Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 21, 2007, 05:52 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Isherwood

After all, books are just collections of common words used by everyone who speaks that particular language.

Books are physical, scarce things.

They have value in themselves.

The information modulated upon them can't be owned.

saltinespike · Apr 21, 2007, 07:36 pm

Quote:

Quote by: tman_ndsu08

If N = "If you knowingly receive illegal material, you are liable.",

then ~(~N) = "If you don't knowingly receive illegal material, you're not liable."

As I showed, they're equivalent.

That is a different scenario.

If you stab someone, you will go to jail.=/= If you don't stab someone, you don't go to jail.

These are not equivalent. In fact, they are much closer to opposites. Only in math do 2 negatives make a positive.

The way you are putting things, none of us are original. We are just different combinations of the common DNA twisted ladder (don't know the official name of it).

So nothing is original. Not even anything about us. Great arguement. :rolleyes:

Mr.Vicchio · Apr 21, 2007, 08:04 pm

Basically, by tdman's theory, we could know ever technology ever to be created by his method.

We could know all the secrets of the universe. Just run his scheme long enough and viola! Warp Drive? Fusion? The next great American novel?

All done.

And free too btw, no one should pay for anything ever... after all it's jsut 0's and 1's.

**Jack** · Apr 21, 2007, 08:29 pm

Quote:

Books are physical, scarce things.

They have value in themselves.

The information modulated upon them can't be owned.

So how do you account for the fact that copyright is applied to the content of a book, not the book form itself? The unique combination of words that form the content are what are protected by copyright.

You make blanket statements without expanding on them, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 22, 2007, 09:58 am

Quote:

Quote by: saltinespike

These are not equivalent.

Logically they are.

Quote:

Only in math do 2 negatives make a positive.

Logic as well.

Quote:

We are just different combinations of the common DNA

Correct.

Any scientist will confirm this for you.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 22, 2007, 10:26 am

Quote:

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio

Just run his scheme long enough and viola! Warp Drive? Fusion? The next great American novel?
All done.

In theory yes.

Practically, if you assume a CD has 650 MiB capacity, the number of possible CD permutations is 2^(650*20) or 2^13000. The highest number I could get MATLAB to calculate was 2^1023 which is 89885 with 303 zeros after it.

IE, if you made every CD that is possible and stacked them on top of each other, you're probably talking about a stack thousands of lightyears long.

Quote:

And free too btw, no one should pay for anything ever... after all it's jsut 0's and 1's.

You can't own something that isn't scarce. Information isn't.

Unlimited, exact copies can be made.

The modulated medium can be owned.

Just try to keep that in mind.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 22, 2007, 10:29 am

Quote:

Quote by: Isherwood

So how do you account for the fact that copyright is applied to the content of a book

How do you account for the fact that slavery was legal at one time?

It must've been justified if it was legal.

saltinespike · Apr 22, 2007, 12:01 pm

So no one owns anything. This world is just chaos and we are it's victims. We are screwed by something we can't even comprehend.

You practically destroyed the debate by breaking it down more than anyone wanted it to be broken down into.

**Jack** · Apr 22, 2007, 12:10 pm

Quote:

You can't own something that isn't scarce. Information isn't.

You restate this but never explain what you mean. Why can't you own something that isn't scarce? What do you mean by scarce?

Quote:

How do you account for the fact that slavery was legal at one time?
It must've been justified if it was legal.

Of course it was rationalized, and still is in some cultures. What does that have to do with copyright?

I think you're speaking ideally, not speaking of copyright as it currently exists. If you are trying to describe the present state of copyright, I don't understand your perception. Single statements without elaboration fail to enlighten.

Spoken Word · Apr 22, 2007, 12:19 pm

As a musician, I would love for people to download my songs and listen to them over and over and over. If you are making money with your music that's great but if you forgot why you are producing music, then you should stop making it.

In other words, music to me should be free. Considering that it's so easy to make(good music) why does anyone want to tax it?
Besides, 25+ for 15 songs????
Who's stealing from who?

**Jack** · Apr 22, 2007, 12:35 pm

Quote:

In other words, music to me should be free.

There are no restrictions on what you do with your own music. Your attitude is what has helped MySpace become such a source for new bands to expose liteners to their music. But I don't think you can extrapolate that attitude to every musician, or writer, graphic artist or photographer. Each artist should be free to decide how they want to share their work. I'm no fan of the RIAA or DRMA, but if some choose to go that route, the opportunity is there. As for fans, we vote with our dollars.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 22, 2007, 01:41 pm

Quote:

Quote by: saltinespike

So no one owns anything.

Many people own many scarce things.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 22, 2007, 01:45 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Isherwood

Why can't you own something that isn't scarce?

Because it has no value.

Quote:

What do you mean by scarce?

Unlimited copies can't be made.

Quote:

I think you're speaking ideally, not speaking of copyright as it currently exists.

Isn't that obvious?

**Jack** · Apr 22, 2007, 01:52 pm

Quote:

Isn't that obvious?

No.

saltinespike · Apr 22, 2007, 02:43 pm

Quote:

Quote by: tman_ndsu08

Because it has no value.

Obviously it does because people buy books and art and CDs and such all the time. Have you never bought a CD? You may not want to buy it but it has value to you, so you do anyways, because you could not put the ones and zeros in that order to form the product.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 22, 2007, 03:25 pm

Quote:

Quote by: saltinespike

Obviously it does because people buy books and art and CDs and such all the time.

Books, art, and CDs all have value.

They're scarce.

The information modulated upon them is not scarce. It has no value.

saltinespike · Apr 22, 2007, 03:28 pm

You keep switching your arguement up. What is your true position?

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 22, 2007, 03:59 pm

I've not changed my argument a single time in the entire thread.

If you can't understand the difference between a book and the information modulated upon it, that's not my problem.

saltinespike · Apr 22, 2007, 04:09 pm

Why are you being rude?

You reveal your arguement slowly. Why don't you just say it all at once. So people don't have to guess what you're thinking and get angry at you?

Copyrights should be out there. Argue that I'm wrong, since you have yet to do so.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 22, 2007, 04:17 pm

Quote:

Quote by: saltinespike

Copyrights should be out there.

They should only apply to things that can be owned.

Apr 21, 2007, 08:04 pm	#43 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,031	Basically, by tdman's theory, we could know ever technology ever to be created by his method. We could know all the secrets of the universe. Just run his scheme long enough and viola! Warp Drive? Fusion? The next great American novel? All done. And free too btw, no one should pay for anything ever... after all it's jsut 0's and 1's. Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

Apr 22, 2007, 12:01 pm	#48 (permalink) (top)
saltinespike 20-20 Atheist Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 466	So no one owns anything. This world is just chaos and we are it's victims. We are screwed by something we can't even comprehend. You practically destroyed the debate by breaking it down more than anyone wanted it to be broken down into. Torture is the gradual elimination of emotions.

Apr 22, 2007, 03:28 pm	#57 (permalink) (top)
saltinespike 20-20 Atheist Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 466	You keep switching your arguement up. What is your true position? Torture is the gradual elimination of emotions.

Apr 22, 2007, 04:09 pm	#59 (permalink) (top)
saltinespike 20-20 Atheist Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 466	Why are you being rude? You reveal your arguement slowly. Why don't you just say it all at once. So people don't have to guess what you're thinking and get angry at you? Copyrights should be out there. Argue that I'm wrong, since you have yet to do so. Torture is the gradual elimination of emotions.

Apr 22, 2007, 12:19 pm	#50 (permalink) (top)
Spoken Word The Truth Hurts Posts: 36	As a musician, I would love for people to download my songs and listen to them over and over and over. If you are making money with your music that's great but if you forgot why you are producing music, then you should stop making it. In other words, music to me should be free. Considering that it's so easy to make(good music) why does anyone want to tax it? Besides, 25+ for 15 songs???? Who's stealing from who?

Apr 22, 2007, 03:59 pm	#58 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	I've not changed my argument a single time in the entire thread. If you can't understand the difference between a book and the information modulated upon it, that's not my problem.