By JohnGoomer - 07 Aug 2018 09:19
- 07 Aug 2018 09:19
#14937707
If you read this, you'll have a few ideas in you that will change the world forever! It'll help the 2nd and 3rd world catch up with the 1st world. It'll also improve the quality of life while reducing the cost of living in the 1st world. The basic idea is that if the patent system was replaced with an open source system, and if the world embraced automation; everyone would benefit. Everyone would have less hours to work and have a better quality of life all while providing for everyone's needs and most of their wants. There's 500 million people with college and university educations as well as many self educated people. Ideas and inventions grow on treas now.
How would you like to live in a world where everyone had everything they need and almost everything they wanted? A world where everyone had to work less while also having a better quality both for themselves and society as a whole. All you have to do is read, think, talk, and vote... After reading this, you'll know how evil the patent system is and how to change it! Changing it will save millions of lives, improve everyone's quality of life, and reduce the cost of living / hours worked. Read on for more...
Patents are 20 year monopolies on inventions. When corporations and occasionally inventors invent something, they apply for a 20 year monopoly on the invention. After that, they can either hold a monopoly on using it, or license it out.
Have you ever wondered where ideas and inventions come from? At colleges and universities, everyone in each degree gets basically the same knowledge. When you fill brains with knowledge and ask them how to build or do something, ideas / inventions form. In 2018, there's roughly half a billion people with college educations - and there's the free knowledge on the the internet... And any of them can give their ideas / inventions away for free. Why would you allow someone(s) to own an idea when ideas basically grow on trees now??? Many inventions have no or little cost of inventing. For example, math, and computer programming, have very little cost of development. Electrical engineering also has a low cost of development mostly because it can be done in simulations on computers. Soon, these technologies will be easily simulated on modern computer hardware - molecular engineering, genetic engineering, and nanotechnology. Many things are patented simply to stop competition - even if the idea's obvious to someone in their field of knowledge. For example, some communications protocols specifically use patented techniques to block competition - HDRadio for example. When you have half a billion highly educated people, the bar for obviousness should be much higher. Ideas / inventions are reinvented all of the time - there's nothing special to them... Why give out monopolies when many cost nothing to produce and can be given away for free by scientists. Why not fund research and reward inventions?
Is the patent system in anybody's bests interest? Was it ever? Is it even in inventor's best interests? Have you ever asked an inventor if they'd rather have a monopoly on their inventions, or free access to all other ideas/inventions and funding for r&d? Most of the time the corporations hiring the inventor make all of the profit. How does the patent system benefit anyone in the 2nd or 3rd world? They could build out of poverty and catch up with the 1st world if it wasn't for the patent system. Why would their politicians ever vote for something like that? Even when someone independently comes up with the same ideas or inventions, they can't use them. Do 1st world patent holders even benefit from having the monopolies in the 2nd in 3rd world? How much profit do 1st world patent holders get from 2nd and 3rd world? Would they even loose 10% of their profit if the 2nd and 3rd world produced more of their own goods?
Have you ever wondered if there was a better way to do things? If one were to replace the patent system with the best system, what might it look like? I think open source is the best model. Businesses could be required to publish all their ideas, inventions, along with all of their decision making and the could be publicly rewarded. The whole world would benefit when they could simply copy and improve on things. Even capitalism itself would work better - monopolies are anti-competitive in nature. If a corporation isn't producing good quality goods for reasonable prices, another one can pop up and replace them. Research and design could be publicly funded, and inventions could be rewarded. If r&d were publicly funded, rewarded, and shared; less duplication of work would happen and the whole of society would benefit. Current patent holders could be rewarded if they meet a certain bar. A decrease in medical costs and lower technology costs might pay out of patent system and fund new r&d. Replacing the patent system would lower the costs of many goods and services. Some goods would be more advanced, efficient, and feature-full.
The more efficient the more can be produced or serviced. More goods produced means more can be provided for. More automation means the work we do does more. The more efficient the economy is at getting new ideas and inventions into their products, the more society benefits. If society worked just as hard / long, and and the efficiency of business improve, either hours decrease, or more goods are created. The 1st world could provide for the rest of the world if they embraced efficiency and automation, and not even have to work longer or harder. And if the patent system was replaced with an open source system, they wouldn't need our help in the first place...
If enough jobs are eliminated, the 40 hour work week could be reduced while the minimum wage is raised, or a jobs program could provide for needy and 2nd/3rd world. If a good unemployment safety net and retraining program are in place, there wouldn't be many if any down side to automation.
The patent system kills who knows how many million people every year by preventing the advancement of 2nd and 3rd world countries. It prevents them from producing modern drugs, using modern manufacturing techniques, and producing many modern goods. It slows their economies down to the point where there's no hope of advancing to a 1st world country. It helps keep 1 billion people in hunger. Patent system is basically economic warfare.
How does the patent system get changed? Hearts and Minds! Open-sourcing it is in both individuals personal interests and society's interests, so it shouldn't take much convincing. I think sharing ideas and helping people connect the dots would work. It could be spread like religion. Once public opinion changes, politicians will change or be replaced...
Voters and politicians are still in control, not corporations. Good ideas are contagious
Better ideas are welcome! If you can think of a better way to explain things or if ideas are missing, please contact me...
JohnGoomer75@gmail.com
I'm going to try to keep the document updated here:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... lNrrX7f7hZ
A few other ideas:
The patent system doesn't allow patents on published ideas. Could websites be created to undermine the patent system by volunteers publishing ideas they come up with? I don't know about other engineers and scientists, but If i published every idea I had and others did the same, it might put a huge dent in the patent system... How much of nanotechnology could be published before it could be patented?
How many lives could be saved if law enforcement were screened for conscious and unconscious bias with something like a video game / simulation. It could compare how they respond to different ethnicities... An Xbox or similar could measure if and how long it takes to draw/shoot the gun. You could also train an AI to read their facial expressions and body language through ought the simulation. Something like a first person shooter with raids or other situations. Hitler - anybody could have been raised that way or taught those things. Millions had the same idea, he was just the leader. How many people with white supremacist ties have recently been in the white house, and how many have been going along with it? White supremacists have been known to infiltrate law enforcement...
Proportional Voting! If you ever want a voting system that represents people equally, read this! What if you could send any percentage of your vote to anyone. The votes would be added up, and the politicians elected would get a vote proportional to the vote they received. If someone votes for someone who's not elected, their vote for them could be shifted to the ones who won. A similar system could be used to direct funding for research and the arts.
What if the same principles were applied to copyright? Works of art cost the same amount to produce no matter how many people they're seen by or how many times they're seen. It costs the same to fund a movie if paying customers see it or if everyone sees it for free. If it's free, more people see it for the same overall cost. So if the art were publicly funded, more people get to see the same art and it still costs the same toe produce. So why not publicly fund the arts proportionally, and proportionally reward them? Private entities could also produce art and be rewarded via the same system, but extra to compensate for the lack of funding.
Genetics build your hardware (nature). Conditioning (experiences) build your software (nurture). All actions, thoughts, and emotions are based on genetics and past experiences. From the time shortly before you're born, you're getting experiences. Each one of those experiences cause you to think, feel, learn, and then act. One could think of life as alternating between perceiving (learning) and doing. One perceives experiences and you learn from them - the learning part can't even be turned off. Then one does stuff using all of the experiences up to that point. And then the process repeats. Since you don't have control over what you perceived or experienced, you don't have control over what you learn. Since you don't have control over what you learned, you don't have control over what you decide. Since you don't have control over what you decided, you don't have control over how you act. Since you don't have control over how you act, you don't have control over future experiences. Since the process repeats, there's no control over any of it. The "control" is just an illusion because everything that goes into you controlling choices is from previous experiences. So basically it's genetics and experiences that make people do what they do and people don't really have control over either.
A personality is like a mirror reflection of experiences. At any given time, you don't have control over your previous experiences so you don't have control over the future emotions, thoughts, and actions... We're all basically victims of physics or genetics and conditioning... If someone programmed a robot to do something bad, would you blame the robot or the person? People are kind of the same way, except conditioning rather than programming.
If a mind could be described as a pool table: Genetics would build the table, balls, and set their starting positions. Each experience in life is like someone hitting one of the balls. The pool table and balls don't have control over anything. Experiences hit your personality like the balls are hit by the cues... Actions would be like balls going into the holes. Your personality would be the state of the balls on the table.
Think of putting your shoes on in the morning. Before you put your shoes on, the universe is in a set state - including everything in the room and your state of mind. You choose to put your shoes on based on previous experiences and the need to put the shoes on. You can't change previous experiences or the need to put them on, so there's nothing you can do but "choose" to put the shoes on. If the preceding events lead you to put your shoes on, how do you not put on.
All of life is mostly luck. You're lucky your parents were fooling around when you were conceived. You're lucky the egg was fertilized with the individual sperm it was fertilized with
You're lucky is wasn't one of the other millions of sperm - or you wouldn't exist and someone else would. You're lucky if you were born to good parents. You're lucky if you had/have good friends. You're lucky if you had good community to grow up in. You're lucky if you were conditioned with good personality traits. You're lucky if you have a good position in life. Bad things happen to people because of bad luck only... Every bad thing in life can probably be traced back to bad luck of some kind. IMHO, it's a great idea to love everyone and not to hate anyone because nothing is their fault...
Life's a little like a cooperative video game, but you only get one try, and you don't start with even positions!
How would you like to live in a world where everyone had everything they need and almost everything they wanted? A world where everyone had to work less while also having a better quality both for themselves and society as a whole. All you have to do is read, think, talk, and vote... After reading this, you'll know how evil the patent system is and how to change it! Changing it will save millions of lives, improve everyone's quality of life, and reduce the cost of living / hours worked. Read on for more...
Patents are 20 year monopolies on inventions. When corporations and occasionally inventors invent something, they apply for a 20 year monopoly on the invention. After that, they can either hold a monopoly on using it, or license it out.
Have you ever wondered where ideas and inventions come from? At colleges and universities, everyone in each degree gets basically the same knowledge. When you fill brains with knowledge and ask them how to build or do something, ideas / inventions form. In 2018, there's roughly half a billion people with college educations - and there's the free knowledge on the the internet... And any of them can give their ideas / inventions away for free. Why would you allow someone(s) to own an idea when ideas basically grow on trees now??? Many inventions have no or little cost of inventing. For example, math, and computer programming, have very little cost of development. Electrical engineering also has a low cost of development mostly because it can be done in simulations on computers. Soon, these technologies will be easily simulated on modern computer hardware - molecular engineering, genetic engineering, and nanotechnology. Many things are patented simply to stop competition - even if the idea's obvious to someone in their field of knowledge. For example, some communications protocols specifically use patented techniques to block competition - HDRadio for example. When you have half a billion highly educated people, the bar for obviousness should be much higher. Ideas / inventions are reinvented all of the time - there's nothing special to them... Why give out monopolies when many cost nothing to produce and can be given away for free by scientists. Why not fund research and reward inventions?
Is the patent system in anybody's bests interest? Was it ever? Is it even in inventor's best interests? Have you ever asked an inventor if they'd rather have a monopoly on their inventions, or free access to all other ideas/inventions and funding for r&d? Most of the time the corporations hiring the inventor make all of the profit. How does the patent system benefit anyone in the 2nd or 3rd world? They could build out of poverty and catch up with the 1st world if it wasn't for the patent system. Why would their politicians ever vote for something like that? Even when someone independently comes up with the same ideas or inventions, they can't use them. Do 1st world patent holders even benefit from having the monopolies in the 2nd in 3rd world? How much profit do 1st world patent holders get from 2nd and 3rd world? Would they even loose 10% of their profit if the 2nd and 3rd world produced more of their own goods?
Have you ever wondered if there was a better way to do things? If one were to replace the patent system with the best system, what might it look like? I think open source is the best model. Businesses could be required to publish all their ideas, inventions, along with all of their decision making and the could be publicly rewarded. The whole world would benefit when they could simply copy and improve on things. Even capitalism itself would work better - monopolies are anti-competitive in nature. If a corporation isn't producing good quality goods for reasonable prices, another one can pop up and replace them. Research and design could be publicly funded, and inventions could be rewarded. If r&d were publicly funded, rewarded, and shared; less duplication of work would happen and the whole of society would benefit. Current patent holders could be rewarded if they meet a certain bar. A decrease in medical costs and lower technology costs might pay out of patent system and fund new r&d. Replacing the patent system would lower the costs of many goods and services. Some goods would be more advanced, efficient, and feature-full.
The more efficient the more can be produced or serviced. More goods produced means more can be provided for. More automation means the work we do does more. The more efficient the economy is at getting new ideas and inventions into their products, the more society benefits. If society worked just as hard / long, and and the efficiency of business improve, either hours decrease, or more goods are created. The 1st world could provide for the rest of the world if they embraced efficiency and automation, and not even have to work longer or harder. And if the patent system was replaced with an open source system, they wouldn't need our help in the first place...
If enough jobs are eliminated, the 40 hour work week could be reduced while the minimum wage is raised, or a jobs program could provide for needy and 2nd/3rd world. If a good unemployment safety net and retraining program are in place, there wouldn't be many if any down side to automation.
The patent system kills who knows how many million people every year by preventing the advancement of 2nd and 3rd world countries. It prevents them from producing modern drugs, using modern manufacturing techniques, and producing many modern goods. It slows their economies down to the point where there's no hope of advancing to a 1st world country. It helps keep 1 billion people in hunger. Patent system is basically economic warfare.
How does the patent system get changed? Hearts and Minds! Open-sourcing it is in both individuals personal interests and society's interests, so it shouldn't take much convincing. I think sharing ideas and helping people connect the dots would work. It could be spread like religion. Once public opinion changes, politicians will change or be replaced...
Voters and politicians are still in control, not corporations. Good ideas are contagious
Better ideas are welcome! If you can think of a better way to explain things or if ideas are missing, please contact me...
JohnGoomer75@gmail.com
I'm going to try to keep the document updated here:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/ ... lNrrX7f7hZ
A few other ideas:
The patent system doesn't allow patents on published ideas. Could websites be created to undermine the patent system by volunteers publishing ideas they come up with? I don't know about other engineers and scientists, but If i published every idea I had and others did the same, it might put a huge dent in the patent system... How much of nanotechnology could be published before it could be patented?
How many lives could be saved if law enforcement were screened for conscious and unconscious bias with something like a video game / simulation. It could compare how they respond to different ethnicities... An Xbox or similar could measure if and how long it takes to draw/shoot the gun. You could also train an AI to read their facial expressions and body language through ought the simulation. Something like a first person shooter with raids or other situations. Hitler - anybody could have been raised that way or taught those things. Millions had the same idea, he was just the leader. How many people with white supremacist ties have recently been in the white house, and how many have been going along with it? White supremacists have been known to infiltrate law enforcement...
Proportional Voting! If you ever want a voting system that represents people equally, read this! What if you could send any percentage of your vote to anyone. The votes would be added up, and the politicians elected would get a vote proportional to the vote they received. If someone votes for someone who's not elected, their vote for them could be shifted to the ones who won. A similar system could be used to direct funding for research and the arts.
What if the same principles were applied to copyright? Works of art cost the same amount to produce no matter how many people they're seen by or how many times they're seen. It costs the same to fund a movie if paying customers see it or if everyone sees it for free. If it's free, more people see it for the same overall cost. So if the art were publicly funded, more people get to see the same art and it still costs the same toe produce. So why not publicly fund the arts proportionally, and proportionally reward them? Private entities could also produce art and be rewarded via the same system, but extra to compensate for the lack of funding.
Genetics build your hardware (nature). Conditioning (experiences) build your software (nurture). All actions, thoughts, and emotions are based on genetics and past experiences. From the time shortly before you're born, you're getting experiences. Each one of those experiences cause you to think, feel, learn, and then act. One could think of life as alternating between perceiving (learning) and doing. One perceives experiences and you learn from them - the learning part can't even be turned off. Then one does stuff using all of the experiences up to that point. And then the process repeats. Since you don't have control over what you perceived or experienced, you don't have control over what you learn. Since you don't have control over what you learned, you don't have control over what you decide. Since you don't have control over what you decided, you don't have control over how you act. Since you don't have control over how you act, you don't have control over future experiences. Since the process repeats, there's no control over any of it. The "control" is just an illusion because everything that goes into you controlling choices is from previous experiences. So basically it's genetics and experiences that make people do what they do and people don't really have control over either.
A personality is like a mirror reflection of experiences. At any given time, you don't have control over your previous experiences so you don't have control over the future emotions, thoughts, and actions... We're all basically victims of physics or genetics and conditioning... If someone programmed a robot to do something bad, would you blame the robot or the person? People are kind of the same way, except conditioning rather than programming.
If a mind could be described as a pool table: Genetics would build the table, balls, and set their starting positions. Each experience in life is like someone hitting one of the balls. The pool table and balls don't have control over anything. Experiences hit your personality like the balls are hit by the cues... Actions would be like balls going into the holes. Your personality would be the state of the balls on the table.
Think of putting your shoes on in the morning. Before you put your shoes on, the universe is in a set state - including everything in the room and your state of mind. You choose to put your shoes on based on previous experiences and the need to put the shoes on. You can't change previous experiences or the need to put them on, so there's nothing you can do but "choose" to put the shoes on. If the preceding events lead you to put your shoes on, how do you not put on.
All of life is mostly luck. You're lucky your parents were fooling around when you were conceived. You're lucky the egg was fertilized with the individual sperm it was fertilized with
You're lucky is wasn't one of the other millions of sperm - or you wouldn't exist and someone else would. You're lucky if you were born to good parents. You're lucky if you had/have good friends. You're lucky if you had good community to grow up in. You're lucky if you were conditioned with good personality traits. You're lucky if you have a good position in life. Bad things happen to people because of bad luck only... Every bad thing in life can probably be traced back to bad luck of some kind. IMHO, it's a great idea to love everyone and not to hate anyone because nothing is their fault...
Life's a little like a cooperative video game, but you only get one try, and you don't start with even positions!
- By Tainari88
- By litwin