4 ms·

Does “public” here refer to nationally-available, or internationally? Should I be able to access your taxpayer’s research?

RosanaAnaDana 4y ago
All persons. The principals enshrined in the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence specify no nation in particular. Freedom of information is a direct extension of the Declaration of Independence.
- elil17 4y ago
  I would say the real reason is that it's pretty impractical to limit it to just Americans given that we don't have any sort of national e-identity.
  - stjohnswarts 4y ago
    we do through the international patent system. We should get money back for our tax dollars, simple as that. We could work it into international patents. I know some countries ignore those, but we can make them pay in other ways like tariffs and treaties.
    - bruce511 4y ago
      Not to be that guy, but other countries don't pay tarrifs, Americans do. The tarrif is levied on the importer, who then passes that cost on to the consumer. The tarrif is not paid by the exporter. The goal of a tariff is to _increase_ the customer price for some good locally, and thus make a local (more expensive) good more compeditive. A foreign country may experience lower demand for their product, but its not like they "pay any money". Yes, lower demand may lead to a lower price, or it may mean they export to other countries instead.
stjohnswarts 4y ago
We should be able to use the international patent system for that. Make it publically open to any single "citizen" any international corp seizing on it should have to pay patent fees to the general fund of the US treasury or something set up to feed it back into our government sponsored R&D programs.
Test0129 4y ago
I was thinking nationally but honestly there's nothing constitutionally that would prevent a non-citizen from accessing the research. I guess, aside from military/encryption research of course. I see no problem with publicly funded stuff being available world-wide. But given the choice between nothing or taxpayer only, the taxpayer should get first dibs.
biomcgary 4y ago
Although I am generally supportive of research products (data, papers, reagents) being broadly open, I think there is the possibility of a perverse incentive to free-ride on the scientific funding of other nations. As the velocity of information (i.e., faster spread) and international mobility of academics increases, the perverse incentive goes up.
- jltsiren 4y ago
  That's not a perverse incentive. It's the entire purpose of academic research. The results of the research are supposed to benefit the entire humanity, not just the entity that happened to fund it. Funders in turn have a range of motives. Some are idealistic and fund research because it's morally the right thing to do. Others are more utilitarian and believe that there are indirect benefits from having academic researchers in the society.

RosanaAnaDana 4y ago

All persons. The principals enshrined in the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence specify no nation in particular. Freedom of information is a direct extension of the Declaration of Independence.

elil17 4y ago
I would say the real reason is that it's pretty impractical to limit it to just Americans given that we don't have any sort of national e-identity.
- stjohnswarts 4y ago
  we do through the international patent system. We should get money back for our tax dollars, simple as that. We could work it into international patents. I know some countries ignore those, but we can make them pay in other ways like tariffs and treaties.
  - bruce511 4y ago
    Not to be that guy, but other countries don't pay tarrifs, Americans do. The tarrif is levied on the importer, who then passes that cost on to the consumer. The tarrif is not paid by the exporter. The goal of a tariff is to _increase_ the customer price for some good locally, and thus make a local (more expensive) good more compeditive. A foreign country may experience lower demand for their product, but its not like they "pay any money". Yes, lower demand may lead to a lower price, or it may mean they export to other countries instead.

stjohnswarts 4y ago

We should be able to use the international patent system for that. Make it publically open to any single "citizen" any international corp seizing on it should have to pay patent fees to the general fund of the US treasury or something set up to feed it back into our government sponsored R&D programs.

Test0129 4y ago

I was thinking nationally but honestly there's nothing constitutionally that would prevent a non-citizen from accessing the research. I guess, aside from military/encryption research of course. I see no problem with publicly funded stuff being available world-wide. But given the choice between nothing or taxpayer only, the taxpayer should get first dibs.

biomcgary 4y ago

Although I am generally supportive of research products (data, papers, reagents) being broadly open, I think there is the possibility of a perverse incentive to free-ride on the scientific funding of other nations. As the velocity of information (i.e., faster spread) and international mobility of academics increases, the perverse incentive goes up.

jltsiren 4y ago
That's not a perverse incentive. It's the entire purpose of academic research. The results of the research are supposed to benefit the entire humanity, not just the entity that happened to fund it. Funders in turn have a range of motives. Some are idealistic and fund research because it's morally the right thing to do. Others are more utilitarian and believe that there are indirect benefits from having academic researchers in the society.