Even the most visible "enemies" of the US (and I say "enemies" with tongue firmly planted in cheek) all have websites. Wouldn't it make sense that, if the US government were the least bit interested in seizing control of the Internet, these "enemy" organizations would have been kicked off a long time ago?
As has been stated before, the US government does NOT control the Internet. If it did, I would be fully in favor of rallying against the oppressive, gluttonous, neo-imperialist regime and wrestling the power from them. But it doesn't, so I'm not.
My little corner of the world was just graced with this technology a little over a year ago through a partnership with Cinergy (power company) and Current Braodband (the ISP).
As a long time user of cable broadband, I've listed my top three pics for "best parts of this technology".
1) Most homes have a great deal more power outlets than phone or cable outlets. This greatly increases the chance that you won't have to run cable across your room to your desktop/wireless router.
2) I get to see the people's faces when I tell them that I have broadband coming over my power lines.
3) $30/month. Wait, did I say that right? Yeah, I did...$30/month. Not an introductory rate, not a special "we don't want you to cancel your service" deal. Just straight up $30/month. The cheapest alternative in my ares is $45/month for DSL, followed closely by $50/month for cable.
I know many who have spent upwards of a thousand dollars for a set of golf clubs or tennis equiptment (accompanied by only the most stylish apparell). It could be argued that it is no less pathetic, obsessive, or legal to spent outrageous amounts of money to aid yourself in those "real world" games as it would be for an online RPG. So why the ban of one and not the other?
Alright so now we have a web page where we can stick all of the people trying to make a buck off of Linux the good ol' fashioned Ameriacn way.... ohh beautiful for spacious skies...
Practically speaking, I agree that the argument for having these kinds of patents is valid in the world of commerce that the internet has become. However, the point of having patents is to give an incentive to the public to invent things. The idea behind patents is that 1)we want a great deal of innovation comming from the people of our country so 2)we tell them that if they invent something good, they can rest assured that they'll get some money for it if someone else wants to use it. This works fine in the world up until now, what with markets based purely on diminishing resources. But the internet doesn't work that way (or at least not that I've seen). If you come up with something new, it can't be used up if someone else decides they want to use it too. It's information, the proverbial and legendary bottomless mug o' beer. Bottom line, because of this phenomenon, people seem to come up with numerous innovations for the internet daily and without need for monetary incentives. So, although the corporate world has decided to tread on this ground and make it their own forcing us to abide by their ideals and rules, I feel it is important, still, to recognize that devices of the business world (like patents) are unnecessary and unwanted.
Maybe I'll go out and copyright whatever I know about the makeup of the digestive track. That way, every time someone needs intestinal surgery, I get a royalty check!
It seems to me that policy such as this goes against everything that has been making our country SO economically stable of late. As of right now, the U.S. is experienceing an unprecedented run of economic expansion for peace time. Most economists attribute this to the fact that demand for capital (one of the major factors in economic growth) is now continually growing due to the constant stream of technological innovation (hardware AND software) as opposed to the spurts of advancement seen in previous eras. The non-stop advancement cancels out the diminishing returns that would normally put an end to economic growth. End result: "Discoveries bring profit and competition destroys profit (Parkin)." So, in the end, this kind of legislation can only prove to hinder an economy that is currently beneficial to all, including the gov't AND the corporations. That in mind........what in the hell are they doing!?!?!
God forbid it might end up on the impulse buy shelves at a gas station next to such great products as the J.I. Goe and Mighty Morphin *Space* Ranger action figures.
Slashdot Mirror
Even the most visible "enemies" of the US (and I say "enemies" with tongue firmly planted in cheek) all have websites. Wouldn't it make sense that, if the US government were the least bit interested in seizing control of the Internet, these "enemy" organizations would have been kicked off a long time ago?
As has been stated before, the US government does NOT control the Internet. If it did, I would be fully in favor of rallying against the oppressive, gluttonous, neo-imperialist regime and wrestling the power from them. But it doesn't, so I'm not.
My little corner of the world was just graced with this technology a little over a year ago through a partnership with Cinergy (power company) and Current Braodband (the ISP).
As a long time user of cable broadband, I've listed my top three pics for "best parts of this technology".
1) Most homes have a great deal more power outlets than phone or cable outlets. This greatly increases the chance that you won't have to run cable across your room to your desktop/wireless router.
2) I get to see the people's faces when I tell them that I have broadband coming over my power lines.
3) $30/month. Wait, did I say that right? Yeah, I did...$30/month. Not an introductory rate, not a special "we don't want you to cancel your service" deal. Just straight up $30/month. The cheapest alternative in my ares is $45/month for DSL, followed closely by $50/month for cable.
sure am glad these guys weren't listening in our our IP games of Duke Nukem 3D...
I know many who have spent upwards of a thousand dollars for a set of golf clubs or tennis equiptment (accompanied by only the most stylish apparell). It could be argued that it is no less pathetic, obsessive, or legal to spent outrageous amounts of money to aid yourself in those "real world" games as it would be for an online RPG. So why the ban of one and not the other?
Alright so now we have a web page where we can stick all of the people trying to make a buck off of Linux the good ol' fashioned Ameriacn way.... ohh beautiful for spacious skies...
Practically speaking, I agree that the argument for having these kinds of patents is valid in the world of commerce that the internet has become. However, the point of having patents is to give an incentive to the public to invent things. The idea behind patents is that 1)we want a great deal of innovation comming from the people of our country so 2)we tell them that if they invent something good, they can rest assured that they'll get some money for it if someone else wants to use it. This works fine in the world up until now, what with markets based purely on diminishing resources. But the internet doesn't work that way (or at least not that I've seen). If you come up with something new, it can't be used up if someone else decides they want to use it too. It's information, the proverbial and legendary bottomless mug o' beer. Bottom line, because of this phenomenon, people seem to come up with numerous innovations for the internet daily and without need for monetary incentives. So, although the corporate world has decided to tread on this ground and make it their own forcing us to abide by their ideals and rules, I feel it is important, still, to recognize that devices of the business world (like patents) are unnecessary and unwanted.
Maybe I'll go out and copyright whatever I know about the makeup of the digestive track. That way, every time someone needs intestinal surgery, I get a royalty check!
It seems to me that policy such as this goes against everything that has been making our country SO economically stable of late. As of right now, the U.S. is experienceing an unprecedented run of economic expansion for peace time. Most economists attribute this to the fact that demand for capital (one of the major factors in economic growth) is now continually growing due to the constant stream of technological innovation (hardware AND software) as opposed to the spurts of advancement seen in previous eras. The non-stop advancement cancels out the diminishing returns that would normally put an end to economic growth. End result: "Discoveries bring profit and competition destroys profit (Parkin)." So, in the end, this kind of legislation can only prove to hinder an economy that is currently beneficial to all, including the gov't AND the corporations. That in mind........what in the hell are they doing!?!?!
God forbid it might end up on the impulse buy shelves at a gas station next to such great products as the J.I. Goe and Mighty Morphin *Space* Ranger action figures.