US patent office rules that artificial intelligence cannot be a legal inventor • Hacker News Board

Re: US patent office rules that artificial intelligence cannot be a legal inventor

#71

Post by greiskul » Sat, May 02, 2020, 5:56 PM UTC

jl6 wrote: post #39

gnulinux wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I simply don't understand how we managed to justify this patent and intellectual property mess in the capitalist system. Capitalism is all about competition and the right to choose the better product, whereas the current system encourages monopoly. I don't understand.

The big Isms don’t exist in the real world - every country is a mixed economy to a greater or lesser degree. IP is a bargain between state and author. The state agrees to let the author charge rent on their IP for a limited period of time, thus incentivizing the creation of that IP. In return, the public gets to enjoy that IP’s existence - and eventually enjoy it for free. How long should the limit be? Here lies the…

But copyright is not 5 years right now, it's 70 years after the death of the creator. You say the longer the period, the greater the incentive to invest, but there are definitely diminishing returns there. Does anyone actually believe we would have greater investment if it was 80 years? Or 90 years? Maybe it should be 300 years, for all those companies looking for investments that take centuries to be realized. And look at all amazing work that has been produced based on public domain works, the Disney movie empire was basically created on it. I think we can pretty much say that yes, reduced copyright terms would increase the types of movies that we see.

Re: US patent office rules that artificial intelligence cannot be a legal inventor

#72

Post by tsimionescu » Wed, May 06, 2020, 8:24 AM UTC

pnw_hazor wrote: post #57

chance_state wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IP norms are a small reason among many related reasons why China will outgrow US/EU/Japan. In China, everything is for the collective, the nation, the 100-year plan. In the West everything is for the self. We're happy to tear each other apart for the chance at getting some individual gains. I think it's pretty clear which of these cultures wins out in the long term.

Its only about 45 years since the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976). Before that it was the Communist Revolution (1946-1949). Before that there were other cultural and political upheavals where the victors re-wrote history and changed the culture of China. So at least to me it is not clear what Chinese culture will look like in 50 years let alone a 100.

I think predicting any kind of social behavior 50 years in advance is well beyond any scientific method at the moment.

Before those two revolutions that you mention, and even in spite of them in some areas, China has also had remarkable stability for hundreds if not thousands of years. Are these revolutions just blips? Are they a new pattern?

And for that matter, are the Maoist and current regime that different for the common people of China from the Imperial regime before them? Or are these revolutions more just changes in window-dressing and in the upper echelons, like the Mongol conquest before them?

Re: US patent office rules that artificial intelligence cannot be a legal inventor

#73

Post by tsimionescu » Wed, May 06, 2020, 8:34 AM UTC

gnulinux wrote: post #22

fermienrico wrote: post #17

Patents should be eradicated from this planet. China will outgrow US/EU/Japan because they have little enforcement for these things and execution matters, not ideas.

I simply don't understand how we managed to justify this patent and intellectual property mess in the capitalist system. Capitalism is all about competition and the right to choose the better product, whereas the current system encourages monopoly. I don't understand.

There is no idealism at the upper level. Capitalism-in-practice is about a single concern: each individual trying to maximize their own wealth. This is especially true for corporate entities, which have a particular kind of single-mindedness, by virtue of not being physical people.

Given that observation, it is natural to expect that anything which can maximize the wealth of the most powerful individuals will be adopted into law (since by definition the most powerful are the ones that can influence law making the most). So you have patent laws, you have propaganda and laws against the threat of global warming, you have propaganda and laws against protections from Covid19 etc.

Coincidentally, capitalism-in-practice abhors competition. "Competition is for losers" as the old adage goes - the winners are the ones who have no competition at all. Corporations will generally go out of their way to avoid competing directly with other corporations, as that is usually perceived as a race to the bottom for profits and prices. It is often preferred to find separate niches or expand the market rather than going for direct competition, unless one corporation feels like they have a good chance of monopolizing a particular market after they start competing.

Re: US patent office rules that artificial intelligence cannot be a legal inventor

#74

Post by pnw_hazor » Fri, May 08, 2020, 5:50 AM UTC

tsimionescu wrote: post #72

pnw_hazor wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its only about 45 years since the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976). Before that it was the Communist Revolution (1946-1949). Before that there were other cultural and political upheavals where the victors re-wrote history and changed the culture of China. So at least to me it is not clear what Chinese culture will look like in 50 years let alone a 100.

I think predicting any kind of social behavior 50 years in advance is well beyond any scientific method at the moment. Before those two revolutions that you mention, and even in spite of them in some areas, China has also had remarkable stability for hundreds if not thousands of years. Are these revolutions just blips? Are they a new pattern? And for that matter, are the Maoist and current regime that different for t…

Certainly some common threads seem to remain from ancient China, perhaps the same could be said for many places.

I don't how many threads it takes to suggest that a culture has been sustained over time.

Though I think I was thinking more in terms of political culture in terms of the long term durability of the authoritarian CCP vs. the liberal West.