Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

[c1ue]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

I was responding to the OP, the thread in general, and the push to migrate to "open" systems, not your specific post or your proposal.

As far as your dig at me in your last sentence.... please don't invoke trivial understanding of sophisticated social engineering techniques, it's embarrassing.

Given that NO ONE was talking about abolishing the patent system but you, clearly you're either trolling or just using this thread as an excuse to push forward your own agenda.

As for embarrassing, you've already demonstrated publicly your lack of understanding of even broad historical context. How then can your supposedly nuanced understanding of high level social engineering - based upon this hole-y foundation - be any better?

[reggie]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

Given that NO ONE was talking about abolishing the patent system but you, clearly you're either trolling or just using this thread as an excuse to push forward your own agenda.

As for embarrassing, you've already demonstrated publicly your lack of understanding of even broad historical context. How then can your supposedly nuanced understanding of high level social engineering - based upon this hole-y foundation - be any better?

You obviously enjoy being a prick, as it, along with the utter arrogance that you exhibit, seem to come natural to you. Unfortunately for you, your understanding of the world is not nearly as adequate as you seem to believe. But you'll never see that because fear inhibits your ability to listen to people like me, instead, choosing to put me in a box that has been created for you by others.

IMHO, what seems to be missing from this conversation is a discussion about why this conversation is currently in the public mind, and why this dialectical split, or particular debate frame, is being pushed by some in academia and media. This, for me, is more telling than any detailed discussion of the finer points of the patent system. Ignoring motive here seems illogical to me, especially when we're in the middle of a brutal class struggle.

[bpr]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

This is getting dangerously close to the rant and rave section with ad hominem attacks, but there are some interesting ideas here, particulary Chris' move into copyright and away from trademark as a means of protecting IP: he should write a letter of thanks to the Gershwin heirs if his endeavors work out.

Seems to me, though, that there's a lot of space between "Behemoths" and "Startups." I was hoping someone would have addressed this by now.

I would think that existing firms have enormous capacity for innovation, but our data goes back only as far as 1977, so it excludes firms such as IBM and GE and most of the "behemoths" alluded to in the article. I guess innovation and job creation didn't exist before the Carter Administration.

My guess is that this is the Achilles Heel of the investor class.

EDIT: I would question the whole concept of "behemoths," in fact, if we're excluding data prior to 1977. That was pre-EVERYTHING that made the investor class wealthy. By excluding firms created prior to 1977, they're excluding Monsanto, AMD, GE, IBM, Ford, GM, Berkshire, Goldman... Who knows whether merged entities like Citi and JPM are included. This is dangerously near-sighted, in my view, very close to the IPO fever of the late nineties.

IMO, if you want to make a quick buck or a good return on investment, I'm not sure that "job creation" should be high on your list of priorities.

[Jeff]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

Reggie you pompous ass

Your millimeter deep and miles wide sampling of a world of knowledge and coughing up what ever sticks between your teeth is irritating in the extreme. Do you have anything to offer but snide, belittling displays of your deep misunderstanding of a wide variety of esoterica? I suspect you've accomplished nothing in your bitter little turd of a life, as anyone who leaves Mom & Dad's basement couch on occasion tends to pick up at least a scintilla of insight which you so obviously have not.

Jesus Christ, write a book, yell into the corner, do something, whatever, but just don't suspect for a moment that anyone here finds your baseless attacks and intellectual masturbation enlightening.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

From my viewpoint, I do not see anyone with ALL the answers. Certainly it is true that we are in the SH one T. Sometimes the pressures create circumstances where otherwise gentlemanly conduct turns towards the likes of ally cats clawing and spitting at each other, as here. Reggie has his point of view and his words don't tear the flesh from our faces; so why all the agro?

If there is anyone here with an axe to grind it is me, but you don't see me flaring up because I know that the only way forward is through reasoned debate. I absolutely cannot afford the luxury of "loosing it"; not even for one precious moment of "fun?" As from that moment, everything I say will be tainted with a scintilla of doubt as to my real intentions.

I am here on iTulip, first of all from the kindness of EJ who gave me a slot, a chance to try and get across my own problems as an individual privateer inventor and thus from being on the outside; the classic "Loser" to the average American. Yesterday I had an interesting multiple email conversation with the Governor's office in the Bank of England, today I am trying to calm down a extrovert cat fight; life goes on.

But let us get this into perspective. The United States is short of roughly 30 million private, non government funded jobs, the United Kingdom is similarly in the same spot with ~ 6 million needed here. The point that Fiat Currency made with the Porter Stansberry note is absolutely on the button for accuracy; indeed, it is even worse here in the UK for the very simple reason that "They" not only want to control you; "They" will take your IP from you and sell you to the highest bidder without so much as a `by your leave sir'. At least in the US, the originator is treated with a modicum of respect; here we get NONE! PERIOD.

When Reggie first wrote the word `Both' - I too thought he was wrong, but once I had thought about that for a moment, I had no option BUT to agree with him.

The question I will pose is this:

What is more important? That we find a workable solution; or we continue to fight each other?

Me; I am going to keep working, trying, conversing, holding, for all my worth; onto my infinitesimal credibility; for that is the only road out of all this mess. May I humbly suggest that each of you give some consideration to the same, not for yourselves, but for all those millions that need a simple, prosperous - JOB!

[reggie]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

Reggie you pompous ass

Your millimeter deep and miles wide sampling of a world of knowledge and coughing up what ever sticks between your teeth is irritating in the extreme. Do you have anything to offer but snide, belittling displays of your deep misunderstanding of a wide variety of esoterica? I suspect you've accomplished nothing in your bitter little turd of a life, as anyone who leaves Mom & Dad's basement couch on occasion tends to pick up at least a scintilla of insight which you so obviously have not.

Jesus Christ, write a book, yell into the corner, do something, whatever, but just don't suspect for a moment that anyone here finds your baseless attacks and intellectual masturbation enlightening.

First, I think that we ought to properly define the issues before we start our deep plunge into analytical discussion of possible solutions. Deception is one of the greatest weapons of this class war, and without deep understanding of the goals of the Open Society, it is easy to be ensnared by concepts that appear on their surface to be beneficial to the lower classes. What I am suggesting is that the motives behind introducing this discussion are not what they appear, and that the problem definition and the motives behind introducing this specific problem merits further discussion.

Secondly, I surmise that what you have posted was not designed for my eyes, but for the eyes of the other readers here. It appears to me that you are attempting to convince the reader of your great success while simultaneously deriding me as an utter failure. So, my preliminary conclusion from this is that this is posted to dissuade others from engaging me, or engaging my frame of discussion on this topic. Why? Please tell us, with some specificity and without the personal diagnosis, what is so offensive about the frame of perspective that I have introduced in this thread. If it is without merit, then why is it without merit?

Now, back to that parental couch just in time for my daily dose of Oprah.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

This is getting dangerously close to the rant and rave section with ad hominem attacks, but ..

I think that Jeff's post, right after yours, removed any ambiguity on that matter <grin>.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

So, my preliminary conclusion from this is that this is posted to dissuade others from engaging me, or engaging my frame of discussion on this topic. Why? Please tell us, with some specificity and without the personal diagnosis, what is so offensive about the frame of perspective that I have introduced in this thread. If it is without merit, then why is it without merit?

I disagree reggie. As someone who often agrees with your apparent (*) perspective, but who also agrees with Jeff's pungent description of your manner of presenting it, I think Jeff was primarily expressing annoyance at your manner of presentation, not commenting on your frame of discussion.

Jeff, being apparently more an ordinary (though rather successful) human than this Cynical Cow, likely disagrees more than I do with your perspective, but I did not read his post as commenting on that matter much one way or the other.

If Jeff had suspected that this was a "teachable moment", he might have come across in a more helpful manner regarding your manner of presenting your points on iTulip. I see no sign of any such teachable moment however. Apparently Jeff didn't either.

(*) Well, I need to speak more precisely here. What you've been saying is quite ambiguous. You leave much unspoken. I risk reading my own strange blend of views into the ample shadows of your postings.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

From my viewpoint, I do not see anyone with ALL the answers. Certainly it is true that we are in the SH one T. Sometimes the pressures create circumstances where otherwise gentlemanly conduct turns towards the likes of ally cats clawing and spitting at each other, as here. Reggie has his point of view and his words don't tear the flesh from our faces; so why all the agro?

Chris - you need feel no need to defend the value of your content on this post. That this cat fight broke out here rather than on some other thread is an unrelated accident. Reggie has been if anything consistent in the manner and content of his postings across a wide number of threads.

[leegs]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

I disagree reggie. As someone who often agrees with your apparent (*) perspective, but who also agrees with Jeff's pungent description of your manner of presenting it . . . (snip) . . .

(*) Well, I need to speak more precisely here. What you've been saying is quite ambiguous. You leave much unspoken. I risk reading my own strange blend of views into the ample shadows of your postings.

FWIW (not much) I very much share your well-articulated opinion regarding Reggie. I find what he has to say to be very interesting, to the limited extent that I understand where he is coming from and what he is getting at. I also agree that his presentation is imperfect, and especially given the controversial nature of what he is apparently trying to say, presentation is important. Regardless, I think it would be quite unfortunate if he were to desert this forum.

[jpatter666]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

FWIW (not much) I very much share your well-articulated opinion regarding Reggie. I find what he has to say to be very interesting, to the limited extent that I understand where he is coming from and what he is getting at. I also agree that his presentation is imperfect, and especially given the controversial nature of what he is apparently trying to say, presentation is important. Regardless, I think it would be quite unfortunate if he were to desert this forum.

Well, looking at his first posts (the Hudson interview it seems) I note a certain theme.....

(a) term definitions

"As far as EJ's post, I don't understand how regulation of predatory financial practices makes Hudson a Marxist. I think an agreed-upon definition of Marxism would be helpful here."

(b) class struggle with (I think) the twist that TPTB really control both left and right.

"The problem is that the ruling class has usurped and co-opted both the left AND the right, and play each group of followers 'off' on each other. In the former Soviet Union, they called this the "Pincers Strategy".
Hence, I simply don't see these labels as relevant or pertinent any longer, they simply act to be divisive."

FWIW, Reggie, sit back, compose a detailed posting clearly articulating your viewpoints and post it up. If you've already done so, just link to that. Like some the previous posters, I think you've got the kernel of a potentially interesting discussion, but if you're going to push it here, you need more signal, less noise.

Especially given some of the members you've decided to enter into discussions with (i.e. some of the most articulate and informed people here....)!

[note: not including myself in that! :-)]

[DSpencer]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

Why can't the personal attacks and ad hominem arguments be sent through private messages so they don't kill the thread?

1.

Between the two nations we are under capitalised, at grass roots level by roughly $3 Trillion.

Where/how did this number originate? I was not aware there was some kind of magical "perfect capitalization level". Shouldn't REAL capital represent wealth? Wouldn't we always be better off having more of it? Why not $300 Trillion?

2.

The inventor cannot get their hands on the capital to create new jobs

Assuming this is true, I do not believe that the problem is a general lack of capital. Am I the only one that feels like there are many wealthy people out there with money to invest practically burning a hole in their pocket? I love gold and silver, but what's the underlying reason for this site? Isn't the core principle how to save/grow wealth? A website encouraging T-bills/cash and PMs doesn't suggest lack of capital to me as much as lack of suitable investments.

Maybe the reason for lack of startup funding is the huge risk? IMHO the collusion between government and corporations is a major part of that risk. Patents are one weapon provided by government for corporations to use against new businesses.

Basically a good investment at this point is one that you think the government will support through subsidies, regulation, litigation etc. So yeah a solar energy company might be good even if it never produces a product that would be profitable in a free market. Enough subsidies can make any business profitable (at the expense of everyone else).

3. Fiat Currency's article is dead on in my opinion. The author's background is irrelevant if the facts are true. This article illustrates more of the reason why a startup company without an established monopoly or 10 lobbyists in DC is a higher than acceptable risk for most investors.

4.

Given that NO ONE was talking about abolishing the patent system but you...

I wasn't talking about it ,but I am certainly open to the idea or discussion. I can pretty much assure everyone that my motives would not be aligned with Soros on this idea or almost anything. I just have become increasingly convinced that the moral and pragmatic arguments in favor of patents and intellectual property are very weak and questionable upon closer examination.

Sorry for the length...

[c1ue]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

You obviously enjoy being a prick, as it, along with the utter arrogance that you exhibit, seem to come natural to you. Unfortunately for you, your understanding of the world is not nearly as adequate as you seem to believe. But you'll never see that because fear inhibits your ability to listen to people like me, instead, choosing to put me in a box that has been created for you by others.

Whatever I am or am not - it is for others to decide. I certainly don't back away from some wannabe Internet bully who thinks his opinions are better than mine.

The fact remains that you meander all throughout iTulip trying to convince others of some shadowy conspiracy, yet when actual facts are brought up you simply don't have them at your disposal.

I don't actually care about your opinions one way or the other, but I DO care about the ceaseless hijacking of threads to expound your agenda.

If you want to talk about your ideas, then list them out as separate threads for elucidation or discussion.

Trying to squeeze your theories into every conceivable thread is tiresome and detracts whatever message you might have.

[reggie]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

Man up, and step outside the authorized dialectics that are being deliberately framed and propagated by mainstream media, alternative media, academia and a myriad of other sources. That is my message, and it is consistent throughout my posts.

I have posted here previously references to how social reality is constructed, which is primarily through the distribution of frames to a target audience that are then shared by that audience, taking ownership of these frames. Thinking outside these frames, once they are established, is quite difficult for a target audience, for it is what bound audience members together in society. This is compounded when there is little written evidence to support such outside-the-dialectic thinking and exploration, which of course helps to confirm the social reality previously established.

A given social reality is being created right now, emanating from academics and the technology media. What I am saying in this thread is that we should challenge the way this argument is being framed before we engage in the argument, and further, that we should look to the Cui bono of this given dialectic.

Getting bent out of shape at me is nothing more than a Platos Cave reaction. If someone doesn't like what I have to say, or doesn't understand where I'm coming from, then send me a PM or just simply move-on. It's way out of line to expect a forum poster here to tolerate these targeted rants.

[c1ue]

Re: Startups Or Behemoths: Which Are We Going To Bet On?

That is my message, and it is consistent throughout my posts.

Your message is no different than any of the propagandists you purportedly expose:

My Way or the Highway...