I like the way you think. The market is a powerful tool if it's properly set up, but can't come up with solutions on its own in many issues.

As other said, it sounds to me that you're doing your part, as best as you can from where you stand in life. The rest is politics. At the very least you show that it's possible to do that. Beyond that, do you think that there are people who would like to do that, but can't, for various reasons? If you think so, then you can push for the socio-economic system to make it more convenient to do like you - while avoiding to shit on people who really can't. It's a delicate balance of policies to find.

Seriously. You have to wonder if there's a lack of scientific journalists who can come up with better headlines and articles that don't twist the facts too much.

Interestingly, it's been decades since serious cryptozoologists dismissed Nessie on the basis that the loch's turbid waters didn't allow for enough photosynthesis to sustain a sufficient biomass to feed a large species. Their most prominent theory besides hoaxes is that maybe some visiting seals have been magnified by optic phenomena akin to a fata morgana.

It's just an example of a limited resource that can end up unexploitable or underexploited if no regulation is in place. Make up all the fantasies you want from that, you seem to suck not only at economics, but also at physics and information theory.

Nope. Just economics. Basic economic science. Educate yourself about the Tragedy of the Commons, for starters. It's exactly what it's about here.

You fail at economics forever.

Actuallly, the Constitution of the USA merely allows for it, it doesn't mandate it. Having no patent system at all would be just as constitutional as the current situation.

I'm feeling too lazy to look it up, but is there enough room on the moon to fit the whole of Russia?

I won't click a link that doesn't spell "gauge" right.

"Neo-Nazi Sex Robot" sounds like a good name for a rock band. Or an electro-punk song.

My point was that the CIA had pointers (including some provided by allies), while the NSA was in the dark. I won't comment of what you say about what they did with said informations. It doesn't match what I remember reading on the subject, but I'm not very sure of my sources.

Seriously, it's nice that the NSA comes out as overwhelmed with data it can't exploit (although, as some have already pointed out, that's not particularly new - see 9/11 for an example too obvious to pass), but every internal security agency in the West has been saying so for years (or rather, members of said organizations complained about it anonymously or through their unions). Intelligence requires data, but mass collection of data is of dubious help when the people in charge of examining it is already understaffed for exploiting classically collected data.

Benjamin Bayart, former president of the non-profit French ISP French Data Network, often nicknames this tendency "Minitel 2.0".

What you say is true on a larger scale, but several scales have to be considered in the mean time.