We need to get rid of the concept of 'patents' in science entirely. Science isn't business or art as your work in it isn't aesthetic, it is a model to explain a specific way of looking at a process or a thing in this universe that will in the future be replaced by a better model.
It will probably be used by someone in the future to discover something else or better. If someone cites your work and literally copy pastes your entire report, it doesn't matter as it isn't affecting the long term benefits of that finding. What should matter is how true or empirically replicatable your findings are.
>hey let's get rid of 100% of the monetary incentive to continue doing science
why don't we just all revert to communism while we're at it
Evan Brown
this should never come into play, the only thing differentiating science from business and religion is that its predicated on an honest application of skill and intelligence. Destroying this by underpaying or coercing scientists with the journal/peer-review system is dangerous for the species. There will be long term consequences to letting the market decide the priorities of humanity user
Logan Morales
Who instead should decide the priorities of humanity? The market is just the applied, unconscious wants and need of humanity. What better than humans to decide what humans want and need?
Isaiah Thomas
>The market is just the applied, unconscious wants and need of humanity. no it's not >Who instead should decide the priorities of humanity? rational planning according to social need
Carson Barnes
So you're conflating the patent system with underpayment and bureaucratic coercion, why?
Austin White
>rational planning according to social need
which works great until you realize that an authoritarian politburo is shitty at responding to the fickle demands of a human economy and ends up Holodomor-ing millions of people
Communism was an alright hypothesis written by a chill dude with a beard. Humans tested it experimentally and the results all point to the fact that it sucks ass
Joshua Campbell
Because the (((big corporations))) will eat up every idea immediately and have a monopoly on it from day one. This is a stupid childish idea
Justin Morgan
>no it's not What is the market if not that? The market is the natural sway of human wants and needs. >rational planning according to social need Who knows more about what humanity needs than humanity?
Evan Rogers
>The market is the natural sway of human wants and needs this doesn't mean what you want it to mean, nor is it logical. >Who knows more about what humanity needs than humanity? AI and not the aggregate interests of massive populations most Fortune 500 firms are owned and run by white people as are most large European and 99% of large Asian firms
Aaron Watson
Marx: "Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality will have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence." It's pretty clear he wasn't advocating any "ideal" political or economic system, or set of policies. He just provided an in-depth analysis of the mechanics of history and capitalism and their relationship to the state. It would be pretty disingenuous to claim he prescribed some system for coordinating labor which was experimentally tested. Not only is it a fundamental misrepresentation, well-designed controlled experiments are impossible in sociology. Furthermore all the main predictions of his theory (LTV calculation of equilibrium prices, falling rate of profit, etc) have been empirically confirmed many times over. >What is the market if not that? The market is the natural sway of human wants and needs. Deaths due to starvation and treatable/preventable disease don't exist because we don't have the means to solve them, but because it is not profitable to solve them. Drug cartels violently suppress their competitors not because it is what society wants, but because it is the most profitable option. America launches aggressive wars under false pretenses not because it is socially optimal, but because it is profitable. There are countless examples of cases where social need diverges from private profit. They characterize this entire epoch of history and cannot be defined away as you seek to do. The problem with your claim is that it could apply to any mode of production. Feudalism is just "the natural sway of human wants and needs," because people 1) have wants and needs and 2) feudalism coordinates those with labor and resources in some sense, never mind the antagonisms integral to the system which made it unstable and generated capitalism. It's specious.
Luke Kelly
Before patents, the strategy was to keep everything secret and in house, this lead to a whole lotta duplicate research, lost knowledge, and stagnation.
The patent system makes knowledge public domain, and only temporarily limit others from profiting from the designs while securing the inventor's profit for a time, all while still allowing others to benefit from the research behind the discovery and inspire/modify their own efforts.
Copyright law is another issue... Mickey Mouse has gotten a tad out of hand.
Humanity is notoriously stupid and short-sighted in terms of outlook and thus the market suffers the same issue.
Luis Ward
Capitalism is the only pragmatic, practical, rational and logical way.
Any other way simply does not work.
Isaiah Butler
Back to /pol/ Humans are too stupid for capitalism to work without screwing people over
Elijah Lee
why do you need no. 32?
Cameron Carter
Anyone with a rational mind will argue that capitalism is the only practical system that actually works. It is the only way to create wealth and prosperity.
Communist China has abandoned communism in order to develop itself.
Communism simply does not work with humans.
Capitalist dictatorships(Singapore, Dubai, Hong Kong) have extravagant standard of living compared to communist hellholes/shitholes.
Brayden Myers
This, the alternative to patents is significantly worse.
>/pol/ >capitalism If I had saved some of the low IQ wojak memes I would post them now.
Elijah Flores
>only way to create wealth and prosperity Wealth is not a zero-sum game you tard. You also seem to think criticising capitalism equates to being pro-communist
Logan Wright
Yes capitalism is the only ecosystem that enables the creation of wealth. Thinking that any other system can create wealth is pure delusion.
Landon Miller
"Creation of wealth" implies a non-zerosum game.
Criticism of capitalism is a communist thing. No one else believes that economic freedom is bad.
Austin Gonzalez
say goodbye to drugs
Ryder Campbell
Wouldn't it be the opposite? They would have to keep coming up with new ones more frequently to stay ahead of the competition.
Carson Roberts
you make it sound like if they just tried a bit harder they could pull a couple more out of a bag
drug development is hard risky expensive and uncertain. things fail for retarded random reasons. no patent = you literally can’t make money
Christian Perry
>Humans are too stupid for capitalism to work without screwing people over Meanwhile Humans are too stupid for communism to work
Jace Kelly
I agree. We should even abolish capitalism while we're at it
>drug development is hard risky expensive and uncertain. Not even OP, but you're falling for their meme-tier propaganda. Look at their operating budgets. 75% goes to marketing while 10% goes to R&D.
Cameron Turner
think about what you said and whether or not it actually contradicts what i said
Nicholas Turner
Regardless of that, it's still hard, expensive and risky. Do you even know what clinical trials are and how they work?
Nicholas Morris
This
Joshua Thompson
I bet you're a stoner neet. only way someone could hold such a retarded, ill thought out opinion
Adam Cruz
you say that like communism has worked in even a single country
Luis Rodriguez
Wasn’t risk and competition the base for capitalism? If it’s so difficult to develop better drugs then competition will happen to create better drugs and once they are found it would be to make them cheaper until finding a new better one
Zachary Smith
I write patents for a living. The purpose of patents is to make sure that information remains public. Patents protect the inventor for 20 years in exchange for making all their research and findings available to everyone. This prevents people from hiding what they're doing in a corner.
Bentley Morris
I dunno how all this became about capitalism vs. communism, when patents are blatantly anti-capitalism.
Providing a mechanism through which the public can share knowledge is more of a communist thing. It's also anti-competition, discouraging companies from hiding secrets from one another in order to beat one another out. Only difference between this and "true communism" being that the government is declaring who owns what property by law - and """communist""" governments have had no problems declaring intellectual property secret or banned themselves.
countries that break patents scare away private funding for research, logically.
research is expensive and risky. Imagine spending tens of millions on a project for a particular medicine and then after 10 years it turns out it's bunk/too harmful? High risk requires high reward.
David King
You're implying that drug R&D will cease if we stop granting anticompetitive monopolies in the form of patents, but that is clearly false since drug company R&D expenditures are already negligible. It will simply force drug companies to invest more in research to stay ahead of the competition. When has a monopoly *ever* resulted in lower prices or more innovation?
But that's wrong. China is outspending the US on research, and also advancing faster because it doesn't have a ton of IP restrictions. Get off your corporate cock.
Daniel Sanders
>China is advancing faster
no shit man, they have a huge savings rate and are extremely poor. savings => investment.
Bentley Peterson
>advancing faster
lmaooaoooooooooooo
give ONE example
Jaxon Gonzalez
Do the dairy estrogens interfere with your frontal lobes and keep you from using punctuation?
>drug company R&D expenditures are already negligible Are you retarded?
Ethan Williams
We can keep them in engineering though right
Jose Wood
>researchers in the US and the EU produce more papers (and patents) on biomedical science
Jeremiah Cruz
>10% is bigger than 75% Nice reading comprehension. Seriously, congrats on this.
Asher Ward
>Wealth is not a zero-sum game you tard.
That's some great information considering he never even said that in his post
Jayden Nelson
'Scientific output' means raw numbers of papers published. Look at the numbers of papers that the US publishes in Nature versus the number of papers that China publishes in the Shenzhen Journal of Who-Gives-A-Shit?
