Bradley Scott wrote:
>
> At 12:53 AM 21/7/98 -0700, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >On Tue, 21 Jul 1998, donadams wrote:
> >
> >> How can someone be smart enough to create a free energy device
> >> yet be dumb enough to try to bring it to market via conventional
> >> channels instead of giving it freely to the public domain?
> >
> >Nobody said that inventors are any less impervious to GREED than anyone
> >else.
> >
> >> It just doesn't make sense to me... if I ever developed a truly
> >> working device I would send its schematics to millions of people
> >> across the internet so that the powers that be, could never stop it!
> >
> >Riiiiight - ok, you send this schematic to EVERYONE. Now ask yourself:
> >who is going to assemble it? Exactly. Most people will brush it off as a
> >fraud, and refuse to commit the resources to build it -- people want
> >instant total gratification (read: AN ASSEMBLED PRODUCT) that they can use
> >INSTANTLY. That's just basic economics, something you obviously didn't
> >take enough of in high school.
>
> I can see that you really have a good handle on economics yourself! Just
> because energy is free doesn't mean that people will stop producing things.
> Some people actually like it. People will still demand products, but they
> wont be paying the production cost, they'll be paying the demand cost.
> That is, there isn't enough to go around, so those who are prepared to pay
> the most will get the few available. This provides the incentive for more
> people to produce the product, because there is a buck to be made, but this
> drives down the demand cost. The net result, products are produced at
> cost. That is basic economics! That is the competitive market. Ask any
> farmer why they can't make any money and you'll see that it is because
> their are too many of them producing the same product. If production costs
> are zero, things are worthless. Therefore, you end up with a whole lot of
> people doing things because that is what they want to do.
>
> >
> >> To charge for something like this would be like asking people to
> >> pay for their freedom with money...or to charge for the air we breathe,
> >> that is simply wrong...
> >
> >Freedom costs, genius - that's the way things are.
>
> Have you seen the movie "Babe"? "That's just the way things are!"
>
> >
> >Greed, yeah - kinda like people who DEMAND that people release information
> >freely and give nothing in return, right? Yeah. People like that really
> >piss me off. (Take a hint)
> >
> >Again: act yourself. Whoopie, you're a Celtic Scottish Canadian...
> >and I'm a European-mixed-breed Seminole Californian, what's your point?
> >Everyone knows the power of pollution - and whining for everyone to give
> >up their knowledge won't stop this world from going down the drain.
> >
> >It takes a lot of dedication, effort, energy, hard work, and thought to go
> >into creating a working device - and you expect people to just give it up,
> >willing. That's lunacy. That's also socialistic. I hate socialists.
> >
> >Don't take this the wrong way... I'm not trying to be an asshole - but
> >your pleas accomplish nothing. Give something back or be silent.
> >Either way, just PLEASE stop whining for everyone ELSE to solve the
> >world's problems first.
>
> Well, this is really a set of constructive comments. Hopefully this will
> put an end to any philosophical debate on the pros and cons of sharing
> information. (and, Holmer, if you don't realise it, I'm being sarcastic!)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brad
>
> Dr Bradley W. Scott
> Saltbush Software
> Agricultural Business Research Institute
> University of New England, NSW
> Australia, 2350.
>
> Ph: +61 2 6773 5252
> email: brad@saltbush.une.edu.au
>
> Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more
> complex and more violent. It takes a touch of genius
> and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.
>
> -- Albert Einstein
>