throwaway1592

12 anni fadiscuss

It is starting to feel like Uber is becoming "Aereo" and not in a good way. Eventually you need to yield and follow laws and work through the process. Uber has lots of good potential but my feeling is that in the end Uber will be dead and existing taxis services will just have a Mobile App.

throwaway1592

12 anni fadiscuss

Current spending is at 2.4% and it pays basically to not have dirt roads 7% is slightly is slightly less than China' current spend.

opening the border will provide a cheaper work force that can extend the infrastructure spending further.

the key is we need build goals and more people that are hungry to achieve them.

US has the natural resource to build out what it needed.

500,000,000 correct US population it far to low relative to the size

throwaway1592

12 anni fadiscuss

I read a lot of comments about the "Calculation" It really doesn't matter how you calculate it. China is the number one economy and American is on its way to becoming Japan or worse Greece.

Having a been in China a lot its easy to see why. China is really striving to be number 1. They are setting a goal and accomplishing it. American on the other hand is mired in Bureaucracy and lack of vision for what we want to do. Therefore we can not make progress. When we have goals we accomplish them. What to end foreign dependence on fossil fuels. We are making good progress towards that end.

American needs to think bigger and accomplish hard near term goals. We need to stop saying by year 2030,2040,2050 and think we want to do this in the next 4 years. China as many advantages of US. The things that people say are a disadvantage (Population & Government) are an advantage over the US.

If i was able to be president this would be my stance:

- Immigration.

   - Pay tuition to a 4 year college and graduate. Greencard. Increases intellectual horsepower

   - 3 million Mexicans. Greencard. Increases manpower
 - Energy

   - by 2020 50% of all electric will be generated by non-fossil fuels. 2025 80%.

   - 2025 be the #1 export of oil and coal

 - Budget. balanced by 2020.

 - Military. halved.

 - Education. Spending doubled.

 - Healthcare. free

 - Taxes. flat

 - Infrastructure 7% GDP

What will be the big goals be:

- Moon by 2030 a sustainable colony.

- Mars by 2040 a sustainable colony.

- Mars by 2050 100,000 people

- Population 500,000 by 2040

throwaway1592

12 anni fadiscuss

If they want to be immortalized as a contributor to the common culture, they will have to relinquish control sooner or later.

This doesn't make sense to me. You can allow people to consume your work but not replicate it or consume it for free. The philanthropic nature of the artist is different than his creative ability.

copyright contains ownership, control, consumption, usage. It should be for the creator to determine.

throwaway1592

12 anni fadiscuss

My view is that the damaging is because 1.) people are not experiencing the original. 2.) the voice of the characters is not that of the creator and can not be true to their his intentions. When the allow others to create derivatives works there are always changes but they allowed those changes

throwaway1592

12 anni fadiscuss

I believe the bargain is correct or swayed to the user because people want it for free.

the creator should have the sole right to set the terms of use and transfer the terms. It is his property.

throwaway1592

12 anni fadiscuss

While I applaud aereo's challenging of the law and twist on the law to create something. The outcome is correct! I read every day on hacker news; copyright laws are wrong, too long, not fair... I do not see it the same way. The hacker news community is a community who creates many things themselves; many of the community has chosen the path to give open licenses to their creation. This is their right and thankfully they do it. But. All things are not equal; while i think the giving open licenses to software benefits everyone. I do not see mandating open licenses and wide use of "The Arts" to do the same.

Creation needs to be a struggle. Taking someone else thing and modifying it is an easy path to create something. It also damages the original creation. Software and Art are NOT the same thing. Because software industry has chosen a different path should not mandate everything do the same.

Taking the collection of Marvel comic's characters and Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" and creating a movie would also be cool, but it damages the original. It also by-passes the true meaning of greatness; Original. We as a society have in the last few decades valued bullshit Art over copyright and originality. Why? because it is easy and gives a short amount of pleasure.

Great things to not need marketing. Tolkien does not need marketing. He and his family (example) should be compensated forever. there should be no termination to it and his family should profit from it forever.

We should never take away the rights of the people who create things. If is their choice to give openness to them.