Anyone who has as a tagline the idea that truth ceases to be truth once it's discovered is divorced from reality. If it is true, it remains, regardless of our understanding or lack thereof. Elseways our hearts would cease to beat, the sun would not rise, Ohm's Law would not work, and all of our circuits would have been built in vain.
It is unsupportable egotism to assume that the universe cares enough about our opinions to change when we perceive a fact. As a corollary, you seem also to assume that the universe is sentient--at least to the extent that it is even aware of us. You have to demonstrate that it is aware of our existence before you can attempt to prove that it cares enough to change because of or perceptions.
(Hint: Religions have been attempting to prove for thousands of years that there is some aspect of the universe that gives a rip that we exist...to no avail. Lacking proof, they are reduced to asking you to take it on faith.)
Even assuming something as dispassionate and indeterminate as the proverbial cat--once you open the box the cat is either live or dead...there's no turning back. It becomes immutable fact. All the king's horses and all the king's men cannot make that cat live if it was dead once you pulled open the lid.
This whole line of reasoning smacks of the "information wants to be free" argument that you hear when selfish, immature people want something for nothing. Information "wants" nothing. It is not a living entity. It is not yearning to be anything, either captive or free.
Applying a framework to the world de-rationalizes it? Consider the platypus. Mammal or not? Only man makes such a distinction. The animal itself remains unchanged--in fact, unaware and uncaring. Our attempts to force it into arbitrary categories are frustrating to us perhaps, but that does not constitute an emergency on the part of the universe. Nothing changes but our mental state as we consider nursing the young vs. eggs; each considered characteristics of very different creatures, yet here combined in one. But does either singular fact change once we understand it?
No.
You had better be glad that the universe pays no heed to your philosophy. If it did, you'd be dead, because it has long been known why hearts beat and your perception of the universe would have had things changing the instant that was understood.
Care to contemplate the consequences?
Grey
It is unsupportable egotism to assume that the universe cares enough about our opinions to change when we perceive a fact. As a corollary, you seem also to assume that the universe is sentient--at least to the extent that it is even aware of us. You have to demonstrate that it is aware of our existence before you can attempt to prove that it cares enough to change because of or perceptions.
(Hint: Religions have been attempting to prove for thousands of years that there is some aspect of the universe that gives a rip that we exist...to no avail. Lacking proof, they are reduced to asking you to take it on faith.)
Even assuming something as dispassionate and indeterminate as the proverbial cat--once you open the box the cat is either live or dead...there's no turning back. It becomes immutable fact. All the king's horses and all the king's men cannot make that cat live if it was dead once you pulled open the lid.
This whole line of reasoning smacks of the "information wants to be free" argument that you hear when selfish, immature people want something for nothing. Information "wants" nothing. It is not a living entity. It is not yearning to be anything, either captive or free.
Applying a framework to the world de-rationalizes it? Consider the platypus. Mammal or not? Only man makes such a distinction. The animal itself remains unchanged--in fact, unaware and uncaring. Our attempts to force it into arbitrary categories are frustrating to us perhaps, but that does not constitute an emergency on the part of the universe. Nothing changes but our mental state as we consider nursing the young vs. eggs; each considered characteristics of very different creatures, yet here combined in one. But does either singular fact change once we understand it?
No.
You had better be glad that the universe pays no heed to your philosophy. If it did, you'd be dead, because it has long been known why hearts beat and your perception of the universe would have had things changing the instant that was understood.
Care to contemplate the consequences?
Grey
Thank you Mr. Pass.
Let me keep this short and sweet.
Anyone who has been around the block more than a time or two knows that there are those who collaborate and grow, and those that steal. I know you know this. Yet still, you took the risk to share your vision and ideas with those that share your passion. I salute you.
There is knowledge, and there is business. Thank you for your knowledge, but keep your business healthy too.
Wynn
Let me keep this short and sweet.
Anyone who has been around the block more than a time or two knows that there are those who collaborate and grow, and those that steal. I know you know this. Yet still, you took the risk to share your vision and ideas with those that share your passion. I salute you.
There is knowledge, and there is business. Thank you for your knowledge, but keep your business healthy too.
Wynn
Grey,
The tagline is also the answer to what you seem to question in your response, but you will have to find the answer yourself. It has to be YOUR answer, not mine or anyone else!
What I actually try to say, because given the hostility most have not understood my point, is that this IP thing restricts the flow of information and knowledge. Imagine where audio technology could be today if there was a free exchange between designers, manufacturers etc. It makes a huge difference if one person looks at a design or a thousand or more who contribute to take a design way beyond als those separate so called "hig end" designs. There are hundreds or even more audio brands with scattered knowledge and information, which if shared would have taken audio reproduction to unimaginable hights. Has competition in audio or any other area in our societies improved the quality of life and the way we treat each other? I don't think so. There may come a time when we will realize that our survival depends on the survival of our neigbour!
Those that are crowned today are only so, because they have something to offer. As soon as such is not the case, they will be crucified and forgotten.
What I say is neither philosophy, nor religion, nor ideology or whatever you called it. And last but not least, the intellect, which is definately not the same as intelligence, is not the means to understand what I am pointing out.
Franklin
The tagline is also the answer to what you seem to question in your response, but you will have to find the answer yourself. It has to be YOUR answer, not mine or anyone else!
What I actually try to say, because given the hostility most have not understood my point, is that this IP thing restricts the flow of information and knowledge. Imagine where audio technology could be today if there was a free exchange between designers, manufacturers etc. It makes a huge difference if one person looks at a design or a thousand or more who contribute to take a design way beyond als those separate so called "hig end" designs. There are hundreds or even more audio brands with scattered knowledge and information, which if shared would have taken audio reproduction to unimaginable hights. Has competition in audio or any other area in our societies improved the quality of life and the way we treat each other? I don't think so. There may come a time when we will realize that our survival depends on the survival of our neigbour!
Those that are crowned today are only so, because they have something to offer. As soon as such is not the case, they will be crucified and forgotten.
What I say is neither philosophy, nor religion, nor ideology or whatever you called it. And last but not least, the intellect, which is definately not the same as intelligence, is not the means to understand what I am pointing out.
Franklin
Perhaps I am oversimpilimifying in this arena of intellect and intelligence...but...um.....
If the above quote were to be reality, there would be no money to be made and... ah..um..these guys would go work for the post office or sumpin...now wouldn't they? Oh, and guess what, something tells me that there wouldn't be any more good designs for the average 'joe' to buy. DIY would thrive but the industry would die.
Don't get me wrong. I'm typing on Ubuntu Linux right now, and I do see your point. However, if it were not for Micro$oft and it's greed, It's likely you would be on a wyse wiggymawachie and I would be on a wang schlimabobit and we couldn't have this conversation. There would likely be no unification.
IP is important
Sharing information and knowledge "freely" does not mean you don't have to pay for it. Every valuable contribution is financially rewarded. Look at the endless list of audio companies producing, what they call over and over again, products that embody a step forward in technology.
If this knowledge and information is brought together through a netwerk which is available for some time now, called internet, think of the leap audio technology will take. And that is just one area I'm talking about. This forum is a proof of many fruitfull designs which have been realized by combined effort. And no, not everything has to be free, but the unrealistic prices of some audio gear is only for the benefit of those who want more and more of the same. Every company these days is only after more and more profit and they compete their neighbours to death if they must, which in itself is violence!
A good example of combined knowledge and information is the CTC project (see thread Blowtorch). If three guys can put such nice sounding gear together, imagine what would be possible if many more would join in and contribute significantly.
That's why I emphisize that IP is an illusion. It brings the flow of knowledge and information which can be used more efficiently to a halt.
Franklin
If this knowledge and information is brought together through a netwerk which is available for some time now, called internet, think of the leap audio technology will take. And that is just one area I'm talking about. This forum is a proof of many fruitfull designs which have been realized by combined effort. And no, not everything has to be free, but the unrealistic prices of some audio gear is only for the benefit of those who want more and more of the same. Every company these days is only after more and more profit and they compete their neighbours to death if they must, which in itself is violence!
A good example of combined knowledge and information is the CTC project (see thread Blowtorch). If three guys can put such nice sounding gear together, imagine what would be possible if many more would join in and contribute significantly.
That's why I emphisize that IP is an illusion. It brings the flow of knowledge and information which can be used more efficiently to a halt.
Franklin
Franklin said:
I do not know the CTC well.
I just understand that one of CTC is Mr. John Curl, who designed the circuit while the other two, TC, did the other disciplines. And, Mr. John Curl clearly anounced that he would not disclose any technical information (I never blaim this).
A flow of knowledge and information . . . ?
Can be used more efficiently . . . ?
How I know . . . ?
Regards
jh
Even if Nelson Pass has his IP, he shares his knowledge very generously all the time. The problem is that some parasites took advantage of his great generousity in a very shameful way.
If we put it in another way, if there was no such thing as the right to claim intelectual property: Nobody would have shared their knowledge at all, it would be kept as a secret.
If we put it in another way, if there was no such thing as the right to claim intelectual property: Nobody would have shared their knowledge at all, it would be kept as a secret.
I agree with Jacco, and there is simply no "case to rest" in circumstances like this.
Stealing is stealing , whichever way you look at it, and there is no valid justification for this, no matter what. Taking away someone else's *legitimate* property from them, in order to benefit from this one's self, can never be countenanced in a civilised and responsible democracy.
Most of us who live in the real World understand this and respect it, but just wait until something similar personally affects those who appear to view such matters with rose-tinted spectacles, and see if this Utopia is still such a wonderful concept.
Sadly, arrogant comments about others' apparent lack of understanding, and which imply one is on a higher intellectual plane than the rest of the World, are typical of do-gooders.
Unfortunately, such insensitive remarks are no help to those who have been badly treated, not to mention their being offensive to the party who has suffered some harm.
Stealing is stealing , whichever way you look at it, and there is no valid justification for this, no matter what. Taking away someone else's *legitimate* property from them, in order to benefit from this one's self, can never be countenanced in a civilised and responsible democracy.
Most of us who live in the real World understand this and respect it, but just wait until something similar personally affects those who appear to view such matters with rose-tinted spectacles, and see if this Utopia is still such a wonderful concept.
Sadly, arrogant comments about others' apparent lack of understanding, and which imply one is on a higher intellectual plane than the rest of the World, are typical of do-gooders.
Unfortunately, such insensitive remarks are no help to those who have been badly treated, not to mention their being offensive to the party who has suffered some harm.
Franklin,
Back when I was in high school I went through a phase where I thought as you do. I got over it in about two weeks.
The problem isn't that other people haven't understood what you've said--the problem is that you don't understand what you've said. I know it's seductive, I know it sounds like a wonderful, utopian world, but it only works out that way in fiction (e.g. Walden 2). In the real world, it falls apart--not infrequently with disasterous consequences. Of course, those who instigated the thing always point fingers at everyone except themselves, but that's human nature.
You might give some thought to the fact that committees never accomplish as much as one or two determined people working alone. This is so strong a trend that the very word 'committee' is synonymous with the inability to produce results. It's an infallible recipe for mediocrity...or worse.
Perhaps someday you'll quit having a pity party, complaining that no one understands this marvelous idea you have and come to see that they understand it only too well.
Or, in the vernacular: Been There, Done That. Got twenty T-shirts to prove it. Don't care to go back, as it wasn't nearly as much fun as the travel posters promised..
Grey
Back when I was in high school I went through a phase where I thought as you do. I got over it in about two weeks.
The problem isn't that other people haven't understood what you've said--the problem is that you don't understand what you've said. I know it's seductive, I know it sounds like a wonderful, utopian world, but it only works out that way in fiction (e.g. Walden 2). In the real world, it falls apart--not infrequently with disasterous consequences. Of course, those who instigated the thing always point fingers at everyone except themselves, but that's human nature.
You might give some thought to the fact that committees never accomplish as much as one or two determined people working alone. This is so strong a trend that the very word 'committee' is synonymous with the inability to produce results. It's an infallible recipe for mediocrity...or worse.
Perhaps someday you'll quit having a pity party, complaining that no one understands this marvelous idea you have and come to see that they understand it only too well.
Or, in the vernacular: Been There, Done That. Got twenty T-shirts to prove it. Don't care to go back, as it wasn't nearly as much fun as the travel posters promised..
Grey
In other words it is tending towards reality.
If you make a focused study of utopian societal concepts, you will find that every contemporary model of utopian societies begins with a definition of a perfect citizen, and then goes forward to define what would be a perfect society for a population of these perfect people.
Therein lies the problem - there is no such thing as perfect people, and the success of pure idealism relies on the prerequisite of perfect people whom all follow said idealism. The first instance of an individual deviating from the ideal seeds the complete collapse. For this reason, modern studies of utopian concepts try to correctly identify the nature of man, pimples and all, and then focus on identifying the best mix of compromises that account for how man will behave and misbehave.
Metalman's axiom: Never underestimate the human capacity for stupidity or greed. Given sufficient temptation of personal benefit, even the most moral person will sacrifice a small decline in the greater good to obtain it.
For the record, I have nothing against anyone here or anywhere!!
The opposite seems to be the case. I dare to point out something which I have discovered for myself. It is of no benefit to you.
If anyone thinks that there is something as IP and that it must be protected, by all means go ahead. I can assure you that the more effort that is put into protecting an IP, the more it will be abused by those who see their opportunity to do so. This is a simple and basic observation. And because it is simple, the mind rebels and refuses to accept it as such.
Grey, I can assure you that none of what I have pointed out is equal to what you seem to have understood about me. This certainty however is not transferable.
I see no difference between you, me or anyone else. I'm not trying to change society or this forum, because it cann't be changed! The hostility against anyone who thinks different than the mainstream of this forum is, wether you like it or not, a form of violence. Wether you believe it or not, it remains a fact.
As I said before, I'm not going to repeat myself over and over again. This is not kindergarten, is it??
The opposite seems to be the case. I dare to point out something which I have discovered for myself. It is of no benefit to you.
If anyone thinks that there is something as IP and that it must be protected, by all means go ahead. I can assure you that the more effort that is put into protecting an IP, the more it will be abused by those who see their opportunity to do so. This is a simple and basic observation. And because it is simple, the mind rebels and refuses to accept it as such.
Grey, I can assure you that none of what I have pointed out is equal to what you seem to have understood about me. This certainty however is not transferable.
I see no difference between you, me or anyone else. I'm not trying to change society or this forum, because it cann't be changed! The hostility against anyone who thinks different than the mainstream of this forum is, wether you like it or not, a form of violence. Wether you believe it or not, it remains a fact.
As I said before, I'm not going to repeat myself over and over again. This is not kindergarten, is it??
It seems this thread is not without a sense of irony.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=77803#post77803
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=77803#post77803
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.