WOOFYGOOFY - Slashdot User

Submission + - NRC Report Links Climate Change to National Security (nytimes.com)

Submitted by WOOFYGOOFY on Saturday November 10, 2012 @10:12AM

WOOFYGOOFY writes: The NY Times and Voice Of America amongst others are reporting on a study by the U.S. National Research Council which was released Friday linking global climate change to national security.

http://www.voanews.com/content/climate-change-security/1543127.html

http://chronicle.com/article/US-Urged-to-Step-Up-Research /135724/

The report which was developed at the request of the C.I.A. characterizes the threats posed by climate change
as "similar to and in many cases greater than those posed by terrorist attacks."

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=14682&page=1

If the effect of unaddressed climate change is the functional equivalent of terrorist attacks on the nation, does the Executive Branch, as a matter of national security, have a duty and a right to begin to act unilaterally against climate change irrespective of what Congress currently believes?

Submission + - Yet another call for abolishing patents, this one from the Fed (theatlantic.com) 1

Submitted by WOOFYGOOFY on Friday September 28, 2012 @03:41AM

WOOFYGOOFY writes: The most recent call for curtailing patents comes not just from an unexpected source, the St. Louis Fed, but also in its most basic form- total abolition of ALL patents.

Via the Atlantic Monthly,

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/09/the-case-for-abolishing-patents-yes-all-of-them/262913/

a new working paper from two members of the St. Louis Federal Reserve, Michele Boldrin and David Levine:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/wp/2012/2012-035.pdf

in which they argue that while a weak patent system may mildly increase innovation with limited side-effects, such a system can never be contained and will inevitably lead a stifling patent system such as that presently found in the U.S.

They argue: "...strong patent systems retard innovation with many negative side-effects. and ..political demand for stronger patent protection comes from old and stagnant industries and firms, not from new and innovative ones. Hence the best solution is to abolish patents entirely through strong constitutional measures and to find other legislative instruments, less open to lobbying and rent-seeking".

They acknowledge that some industries could suffer under a such a system, they single out pharma, and suggest that other legislative measures be found to foster innovation whenever there is clear evidence that laissez-faire under-supplies it.

Slashdot Top Deals