Since a monopolist is a single seller, it faces a demand curve. This curve is negative in slope. This means output directly impacts market price. So the monopolist creates an artificial price structure by restricting production, or forcing future sales (a la predatory licensing).
Thus the monopolist moves to restirct output, getting to the point where *for them* mr = mc. For a monopolist, marginal social revenue > marginal social cost.
There is no company that ever was, is or will be that will turn down the opportunity to gain this advantage. I know this well. I used to be an antitrust economic analyst for the bad guys (Maritime Inudstry). In the maritime industry, collusion was legal, as maritime was protected from federal antitrust regs.
So while, on a techncical sense, "It is not illegal to have a monopoly", you are right. In reality this doesn't work.
I'm faculty at a large westcoast engineering university, and system architect at a computer engineering research group. As far as I can tell, no faculty here are really considering this. NOONE here wants to use MS development tools over Java.
I'm a fairly experienced system architect as well as faculty in the CS/COE department of a major university, yet I have never received a degree in CS or engineering, nor any professional certifications in engineering. I fail to see how these would make me a better developer.
In fact, I've often found that my lack of formal background is a help rather than a hindrance. I'm often able to think outside of the traditional engineers paradigm. Because of that, I often see other developers being surprised at something I though up, that they never would have tried just because their training told them that sort of thing doesn't work. Since I work in distributed middleware and DB research, coming up with new things is kind of the point.
I generally wouldn't use Win2k in a production environment. While SQL server I think is a great product, the weak link in the chain isn't SQL-Server it's the operating system. I've gotten bitten too many times with windows, and I've never really gotten bitten with Solaris.
I remember when I first started my own company, we were looking for venture capital. There were vc companies that wouldn't even talk to us unless we switched over to solaris. It the time I thought, "screw them." Now I'm dumber, but know they were essentially right.
Re:Occam's Razor only cuts one way
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
Dude, I gotta say, you don't know squat. The fact that you think you know something because you "strongly considered going for a biochemistry PhD" means nothing. I majored in economics, now I'm a computer engineer. What's more, is that you've even got your fields incorrect. The primary fields in which this topic applies are Plant Botany, Plant Pathology, Virology, Bacteriology(used for vectors), and Molecular Biology.
On top of that, if you didn't actually get or even start your PhD, then you've got no clue.
On top of THAT, I din't get my information from the bio-tech industry. I got it from a number of research scientists at a VERY liberal university.
You accuse me of falling for propaganda, when it sounds distinctly like you yourself have done that. I'll agree that you've got an interesting article there. It sounds like propaganda too. But for everyone of those, there's another article "for". We could play that all day long.
But the fact is, your credentials are nothing! I mean, "you studied some in college." I laughed hard at that one. I took a courses in french in college and can't speak a word of it.
Thanks, but for the most, I'll listen to molecular biologists, the pros. Not someone who took bio course in college. I don't think your "credentials" qualify you as an expert witness.
Re:Stupidity is Self Curing
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
I must admit that I was focusing on your typo about GMO's. However, the reason that you got blasted and not dair, is cuz dair was simply explaining the facts to me. You just blasted
a-way, while dair was offering friendly corrections.
Second of all, according to all three of the people sitting in my house (who are all PhD's or soon to be PhD's in botany, plant pathology, or molecular biology) they are telling me that you have exagerating quite a bit. First of all, multi-vitamins are not readily available in central china, and second of all, these geeks here are telling me that five punds is quite an exageration.
By the way, I am of course blinded by love for my "life long geneticist." But that isn't really germaine. It just happens that most of my friends are in research in plants or computers. And my guess is that since the love of my life IS working towards a PhD in plant pathology and molecular biology (focused on genetics) she know's more about it than you, regardless of how blind I am.
-Hobo
Re:Stupidity is Self Curing
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
that's a really good question.....hmmmm....
Just lucky sometimes.
Re:Stupidity is Self Curing
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
Wow, excuuuse me! No offense though, but I think I'll listen to the experts. You sound like maybe you know a little, but not a lot. I listen to the lifelong molecular biologists and geneticists.
They dedicate their lives to this sort of stuff.
Prove to me that you know what your talking about. Your just spitting stuff out. I've talked to biologists that give me hard facts/stats with which I can better understand.
Again, you go tell some chinese people that their children have to grow up blind, because you don't really understand the nature of the thing you're talking about.
Re:Stupidity is Self Curing
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
Thanks for the corrections (rice and vitamin A), my significant other (the geneticist) is not around to keep me from making an ass of myself.
As to one of your points, I was under the impression that a buffer zone is required around all testing areas where GM crops are being test.
I have heard about the seed thing, and I'm not sure what I think about it. Sure, I think that the people who came up with the idea should be able to profit, this is good ol' America. But...
I agree that the indenturing nature of that is bad. I don't see a simply solution.
Stupidity is Self Curing
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 5
In Oregon recently, some eco-terror people recently burned down a bunch of trees that were genetically modified for purposes of bio-remediayion.
It amazes me what ignorance people display through much of eco-terrorism. I consider myself
to be a pretty environmentally friendly guy. However, I also happen to be in love with someone who is a researcher in plant genetics (lucky me!), and I've learned how ignorant I was. I used to be one of the people how vowed against all Genetically Modified Organisms(GMO), now I see a great deal of value.
For example, in some countries, many people have vitamin deficiencies that can lead to blindness (I think this is vitamin K but I can't remember). Some researchers are working on (or may have finished) corn that grows with the vitamin in it. They did this using genetics. Now go tell a few million parents that their children can grow up without blindess. This corn has no impact on the environment that is different from regular corn.
This does not mean that GMO companies should be allowed to act with impunity; and most geneticists agree. There needs be very careful controls on the development and use of GMO's.
(Monarch butterflies being a good example of the potential problems).
How 'bout another sample: Bio-remediation. What if we created a harmless bacteria that can clean up toxic waste. I know someone working on such a project. She is practically booed every time she tells someone that she works in genetics, but it seems to me like she is doing some very interesting work.
In conclusion, if we can create wood that is more efficient, crops that are disease or weather resistant etc, we can solve a lot of problems. Let's just be careful when making them. I heard a quote from a geneticist talking about creating "hardier" crops through Genetic Modification. He said, "The person who has no food has only one problem. The person who has food has many problems."
I think his point is well taken, by me at least. That, for those of us who have food, it is easy to complain about GM stuff. And for those who would destory this kind of work, maybe you should go to the far east and tell two parents that their children are going to have to grow up blind, because you destroyed the test field where the GM corn was being grown.
-Hobo
Slashdot Mirror
You definitely don't know much about economics.
Since a monopolist is a single seller, it faces a demand curve. This curve is negative in slope. This means output directly impacts market price.
So the monopolist creates an artificial price structure by restricting production, or forcing future sales (a la predatory licensing).
Thus the monopolist moves to restirct output, getting to the point where *for them* mr = mc.
For a monopolist, marginal social revenue > marginal social cost.
There is no company that ever was, is or will be that will turn down the opportunity to gain this advantage. I know this well. I used to be an antitrust economic analyst for the bad guys (Maritime Inudstry). In the maritime industry, collusion was legal, as maritime was protected from federal antitrust regs.
So while, on a techncical sense, "It is not illegal to have a monopoly", you are right. In reality this doesn't work.
I'm faculty at a large westcoast engineering university, and system architect at a computer engineering research group. As far as I can tell, no faculty here are really considering this.
NOONE here wants to use MS development tools over Java.
That's like shooting yourself in the foot and then touting why guns are bad and should be banned.
So if you tax my intellectual property, and thinking makes me exist......
Tax by what, weight? IQ?
my damn dog has one of these chips, and he's definitely more entertaining (and prbably smarter) than warwick
I'm a fairly experienced system architect as well as faculty in the CS/COE department of a major university, yet I have never received a degree in CS or engineering, nor any professional certifications in engineering. I fail to see how these would make me a better developer.
In fact, I've often found that my lack of formal background is a help rather than a hindrance. I'm often able to think outside of the traditional engineers paradigm. Because of that, I often see other developers being surprised at something I though up, that they never would have tried just because their training told them that sort of thing doesn't work. Since I work in distributed middleware and DB research, coming up with new things is kind of the point.
-Hobo
I generally wouldn't use Win2k in a production environment. While SQL server I think is a great product, the weak link in the chain isn't SQL-Server it's the operating system. I've gotten bitten too many times with windows, and I've never really gotten bitten with Solaris.
I remember when I first started my own company, we were looking for venture capital. There were vc companies that wouldn't even talk to us unless we switched over to solaris. It the time I thought, "screw them." Now I'm dumber, but know they were essentially right.
Dude, I gotta say, you don't know squat. The fact that you think you know something because you "strongly considered going for a biochemistry PhD" means nothing. I majored in economics, now I'm a computer engineer. What's more, is that you've even got your fields incorrect. The primary fields in which this topic applies are Plant Botany, Plant Pathology, Virology, Bacteriology(used for vectors), and Molecular Biology. On top of that, if you didn't actually get or even start your PhD, then you've got no clue. On top of THAT, I din't get my information from the bio-tech industry. I got it from a number of research scientists at a VERY liberal university. You accuse me of falling for propaganda, when it sounds distinctly like you yourself have done that. I'll agree that you've got an interesting article there. It sounds like propaganda too. But for everyone of those, there's another article "for". We could play that all day long. But the fact is, your credentials are nothing! I mean, "you studied some in college." I laughed hard at that one. I took a courses in french in college and can't speak a word of it. Thanks, but for the most, I'll listen to molecular biologists, the pros. Not someone who took bio course in college. I don't think your "credentials" qualify you as an expert witness.
I must admit that I was focusing on your typo about GMO's. However, the reason that you got blasted and not dair, is cuz dair was simply explaining the facts to me. You just blasted a-way, while dair was offering friendly corrections.
Second of all, according to all three of the people sitting in my house (who are all PhD's or soon to be PhD's in botany, plant pathology, or molecular biology) they are telling me that you have exagerating quite a bit. First of all, multi-vitamins are not readily available in central china, and second of all, these geeks here are telling me that five punds is quite an exageration.
By the way, I am of course blinded by love for my "life long geneticist." But that isn't really germaine. It just happens that most of my friends are in research in plants or computers. And my guess is that since the love of my life IS working towards a PhD in plant pathology and molecular biology (focused on genetics) she know's more about it than you, regardless of how blind I am. -Hobo
that's a really good question.....hmmmm.... Just lucky sometimes.
Wow, excuuuse me! No offense though, but I think I'll listen to the experts. You sound like maybe you know a little, but not a lot. I listen to the lifelong molecular biologists and geneticists. They dedicate their lives to this sort of stuff. Prove to me that you know what your talking about. Your just spitting stuff out. I've talked to biologists that give me hard facts/stats with which I can better understand.
Again, you go tell some chinese people that their children have to grow up blind, because you don't really understand the nature of the thing you're talking about.
Thanks for the corrections (rice and vitamin A), my significant other (the geneticist) is not around to keep me from making an ass of myself.
As to one of your points, I was under the impression that a buffer zone is required around all testing areas where GM crops are being test.
I have heard about the seed thing, and I'm not sure what I think about it. Sure, I think that the people who came up with the idea should be able to profit, this is good ol' America. But... I agree that the indenturing nature of that is bad. I don't see a simply solution.
--Hobo
I thought it was kindof a funny advert....
In Oregon recently, some eco-terror people recently burned down a bunch of trees that were genetically modified for purposes of bio-remediayion. It amazes me what ignorance people display through much of eco-terrorism. I consider myself to be a pretty environmentally friendly guy. However, I also happen to be in love with someone who is a researcher in plant genetics (lucky me!), and I've learned how ignorant I was. I used to be one of the people how vowed against all Genetically Modified Organisms(GMO), now I see a great deal of value. For example, in some countries, many people have vitamin deficiencies that can lead to blindness (I think this is vitamin K but I can't remember). Some researchers are working on (or may have finished) corn that grows with the vitamin in it. They did this using genetics. Now go tell a few million parents that their children can grow up without blindess. This corn has no impact on the environment that is different from regular corn. This does not mean that GMO companies should be allowed to act with impunity; and most geneticists agree. There needs be very careful controls on the development and use of GMO's. (Monarch butterflies being a good example of the potential problems). How 'bout another sample: Bio-remediation. What if we created a harmless bacteria that can clean up toxic waste. I know someone working on such a project. She is practically booed every time she tells someone that she works in genetics, but it seems to me like she is doing some very interesting work. In conclusion, if we can create wood that is more efficient, crops that are disease or weather resistant etc, we can solve a lot of problems. Let's just be careful when making them. I heard a quote from a geneticist talking about creating "hardier" crops through Genetic Modification. He said, "The person who has no food has only one problem. The person who has food has many problems." I think his point is well taken, by me at least. That, for those of us who have food, it is easy to complain about GM stuff. And for those who would destory this kind of work, maybe you should go to the far east and tell two parents that their children are going to have to grow up blind, because you destroyed the test field where the GM corn was being grown. -Hobo
I don't feel any need for a union. I've seen to much garbage through unions. -hobo