4 ms·

Look I'm no proponent of Monsanto, but they do have a point here. Roundup will kill all non-monsanto plants; they change the formula every year to make sure th

Look I'm no proponent of Monsanto, but they do have a point here. Roundup will kill all non-monsanto plants; they change the formula every year to make sure that you have to keep buying seeds. In this case, the farmer grabbed a ton of seeds, sprayed everything with roundup and kept only the seeds which survived; the seeds he knew to be from Monsanto. I don't like the idea that Monsanto can go to your farm and throw seeds and suddenly you owe them money, but it seems like they might be in the right here. The farmer did go out of his way to pursue survivable seeds without paying Monsanto for the privilege. This is different from Yogurt where you have some natural selection. He didn't introduce a chemical to the Yogurt with the intention of killing all non-chemically-protected strains.

kens 13y ago
A couple people have mentioned that the Roundup formula changes every year. Where did that idea come from? Roundup's active ingredient is glyphosate, aka N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine, and it's been that way since Roundup was introduced in the 1970s.
jerrya 13y ago
Oh I'm sure I am probably in the legal wrong. I think that if cable companies broadcast encrypted signals in through my house, I should legally be able to decrypt them. (But I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to do that.) I think that if I find a scanner for cell phone conversations and find cell phone conversations that are unencrypted, I should legally be able to listen to them. (But I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to do that.) I think that if an Apple employee leaves an iPhone 6 in a bar, I should legally be able to break it apart. (But I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to do that.) It might be ethically wrong for me to do so, but it should be legal for me to do so. If Monsanto can't keep its products out of a community silo, and Farmer John wants to go fishing for their seeds by spraying them all with a commonly obtained chemical and seeing what survives, I think that should be legal too.
- tptacek 13y ago
  You think it should be legal to steal people's phones and break them apart? Why?! Isn't that the "Finders Keepers Losers Weepers" doctrine?
  - jerrya 13y ago
    I said lose, not steal. I didn't say "steal" anyone's phones. And I didn't say it was ethical behavior. But yes, I think if you lose your trade secrets, your product, whether it's a phone or whether it's the formula for Coca Cola, or KFC, then yes it's lost, and it's your fault. "If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because man, they're gone" I don't really see too many laws enacted to ensure the stuff I lose gets back to me, and so because of that I don't understand why there are laws to protect an enormous corporation's property in ways that my property is not protected. If you can convince me my own personal property is protected in the same manner, I will be happy to change my mind.
    - tptacek 13y ago
      Picking up someone's phone that they left at a bar and doing a teardown on it is theft. Not in a "I think this is equivalent to theft" sense; it is theft in the legal "you can be charged with theft for doing it" sense. It is illegal to take things that other people use and appropriate them for yourself. If someone finds your phone on the street, they need to try to return it.
      - jerrya 13y ago
        Picking up someone's phone that they left at a bar and doing a teardown on it is theft. Not in a "I think this is equivalent to theft" sense; it is theft in the legal "you can be charged with theft for doing it" sense. I know this because I know this is what happened to Gawker. It is illegal to take things that other people use and appropriate them for yourself. If someone finds your phone on the street, they need to try to return it. I don't know this. That's what I've been saying. Can you point to laws that succinctly state that? Can you point to stories of law enforcement actually investigating such losses? You might be right, but I've never encountered anyone saying that they lost something and the law helped them get it back. With the exception of money I've never encountered anything in any class growing up detailing what the citizen's duty was when finding a lost article. And even with money, it's pretty clear the responsibilities of the authorities differ from location to location and much of it is on the order of "turn it in, if no one comes for it within 30 days, it's yours". Is there law that states that?
- rmc 13y ago
  I think that if I find a scanner for cell phone conversations and find cell phone conversations that are unencrypted, I should legally be able to listen to them. (But I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to do that.) No, I don't think that should be legal. Many places have data protection & privacy laws. If you get access to private information, you can't do what you want with it. I'm fine with that being the law and ethics.
  - jerrya 13y ago
    I think the airwaves are the public's airwaves. If you broadcast unencrypted information through them, Joe Average Public should not get in trouble for listening to them. But I'll go further to. I think my living room is mine. If you send your encrypted information through it, I should be able to listen to it. I was born. I didn't sign any data protection & privacy law agreement. Things that I can witness and observe in the privacy of my own home should be none of yours or anyone else's business. If that makes it hard for certain business models, I'm okay with that because the country is intended for the use of its citizens, not its corporations.
    - rmc 13y ago
      I didn't sign any data protection & privacy law agreement. That is not how laws work. You consent is not required. (Fun fact: There is some people who think that consent is required (and can be withdrawn) for laws to apply to them. It's called "freemen-on-the-land". It's like homeopathy but for laws. It's quite funny)
      - jerrya 13y ago
        I think you're missing the point. Broadcasting your radio signals unencrypted means there is no privacy. Making a law saying that it is private is like making a law the sun should come up at 5am. The sun will do what it wants and the communication will be overheard. If you broadcast signals that are encrypted, but that I can intercept without any kind of physical tampering or alteration or destruction of the signal, again laws are of no help to anyone. The communication will be decrypted and overheard. It's better to make laws that conform to reality than to make laws that tilt at windmills and are used arbitrarily against citizens.

kens 13y ago

A couple people have mentioned that the Roundup formula changes every year. Where did that idea come from? Roundup's active ingredient is glyphosate, aka N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine, and it's been that way since Roundup was introduced in the 1970s.

jerrya 13y ago

Oh I'm sure I am probably in the legal wrong. I think that if cable companies broadcast encrypted signals in through my house, I should legally be able to decrypt them. (But I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to do that.) I think that if I find a scanner for cell phone conversations and find cell phone conversations that are unencrypted, I should legally be able to listen to them. (But I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to do that.) I think that if an Apple employee leaves an iPhone 6 in a bar, I should legally be able to break it apart. (But I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to do that.) It might be ethically wrong for me to do so, but it should be legal for me to do so. If Monsanto can't keep its products out of a community silo, and Farmer John wants to go fishing for their seeds by spraying them all with a commonly obtained chemical and seeing what survives, I think that should be legal too.

tptacek 13y ago
You think it should be legal to steal people's phones and break them apart? Why?! Isn't that the "Finders Keepers Losers Weepers" doctrine?
- jerrya 13y ago
  I said lose, not steal. I didn't say "steal" anyone's phones. And I didn't say it was ethical behavior. But yes, I think if you lose your trade secrets, your product, whether it's a phone or whether it's the formula for Coca Cola, or KFC, then yes it's lost, and it's your fault. "If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because man, they're gone" I don't really see too many laws enacted to ensure the stuff I lose gets back to me, and so because of that I don't understand why there are laws to protect an enormous corporation's property in ways that my property is not protected. If you can convince me my own personal property is protected in the same manner, I will be happy to change my mind.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    Picking up someone's phone that they left at a bar and doing a teardown on it is theft. Not in a "I think this is equivalent to theft" sense; it is theft in the legal "you can be charged with theft for doing it" sense. It is illegal to take things that other people use and appropriate them for yourself. If someone finds your phone on the street, they need to try to return it.
    - jerrya 13y ago
      Picking up someone's phone that they left at a bar and doing a teardown on it is theft. Not in a "I think this is equivalent to theft" sense; it is theft in the legal "you can be charged with theft for doing it" sense. I know this because I know this is what happened to Gawker. It is illegal to take things that other people use and appropriate them for yourself. If someone finds your phone on the street, they need to try to return it. I don't know this. That's what I've been saying. Can you point to laws that succinctly state that? Can you point to stories of law enforcement actually investigating such losses? You might be right, but I've never encountered anyone saying that they lost something and the law helped them get it back. With the exception of money I've never encountered anything in any class growing up detailing what the citizen's duty was when finding a lost article. And even with money, it's pretty clear the responsibilities of the authorities differ from location to location and much of it is on the order of "turn it in, if no one comes for it within 30 days, it's yours". Is there law that states that?
rmc 13y ago
I think that if I find a scanner for cell phone conversations and find cell phone conversations that are unencrypted, I should legally be able to listen to them. (But I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to do that.) No, I don't think that should be legal. Many places have data protection & privacy laws. If you get access to private information, you can't do what you want with it. I'm fine with that being the law and ethics.
- jerrya 13y ago
  I think the airwaves are the public's airwaves. If you broadcast unencrypted information through them, Joe Average Public should not get in trouble for listening to them. But I'll go further to. I think my living room is mine. If you send your encrypted information through it, I should be able to listen to it. I was born. I didn't sign any data protection & privacy law agreement. Things that I can witness and observe in the privacy of my own home should be none of yours or anyone else's business. If that makes it hard for certain business models, I'm okay with that because the country is intended for the use of its citizens, not its corporations.
  - rmc 13y ago
    I didn't sign any data protection & privacy law agreement. That is not how laws work. You consent is not required. (Fun fact: There is some people who think that consent is required (and can be withdrawn) for laws to apply to them. It's called "freemen-on-the-land". It's like homeopathy but for laws. It's quite funny)
    - jerrya 13y ago
      I think you're missing the point. Broadcasting your radio signals unencrypted means there is no privacy. Making a law saying that it is private is like making a law the sun should come up at 5am. The sun will do what it wants and the communication will be overheard. If you broadcast signals that are encrypted, but that I can intercept without any kind of physical tampering or alteration or destruction of the signal, again laws are of no help to anyone. The communication will be decrypted and overheard. It's better to make laws that conform to reality than to make laws that tilt at windmills and are used arbitrarily against citizens.