Bettawrekonize 's BestNetTech Comments

Latest Comments (446) comment rss

  • On the post: We Need A Freedom To Tinker Law… Not Just A Right To Repair

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 24 May, 2009 @ 10:22am

    Not to mention that Most DVD's (and Bluerays) with copyrights have regional locks/encryption which does nothing to promote transparency (it does the opposite). The only thing intellectual property does is make it illegal for others to decrypt which only hinders transparency.

  • On the post: We Need A Freedom To Tinker Law… Not Just A Right To Repair

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 24 May, 2009 @ 01:00am

    Heck, the WRT54GS (by linksys) router is an open source router and it's released under the GPL (ie: no patents). Most of the routers with copyright software and patented hardware are closed source and closed platform. So it seems that intellectual property has the opposite effects of its alleged intended effect, instead of encouraging companies to reveal more information to the public it's encouraging them to conceal information from the public.

  • On the post: We Need A Freedom To Tinker Law… Not Just A Right To Repair

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 24 May, 2009 @ 12:28am

    "We Need A Freedom To Tinker Law"

    Or maybe even a freedom to tamper.

  • On the post: We Need A Freedom To Tinker Law… Not Just A Right To Repair

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 23 May, 2009 @ 11:35pm

    Even when it comes to software intellectual property has not really encouraged any companies to reveal any secrets. Microsoft Windows is copyright and has intellectual property encouraged them to reveal source code? NO! If anything it hinders people from reverse engineering the code in fear of breaking intellectual property laws which only hinders the distribution of "secrets". Routers often have software and hardware that's copyright and patented and they are not open source or open platform (and intellectual property prevents people from reverse engineering it in order to fix problems or sell spare parts). Heck, if anything, intellectual property has prevented the distribution of information about products to the public domain. Entities are afraid of reverse engineering products and distributing that information because they might break intellectual property laws. Monsanto has even tried to prevent scientists from studying the effects (on the environment and human health) of their patented genetically modified food and publishing it without their permission. Often times software that is open source is free (ie: under the GPL) of intellectual property. Machines used to come with technical manuals (back before most of it was intellectual property). Often times companies stop manufacturing a product and they stop manufacturing parts for that product. Due to intellectual property no one else is allowed to reverse engineer and manufacturer parts for that product. So if a part of a product breaks (I know people who have had issues with this before) people often have to buy a whole new product (ie: if an LCD component breaks people must buy a whole new monitor). This only hinders the distribution of "secrets" that intellectual property is supposed to encourage companies to reveal to the public.

  • On the post: The Intellectual Property Asshole Competition

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 23 May, 2009 @ 11:24pm

    Re: Re:

    So you agree with what I'm saying then? It's so basic, so obvious, that it should be in philosophy 101. I agree. Good logic is obvious.

  • On the post: We Need A Freedom To Tinker Law… Not Just A Right To Repair

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 23 May, 2009 @ 09:20pm

    Re: Re:

    We have an intellectual property system and it is not doing what it's proposed to do. It's supposed to encourage companies to reveal secrets but not only has it failed but it's also granted these companies government sanctioned monopolies. What a scam.

  • On the post: We Need A Freedom To Tinker Law… Not Just A Right To Repair

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 23 May, 2009 @ 09:18pm

    Re:

    Intellectual property is supposed to solve this problem. Allegedly, the point of intellectual property is that you tell us your secret, we give you a temporary monopoly. Apparently it's not working. Not only do they have government sanctioned monopolies but they still hide things from us. So why even have intellectual property?

  • On the post: The Intellectual Property Asshole Competition

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 23 May, 2009 @ 09:13pm

    Re:

    sp/but most copyright/but most intellectual property in this nation ...

  • On the post: The Intellectual Property Asshole Competition

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 23 May, 2009 @ 09:12pm

    This is another good example at how intellectual property only harms society. The press doesn't need intellectual property on anything in order to take and distribute pictures. Without intellectual property they will do the same thing regardless (because that's what the press does) but the only difference is that others will be allowed to redistribute it. Allowing others to redistribute it is good economics for it brings about higher utility for society (people are redistributing it because it brings them utility, people are assumed to act in their own best interest). The only thing copyright does is it prevents others from redistributing it which only lowers net utility to society. Again, since these corporations will distribute pictures regardless there is no point in even having copyright since no good comes from copyright (only bad). But most of the copyright in this nation causes more harm than good, just look at the agricultural and medicine industry.

  • On the post: The Intellectual Property Asshole Competition

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 22 May, 2009 @ 10:42pm

    ROFLOL! This is hilarious!

  • On the post: We Need A Freedom To Tinker Law… Not Just A Right To Repair

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 21 May, 2009 @ 11:29pm

    Re: Re:

    (btw, the previous post, the one I'm responding to, was by me, I forgot to put my name there).

    I find it difficult to believe that what's best for the environment just so happens to be in the best interest of car manufacturers with patents.

  • On the post: If You Have WiFi, a Cell Phone, Or Lots Of Other Things, The FCC Thinks It Can Search Your House

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 21 May, 2009 @ 10:49pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: They already have a backdoor...

    "The Constitution requires that warrants must "particularly describe the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

    This is how I always learned it in school.

  • On the post: Mark Helprin Stole From BestNetTech Commenters (Using The Logic Of Mark Helprin)

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 21 May, 2009 @ 09:29pm

    "a rather large number of the quotes that Helprin spends his time deriding are pulled from BestNetTech. But not from what I wrote... but from the comments (which he refers to, oddly, as "sections"). "

    For all I know he could have put those stupid comments on there himself so that he can put them in his book and refute a strawman.

  • On the post: If You Have WiFi, a Cell Phone, Or Lots Of Other Things, The FCC Thinks It Can Search Your House

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 21 May, 2009 @ 08:49pm

    I guess the problem is that the word "unreasonable" is subject to interpretation. What 99 percent of the population may consider unreasonable may not be considered unreasonable by the government.

  • On the post: Husband Sues Google For Patent Infringement; Wife Sues Google For Trademark Infringement

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 21 May, 2009 @ 08:43pm

    I respect Google's apparent business ethics and I hope it never changes. Rich and powerful entities hate to see the general population benefit from innovation at a decent price. If it were up to them they would charge us monopoly prices for water. Any company that tries to get rich by simply attacking Google is one I would try and avoid.

  • On the post: Palin Email Hacker Says Emails Were Public Record… So No Crime?

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 21 May, 2009 @ 07:04pm

    I'm no Sarah Palin fan but this is a case where I hope that kid gets in trouble.

  • On the post: Mark Helprin Stole From BestNetTech Commenters (Using The Logic Of Mark Helprin)

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 21 May, 2009 @ 03:36pm

    "Mark Helprin Stole From BestNetTech Commenters"

    Copyright infringement.

  • On the post: If You Have WiFi, a Cell Phone, Or Lots Of Other Things, The FCC Thinks It Can Search Your House

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 21 May, 2009 @ 02:09pm

    Re: They already have a backdoor...

    Again, I thought they were only allowed to take things on the warrant.

  • On the post: If You Have WiFi, a Cell Phone, Or Lots Of Other Things, The FCC Thinks It Can Search Your House

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 21 May, 2009 @ 02:07pm

    "While it's unlikely that the FCC will begin raiding homes to confiscate WiFi routers and garage door openers, there is speculation that should FCC agents enter a home and see evidence of unrelated criminal behavior, that evidence can be used for criminal prosecution."

    I thought there are laws that protect against things like this. If they come in your house they can only take what they are looking for and that's all. Everything else they must ignore?

  • On the post: DirecTV Explains How Guilty Until Proven Innocent Makes Sense

    Bettawrekonize ( profile ), 21 May, 2009 @ 01:40pm

    "the burden of proof actually shifts to the user, if the device can be used for illegal purposes"

    So I can illegally use a car to smash into a building. So now the burden is on me, before I buy a car, to PROVE that I'm not going to use it for that purpose. What nonsense.

Next >>