5 ms·

The argument isn't that it isn't a valuable process, the argument is that it's a process that produces something that is wholly unlike physical property. Inform

by habitue 12y ago

The argument isn't that it isn't a valuable process, the argument is that it's a process that produces something that is wholly unlike physical property. Information like the kind ARM produces[0] is more valuable to society as a whole the more widely it is disseminated. So an artificial monopoly pretending like information is a scarce resource is probably not the best way to compensate them for doing that kind of work. [0] Some information, like intelligence information, is more valuable the less people have it, which is a major distinguishing feature here.

wfjackson 12y ago
>Information like the kind ARM produces[0] is more valuable to society as a whole the more widely it is disseminated. So an artificial monopoly pretending like information is a scarce resource is probably not the best way to compensate them for doing that kind of work. Doing that without properly compensating ARM is like killing the goose that lays the golden egg. ARM is already trying to make a $20 smartphone. There is already a $25 FF OS smartphone. http://www.engadget.com/2014/05/06/20-dollar-smartphone/ http://www.engadget.com/2014/05/06/20-dollar-smartphone/ How much does ARM make from such a phone after all the physical costs are taken out? a few cents?
- habitue 12y ago
  As someone who once invested in ARM, and has looked at their balance sheets in depth: yes, it's a cent or two per phone. Your unexamined assumption here is that copyright monopolies are the only way to compensate people for work like this. That's not the case.
  - msbarnett 12y ago
    Genuinely curious: what do you think would be some other practical, achievable ways of ensuring that the people at a company like ARM get compensated for their work without "putting the force of the state behind their 'thought-property'"?
    - habitue 12y ago
      We actually have a bunch of examples since there are many industries which don't have the ability to obtain copyright monopolies or patents (or either). Here's a good list (I hope you'll excuse the libertarian source): http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Without_Intellectual_Property http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Without_Intellectual_Property People are making money today doing creating intellectual products without the benefit of copyrights and patents, and they're some of the highest margin industries out there.
IBM 12y ago
I don't understand your comment. How else would you compensate them when their business model is designing the processors to be licensed to others and not building it?
- habitue 12y ago
  Is the point to compensate them with their current business model so they don't have to make any changes as a company? If so, then yes, you've defined the solution into a corner here and copyright monopoly is the only way to go. If, however, we look at the actual thing society has an interest in promoting: to get people to do the hard work of original research and engineering optimization, then we find there are lots of ways to solve that problem without granting monopolies or treating information like physical property.
  - wfjackson 12y ago
    >Is the point to compensate them with their current business model so they don't have to make any changes as a company Doesn't ARM keep coming up with new and innovative designs? Don't they have companies like Intel nipping at their heels waiting for a misstep? Isn't ARM on server an uphill battle for them they are working on? Why do we need to shake up their business model? To what end exactly? To make smartphones a few cents cheaper than they already are? >If, however, we look at the actual thing society has an interest in promoting: to get people to do the hard work of original research and engineering optimization, then we find there are lots of ways to solve that problem without granting monopolies or treating information like physical property. Go on... what are some of the "lots of ways" ? I am genuinely curious.
    - habitue 12y ago
      Please see my comment to a similar question above. I was apparently asking for it by not giving examples.

by habitue 12y ago

wfjackson 12y ago

>Information like the kind ARM produces[0] is more valuable to society as a whole the more widely it is disseminated. So an artificial monopoly pretending like information is a scarce resource is probably not the best way to compensate them for doing that kind of work. Doing that without properly compensating ARM is like killing the goose that lays the golden egg. ARM is already trying to make a $20 smartphone. There is already a $25 FF OS smartphone. http://www.engadget.com/2014/05/06/20-dollar-smartphone/ http://www.engadget.com/2014/05/06/20-dollar-smartphone/ How much does ARM make from such a phone after all the physical costs are taken out? a few cents?

habitue 12y ago
As someone who once invested in ARM, and has looked at their balance sheets in depth: yes, it's a cent or two per phone. Your unexamined assumption here is that copyright monopolies are the only way to compensate people for work like this. That's not the case.
- msbarnett 12y ago
  Genuinely curious: what do you think would be some other practical, achievable ways of ensuring that the people at a company like ARM get compensated for their work without "putting the force of the state behind their 'thought-property'"?
  - habitue 12y ago
    We actually have a bunch of examples since there are many industries which don't have the ability to obtain copyright monopolies or patents (or either). Here's a good list (I hope you'll excuse the libertarian source): http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Without_Intellectual_Property http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Without_Intellectual_Property People are making money today doing creating intellectual products without the benefit of copyrights and patents, and they're some of the highest margin industries out there.

IBM 12y ago

I don't understand your comment. How else would you compensate them when their business model is designing the processors to be licensed to others and not building it?

habitue 12y ago
Is the point to compensate them with their current business model so they don't have to make any changes as a company? If so, then yes, you've defined the solution into a corner here and copyright monopoly is the only way to go. If, however, we look at the actual thing society has an interest in promoting: to get people to do the hard work of original research and engineering optimization, then we find there are lots of ways to solve that problem without granting monopolies or treating information like physical property.
- wfjackson 12y ago
  >Is the point to compensate them with their current business model so they don't have to make any changes as a company Doesn't ARM keep coming up with new and innovative designs? Don't they have companies like Intel nipping at their heels waiting for a misstep? Isn't ARM on server an uphill battle for them they are working on? Why do we need to shake up their business model? To what end exactly? To make smartphones a few cents cheaper than they already are? >If, however, we look at the actual thing society has an interest in promoting: to get people to do the hard work of original research and engineering optimization, then we find there are lots of ways to solve that problem without granting monopolies or treating information like physical property. Go on... what are some of the "lots of ways" ? I am genuinely curious.
  - habitue 12y ago
    Please see my comment to a similar question above. I was apparently asking for it by not giving examples.