This is just a PR angle for the unwashed masses who don't know what the fuck he is talking about. The word "scraping" when said with the right inflection can come off as sinister sounding.
Of course to those in the know this is nothing more than an evil, sociopathic organisation trying to spread FUD and discredit innocent people to advance their own organisation's aims at the expense of freedom and liberty.
But then I think that is what the NSA's mission statement is...
Because corporates such as the Pharma companies own your politicians?
I just love the line "But don't forget that big pharma, for all its problems still is the number one creator of new drugs.".
Install government-backed monopolies. Let universities use any public grants to research drugs and then sell the patents from that research to said companies. Allow them to buy legislation and orgs like the FDA outright. Turn a blind eye to 1,000,000 dodgy and anticompetitive practices. Allow said companies to completely rort your entire medical system to the point of obscenity.
etc etc "But don't forget they make most of the wonder drugs!"
And meanwhile people go bankrupt, remain unwell and of course DIE due to all this complete BS.
You think you are very smart here but you are not and simply restating what you already said does not cut the mustard in terms of "winning" a debate.
ALL his points were to do with issues that do not effect the bottom line of an individual company but the TCO to the country for relying so heavily on this resource. And he is very correct in this and you can add food security (due to the relationship between fertilisers and oil price) and global warming to that also.
As per usual with your type of "blinders on" free market capitalist reasoning the TCO extends only as far as an individual company's bottom line, stock market, GDP or other superficial measure. Effects or costs to the country, the people, and environment are completely ignored and failed to be factored into the cost/benefit ratio at all. Negative effects such as pollution, unemployment and squandering limited resources are often swept under the rug (or your closest river) until they become major problems and often too expensive (or its too late) to fix. None of these lists are exhaustive. The company's responsible almost always dodge such costs and hence can remain profitable because of this. Essential being subsidised by the taxpayer or future generations etc.
So yes it would be very hard to compete or (more importantly) raise funding for a solar plant in the private sector. But that is not because it is a bad idea - it is due to the unfair competition.
So your statement about it being immensely profitable is utterly ridiculous. Both in the context of the original post and in general.
But like I said you are not alone. So be safe in the knowledge that every other greedy idiot out there will agree with you.
lol. Like you are the one that gets to choose aside from quitting your job.
The sad truth is that there will be a whole bunch of managers out there that will think this is a fantastic idea. After all "if you have nothing to hide..." etc
Whether they think they could get away with using it without losing most of their workforce....
It is THE WORST support I have ever encountered and that is saying something. (and this was backed up by the countless other experiences I read on their forums etc also)
Basically he never read a word I wrote and just sent back copy and paste responses that had nothing to do with my problem over and over again no matter how many times I tried to explain the problem. By the end I was considering that it was not a real person and just a robot firing off canned responses based on a machine learning algorithm.
(and I am not joking here - I have a MSc in AI and I am pretty sure I could come up with something as good and probably better than the person I dealt with)
Since then I have not spent a dime with them and do not intend to unless I absolutely have to. (i.e. an app I cannot get anywhere else)
So we know the effects of pouring trillions of tons of water into the ground per year cooling the magma layer over time by some amount and the effect this will have?
Interesting. Have not read that paper.
Again. Not being alarmist. Just thinking ahead and wondering - as any intellectually minded person does occasionally.
It sounds like a joke till this works really well and then everybody starts doing it.......and then they get bigger and bigger with more and more exponentially.......and then we discover what the unforeseen negative side effects caused by the unbelievably massive scale we are implementing this are......but we are too balls deep to stop now because all our economies depend on it so heavily.......so we angst about it and the pollys flap their mouth parts but corporations just keep on truckin on with business as usual until.......disaster....
I seem to vaguely remember something similar happening recently with old dead trees or something but it can't have been important. Just as well we sorted that all out eh?!
PS: No I am not predicting doom I would just like those in charge to at least think briefly about where such things might go before we get there....for once.
OK since apparently you or the moderators can't seem to get the obvious....
Instead of "fixing" the patent system (which they NEVER intended to do BTW) they have ensured that the only people who will be able to obtain and DEFEND (the important part) their patents will be large corporations with the lawyer muscle to achieve this new level of proof.
The small innovator stands almost no chance now if they ever did - although at least a few have succeeded in the past.
To my mind if this is the best that can be achieved then the whole system should be thrown out wholesale. Rather no patents than patents that only defend the large corporates.
But of course what I think is irrelevant. What has been achieved here is EXACTLY what was intended since this is exactly why the system is the way it is.
The only reason there is ANY reform is because it was starting to hurt the big players. Thus the reforms are designed with only them in mind.
Slashdot Mirror
This is just a PR angle for the unwashed masses who don't know what the fuck he is talking about. The word "scraping" when said with the right inflection can come off as sinister sounding.
Of course to those in the know this is nothing more than an evil, sociopathic organisation trying to spread FUD and discredit innocent people to advance their own organisation's aims at the expense of freedom and liberty.
But then I think that is what the NSA's mission statement is...
And you forgot the most important piece of advice: Don't buy a Dell next time!
Thanks dude.
Yes I was venting and made my point more harshly than I would normally, no what I am saying is anything other than what I observe and believe.
Hence not a troll.
You can mod it down but it does not make it any less true.
Regardless how much cud you have to chew.
Or they could just ignore the public and do whatever the fuck they want like they currently do.
Remember that only INDIVIDUALS get punished when they don't line up with policy and then get paraded about as the system working well.
I still laugh when the plebs suggest that they can have a say in how anything in america goes does.
They will or will not use this as they please and there is not a fucking thing you can do about it.
Be a nice bovine and go back to being farmed for your productivity and wages like a good little citizen.
Because corporates such as the Pharma companies own your politicians?
I just love the line "But don't forget that big pharma, for all its problems still is the number one creator of new drugs.".
Install government-backed monopolies. Let universities use any public grants to research drugs and then sell the patents from that research to said companies. Allow them to buy legislation and orgs like the FDA outright. Turn a blind eye to 1,000,000 dodgy and anticompetitive practices.
Allow said companies to completely rort your entire medical system to the point of obscenity.
etc etc
"But don't forget they make most of the wonder drugs!"
And meanwhile people go bankrupt, remain unwell and of course DIE due to all this complete BS.
I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.
Weakly (and in fact erroneously) dismissing the entire point of the argument is not the same as refuting it and making a valid counter argument.
Those externalities are currently measured in the many trillions even based on conservative estimates.
You think you are very smart here but you are not and simply restating what you already said does not cut the mustard in terms of "winning" a debate.
ALL his points were to do with issues that do not effect the bottom line of an individual company but the TCO to the country for relying so heavily on this resource. And he is very correct in this and you can add food security (due to the relationship between fertilisers and oil price) and global warming to that also.
As per usual with your type of "blinders on" free market capitalist reasoning the TCO extends only as far as an individual company's bottom line, stock market, GDP or other superficial measure. Effects or costs to the country, the people, and environment are completely ignored and failed to be factored into the cost/benefit ratio at all. Negative effects such as pollution, unemployment and squandering limited resources are often swept under the rug (or your closest river) until they become major problems and often too expensive (or its too late) to fix. None of these lists are exhaustive.
The company's responsible almost always dodge such costs and hence can remain profitable because of this. Essential being subsidised by the taxpayer or future generations etc.
So yes it would be very hard to compete or (more importantly) raise funding for a solar plant in the private sector. But that is not because it is a bad idea - it is due to the unfair competition.
So your statement about it being immensely profitable is utterly ridiculous. Both in the context of the original post and in general.
But like I said you are not alone. So be safe in the knowledge that every other greedy idiot out there will agree with you.
I just love the thought process you betrayed there. Don't worry you are not alone - most of the world is right there with you.
Because of course the ONLY reason you would do ANYTHING is because it is profitable right?
If you do anything that is not profitable for some private company it is branded socialist and thrown out....
We are doomed...
But apparently their employees have mod points...
NZ does if you return at all within 5 years. (IOW you never left if that is the case)
Not as draconian but not quite as black and white as you are making out.
I don't know about other countries.
lol. Like you are the one that gets to choose aside from quitting your job.
The sad truth is that there will be a whole bunch of managers out there that will think this is a fantastic idea. After all "if you have nothing to hide..." etc
Whether they think they could get away with using it without losing most of their workforce....
Also the support.
Have you ever used steam support before?
It is THE WORST support I have ever encountered and that is saying something. (and this was backed up by the countless other experiences I read on their forums etc also)
Basically he never read a word I wrote and just sent back copy and paste responses that had nothing to do with my problem over and over again no matter how many times I tried to explain the problem.
By the end I was considering that it was not a real person and just a robot firing off canned responses based on a machine learning algorithm.
(and I am not joking here - I have a MSc in AI and I am pretty sure I could come up with something as good and probably better than the person I dealt with)
Since then I have not spent a dime with them and do not intend to unless I absolutely have to. (i.e. an app I cannot get anywhere else)
So in summery: Steam can suck my balls.
blah blah.
I see now you are just a troll taking me out of context for the sake of it.
Have a good life...
I was not freaking out.
I was raising the question of what happens were we to scale this up to meet out energy needs.
For example: trillions of tons of water per year causing cooling...
Do you know for sure what will happen? I don't?
I bet you don't either....
So we know the effects of pouring trillions of tons of water into the ground per year cooling the magma layer over time by some amount and the effect this will have?
Interesting. Have not read that paper.
Again. Not being alarmist. Just thinking ahead and wondering - as any intellectually minded person does occasionally.
It sounds like a joke till this works really well and then everybody starts doing it.... ...and then they get bigger and bigger with more and more exponentially.... ...and then we discover what the unforeseen negative side effects caused by the unbelievably massive scale we are implementing this are... ...but we are too balls deep to stop now because all our economies depend on it so heavily.... ...so we angst about it and the pollys flap their mouth parts but corporations just keep on truckin on with business as usual until.... ...disaster....
I seem to vaguely remember something similar happening recently with old dead trees or something but it can't have been important. Just as well we sorted that all out eh?!
PS: No I am not predicting doom I would just like those in charge to at least think briefly about where such things might go before we get there....for once.
Oh yes but the peanut powder has been patented and costs $2000 per month to administer... ...probably...
Yeah because that was all that was bombed.
Your statement is very ironic...
Amen.
PS: ...
I believe he stood for US foreign policy
And by natural ideas you mean anything that comes from a human brain right? ;)
I would be more extreme and include unnatural ideas also such as those that come from a computer program.
IOW the destruction of the patent system altogether.
Yes I am a rebel and no I don't believe that inventors should be given monopolies anymore - that boat has sailed.
And that one there shows that the Nobel peace prize means NOTHING.
Throw the towel in rocky, throw the Towel in!
You could have been somebody!
Well there you go then.
And those robots...they are already in development.
And as always this is what we know about. Snowden would not have been privy to all of it as he only had access to the communal NSA system.
For example Cheney was well known for his large "safe full of documents" in his office - I doubt anything in there was on the NSA system...
OK since apparently you or the moderators can't seem to get the obvious....
Instead of "fixing" the patent system (which they NEVER intended to do BTW) they have ensured that the only people who will be able to obtain and DEFEND (the important part) their patents will be large corporations with the lawyer muscle to achieve this new level of proof.
The small innovator stands almost no chance now if they ever did - although at least a few have succeeded in the past.
To my mind if this is the best that can be achieved then the whole system should be thrown out wholesale. Rather no patents than patents that only defend the large corporates.
But of course what I think is irrelevant. What has been achieved here is EXACTLY what was intended since this is exactly why the system is the way it is.
The only reason there is ANY reform is because it was starting to hurt the big players. Thus the reforms are designed with only them in mind.
It is not hard to see how this all works...