/tech/ - Tech


Mode: Reply

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

(3.36 MB 3120x4160 IMG_20200504_162028.jpg)
Patents and copyright Comrade 05/04/2020 (Mon) 14:24:32 No. 1570
Should they be abolished? If so, how it would affect technology/development.
(227.75 KB 1280x565 World_copyright_terms.png)
Won't happen in your lifetime. It would require a worldwide revolution. Only a handful of African countries don't recognize copyright, but that's because they're too underdeveloped to prioritize passing copyright laws anytime soon.
>>1571 In Eastern Europe, those laws werent enforced. So to save money on research and development, factories just copied a lot of elements from western manafacturers (OP pic related). So in the context of worldwide revolution, how would factories handle research and development?
>>1571 Based Vietnam and North Korea.
>>1570 Would put a major brake on technological development, which is based IMO. Humanity needs a couple centuries to breathe before someone makes an AI that kills us all. Intellectual labor would probably regress to secretive guilds which is also based and cyberpunk and quasi-feudal-anachronistic. Oh yeah, and capitalism would completely implode if it still existed while IP was abolished. Most of the capitalists would lose most of their revenue and power and millions of people would suddenly face the choice between starvation or revolt
>>1570 Would massively accelerate technological development, which is based IMO.
>>1603 >>1604 >Would put a major brake on technological development >Would massively accelerate technological development Theres only one way to find out
There will be no patents because there will be no innovation. Problem solved.
>>1606 probably both, depending on how you see it way less constant bullshit being pumped out as schemes to get rich/make more profits, so in a sense slowing down, but also could lead to a boom in hacking/hobbyist shit along with more competition driving profits down further.
>>1608 So instead of a general effect on techology progression, it will rather shifts balance of industry as a whole?
>>1610 We're talking Fully Automated Luxury GNU here. Think of all that talent being wasted to "update" daily software for either the purposes of keeping people buying pointless changes they don't need or integrating as much spying software as possible in order to commodify the user. Now imagine if it was put to use truly innovating computation.
This is a topic dear to me, as a mathematician I think it should all be done away with. Please tell me why, in a post scarcity world, (which we are aiming for as we are communists) would we have patents? Why would some arbitrary collection of thoughts 'belong' to one person? This is no different to a kulak hoarding grain, someone hoarding the means of which to accelerate/advance society. It is pretty much literally impossible to do this in mathematics, it is a field pioneered by love. The only reason we have any of the devices which are deserving of patents is because they came from tinkering nerds, just imagine what world we'd have today (in regards to computing) if there were no closed source code? The only reason these devices exist because mathematicians sat down one day and wondering how they could do maths faster. In another dimension, the concept of art being 'owned' is also fairly ridiculous, comparing it to software it takes time to create, but can be (essentially) infinitely redistributed now through jpgs and mp3s, to infinitesimal cost. At the end of the day why would you advocate for people's passions to be motivated by profit, rather than the love of the craft, the desire to create? The only reason it is an issue in our current time is because of the fact that if you steal some unknown persons good work, and turn a profit on it by switching it up a tiny bit, you can then create masses of profit for yourself, and this sits their accruing royalties while 99% of creators get nothing, again no different from a landlord.
>>1612 This. But I will go back to >>1571 . We need world aboshlishment of those laws because if abolished in one country like in USSR, it will create pressure of profit oriented foreign capital wich doesnt play by your rules.
As somebody with a patent, patents do not protect creators or innovation - they are a way for companies to control markets and litigate with other companies/ individuals. Every independent creator I know who has dallied with patents lost immeasurable time and money in obtaining patent and subsequent fruitless litigation attempts against patent violations. Fuck a patent
Linking Gavin Mueller's book again because he seems like one of the only marxists talking about topics related to this.
>>1570 A more interesting question is Are they needed currently in this capitalist world or still just useless


no cookies?