Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:No Real Conflicts? Really? (Score 1) 528

I disagree. An omnipotent god would have thrown out all the dietary/hygiene rules in the OT and replaced it with "Boil your water, cook your food, wash your hands, shit downstream from where you live". These 4 simple instructions are VASTLY superior to all the rubbish that masquerades as "divinely inspired" nonsense in the OT. They are easier to remember, easier to do, and about 1000 times more effective. Why isn't that information in the Bible? Because the ignorant shepherds who wrote it didn't know about germ theory.

To paraphrase Sam Harris, imagine how incredible the Bible would be if it was actually written by an omnipotent being.

Comment Re:Or not. (Score 1) 610

This is the same argument that people make for abstinence-only sex education. When it's done perfectly, it's perfect. When it's not done perfectly, it's a fucking disaster.

I have a 2 and a 4-year-old. I bust my ass to keep tabs on them and I'll rip the face off of anyone who claims otherwise. But I'm not perfect, and neither are they. Why the hell would I gamble everything on my ability to be perfect?

Whenever someone mentions tracking technology, everyone gets their panties in a giant knot, and there are real issues there, so that's fine. But let me put it to you this way: If you had the ability to put a small device on your child that communicated in an encrypted fashion with a mobile that you carried, and it was impossible for anyone else (your mobile provider, Google, Apple) to learn ANYTHING about where you child was except you, wouldn't you do it? I sure as hell would. It would be negligent not to.

So the problem isn't knowing where your toddler is through electronic means, the problem is third parties knowing where your toddler is through electronic means. This is a software problem, and one we know how to solve. Let's move on to finding a better way for parents to look after their kids.

Lemon out.

Comment Re:How is it even possible to innovate these days? (Score 1) 286

That's certainly what a lot of people think. What I'm trying to say is that is not what the evidence says. The innovation happens anyway. Only after the innovation has happened to patents get applied to the new field.

Anyway, check out the book I mentioned (Against Intellectual Monopoly). It spells it out in much greater detail.

Comment Re:How is it even possible to innovate these days? (Score 1) 286

There's a lot of good stuff in your post. We often forget the historical perspective.

My objection is your conclusion that innovation happens in spite of and because of these patent battles. This is incorrect. Research shows that in almost every field, there was rapid innovation, then patents were brought in to consolidate. The evidence is outlined in the freely available "Against Intellectual Monopoly".

TL;DR - Innovation does not happen because of patents, innovation happens, then patents happen.

Comment Re:SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY! (Score 1) 180

I'm not sure that's possible. However, you can show it "likely" to be true by analyzing industries that do not have intellectual property now, and industries that did not have intellectual property, but now do.

Fortunately, someone has already done this work for you. Search for "Against Intellectual Monopoly", a freely available book, which explores this very issue.

Slashdot Top Deals

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Working...