their founding documents the requirement that religion play no part in their government?

You may want to go back to that school of yours and learn a bit more about American history. I know it may not be the most exciting thing on planet earth but at least you will stop making false assertions about some of the greatest free thinkers that any land has known.

I am interested in your equation of a progressive to socialists and the assertion that neither allow multiple view points.

Are you saying that the Chinese Socialist Party is progressive? Or just that all progressive parties are socialists(and then that not all socialists are progressive)?

Does this preclude conservative parties from being socialists?

Are you implying that conservative parties always allow multiple view points?

I'm curious.

Given that up until recently this is was how pretty much all music was made, I believe that you have reduced the likes of Mozart, Beethoven and Bach to creating merely stifled and uninnovative music.

I'll agree on the point of big budget movies being thrown out with all this. Games and books however I don't think will be.

I would like to state that I don't think a system that relays on patrons in this day and age would work. But the donations thing may.

I myself would like to see a more sane copyright term. Something like 25 years or so should do it.

There is no reason to let those who make "Intellectual Property" have such a huge monopoly on their works. Other Intellectual Properties, like Patents, expire on a term of 14years. Could you imagine a world where patent law was guaranteed for life +70 years?. I believe the Air Conditioning (invented in 1902) would still be covered. Imagine a world where only Carrier Corporation could make AC systems. Good news would be that in this weird world the patent should be up in 10 more years! Assuming it doesn't get extended any more.

Just imagine the LACK of innovation that would have been brought to the world if this were the case.

There was a time when Patent Law and Copyright Law were in lockstep and now they are not. I think its time that we bring them back together, for better or worse.

~Zehaeva

wow, I never thought i would see what i think is one of the most innovative mmo ideas on /. . I'm really quite impressed. forgive me if i ever make/design an mmo and you see these features in it. mea culpa.

it would be more apt to say that a black hole sucking stuff in is more akin to taking everything in a very messy room and giving it all to the "Will it Blend?" guy, having him whip up a "messy room" shake and compacting that into a very tiny ball.

while your room is indeed clean, everything that was in your room is now in a small ball of disorganized matter where as it used to form nice neat polymer chains and crystalline structures and other such organized molecular structures. now its all just a large amount of goo which is defiantly less organized than a bed room set, sheets, clothes, your favorite plushies and whatever other junk there was there.

~zeh