7 ms·

This is not exactly something to be proud of.

RCitronsBroker 2y ago
Hard agree. it’s sad to see that the funding for leading edge science has dried up considerably after the "cold" war ending, but this is a very unfortunate perspective to look at scientific progress.
labster 2y ago
If you think a little IP theft makes an entire country evil, I’d hate to know what you think of China. Note: OP edited his comment
- jmprspret 2y ago
  Yeah, they're evil too. As if saying one is evil means that the other isn't? Come on...
- OutOfHere 2y ago
  I just think there should be consistency between which laws apply to the country and which apply to its citizens. If IP theft is okay for the country, it should be okay for its citizens too.
  - exe34 2y ago
    the laws aren't for the benefit of the citizens, they're there for benefits of the rich. does it make more sense now? that way you can have both spying being okay and sharing books being evil.
  - ffgjgf1 2y ago
    To be fair IP law initially and too a large degree still were mainly meant to prevent your country’s citizens from stealing from other citizens/residents. Presumably that would result in lower overall productivity. Stealing IP from other countries is just pure profit though..
  - Terr_ 2y ago
    > If IP theft is okay for the country, it should be okay for its citizens too. Hold up--by that logic, if a country has a military it should also be okay for its citizens to privately kill one another. Or: "The government is allowed to print bills and mint coins that look just like the real thing, so why can't I?"
    - OutOfHere 2y ago
      It is misleading to go from having a military to killing as if they're the same. They're not the same. A moral military is for self defense only, and self defense is always moral, whether for the military or for oneself. Regarding money, citizens however are free to mine non-governmental forms of money such as gold and bitcoin.
      - Terr_ 2y ago
        > > Hold up--by that logic [equally silly conclusion about murder] > It is misleading to go from having a military to killing as if they're the same. They're not the same. Almost there! Now finish the job by taking that crucial "hey that reasoning is sketchy" insight and look at how it also applies to your original argument. Ex: "It is misleading to go from having having a {national agency spying on other nations} to {casual theft} as if they're the same. They're not the same."
        OutOfHere 2y ago
        Both are theft in the context of intellectual property, and so they are the same.
        foverzar 2y ago
        It is misleading to go from patent infringement to casual theft. They're not the same.
kstenerud 2y ago
This is something to be extremely proud of. Espionage is how proprietary information gets disseminated and built upon (and eventually made public in some form, or via its descendants). So many of the technologies we enjoy today are in widespread use because of espionage (industrial or government or both). It's how you even the tables from time to time. There's nothing immoral about espionage - only what you use the information for (to build systems of repression, or to build systems that improve ourselves).
- foverzar 2y ago
  Somehow people aren't that eager to make the same argument when accusing China of "IP theft".
- OutOfHere 2y ago
  If espionage is okay, then we should not be subject to intellectual property laws. The point is that there needs to be consistency between what's right for the country and what's right for its citizens.
  - kstenerud 2y ago
    That's a naive way of looking at it. There's no "world police". It's the law of the schoolyard when it comes to international relations. You make and break alliances, set up partnerships, break them, gather information to help your allies, and life goes on. You spy on everyone. That's just how it works (by necessity). If some country is hoarding the secret to a revolutionary food that would help your starving citizens, you're not going to say "Oh, I'll just let my people starve because spying would be WRONG." If someone has a game changing weapon that they're threatening the region with, you're not going to say "I'll just let them have this power because spying is WRONG." If you could spy to get new chip technology that will elevate your country out of 80% poverty, you're not going to say "Oh, we'll just remain poor because spying is WRONG."
    - vasco 2y ago
      > won't do it because spying is WRONG They aren't going to say that, but spying is wrong. Murder is also wrong and governments still do it.
matkoniecz 2y ago
why?
euroderf 2y ago
Sure it is. If the commies were foolhardy enough to put a crown jewel out there, there's no fundamental harm in sneaking a peek. No humans were harmed. No individuals were betrayed. No careers were needlessly ruined. Just snooping.

Hard agree. it’s sad to see that the funding for leading edge science has dried up considerably after the "cold" war ending, but this is a very unfortunate perspective to look at scientific progress.

labster 2y ago

If you think a little IP theft makes an entire country evil, I’d hate to know what you think of China. Note: OP edited his comment

jmprspret 2y ago
Yeah, they're evil too. As if saying one is evil means that the other isn't? Come on...
OutOfHere 2y ago
I just think there should be consistency between which laws apply to the country and which apply to its citizens. If IP theft is okay for the country, it should be okay for its citizens too.
- exe34 2y ago
  the laws aren't for the benefit of the citizens, they're there for benefits of the rich. does it make more sense now? that way you can have both spying being okay and sharing books being evil.
- ffgjgf1 2y ago
  To be fair IP law initially and too a large degree still were mainly meant to prevent your country’s citizens from stealing from other citizens/residents. Presumably that would result in lower overall productivity. Stealing IP from other countries is just pure profit though..
- Terr_ 2y ago
  > If IP theft is okay for the country, it should be okay for its citizens too. Hold up--by that logic, if a country has a military it should also be okay for its citizens to privately kill one another. Or: "The government is allowed to print bills and mint coins that look just like the real thing, so why can't I?"
  - OutOfHere 2y ago
    It is misleading to go from having a military to killing as if they're the same. They're not the same. A moral military is for self defense only, and self defense is always moral, whether for the military or for oneself. Regarding money, citizens however are free to mine non-governmental forms of money such as gold and bitcoin.
    - Terr_ 2y ago
      > > Hold up--by that logic [equally silly conclusion about murder] > It is misleading to go from having a military to killing as if they're the same. They're not the same. Almost there! Now finish the job by taking that crucial "hey that reasoning is sketchy" insight and look at how it also applies to your original argument. Ex: "It is misleading to go from having having a {national agency spying on other nations} to {casual theft} as if they're the same. They're not the same."
      - OutOfHere 2y ago
        Both are theft in the context of intellectual property, and so they are the same.
      - foverzar 2y ago
        It is misleading to go from patent infringement to casual theft. They're not the same.

kstenerud 2y ago

This is something to be extremely proud of. Espionage is how proprietary information gets disseminated and built upon (and eventually made public in some form, or via its descendants). So many of the technologies we enjoy today are in widespread use because of espionage (industrial or government or both). It's how you even the tables from time to time. There's nothing immoral about espionage - only what you use the information for (to build systems of repression, or to build systems that improve ourselves).

foverzar 2y ago
Somehow people aren't that eager to make the same argument when accusing China of "IP theft".
OutOfHere 2y ago
If espionage is okay, then we should not be subject to intellectual property laws. The point is that there needs to be consistency between what's right for the country and what's right for its citizens.
- kstenerud 2y ago
  That's a naive way of looking at it. There's no "world police". It's the law of the schoolyard when it comes to international relations. You make and break alliances, set up partnerships, break them, gather information to help your allies, and life goes on. You spy on everyone. That's just how it works (by necessity). If some country is hoarding the secret to a revolutionary food that would help your starving citizens, you're not going to say "Oh, I'll just let my people starve because spying would be WRONG." If someone has a game changing weapon that they're threatening the region with, you're not going to say "I'll just let them have this power because spying is WRONG." If you could spy to get new chip technology that will elevate your country out of 80% poverty, you're not going to say "Oh, we'll just remain poor because spying is WRONG."
  - vasco 2y ago
    > won't do it because spying is WRONG They aren't going to say that, but spying is wrong. Murder is also wrong and governments still do it.

matkoniecz 2y ago

why?

euroderf 2y ago

Sure it is. If the commies were foolhardy enough to put a crown jewel out there, there's no fundamental harm in sneaking a peek. No humans were harmed. No individuals were betrayed. No careers were needlessly ruined. Just snooping.