Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 142 posts

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#11

Post by jessaustin »

...Chematica’s database is currently posted on a password protected website on the dark web. During his talk at HOPE this year, Laufer implored the audience to help with cracking the password and releasing the data into the world.

They're talking about an encrypted file, right? If Merck just had this posted on "the dark web", constantly hammering them with bad passwords would probably clue them in. Incidentally, which did Merck value more, the database or the opportunity to keep it away from this group?

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#12

Post by darawk »

> Indeed, Laufer and his collaborators can’t stop pissing off powerful people because Four Thieves is living proof that effective medicines can be developed on a budget outside of institutional channels.

Synthesized. Not developed. Synthesizing medicines is easy. Developing them is extremely difficult.

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#14

Post by lovich »

1996 wrote: post #8
lovich wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how that's a pro capitalist argument. Your not getting rid of a monopoly on the IP, you are compelling people to give up there property to prevent a worse evil

You asked before that I clarify my arguments. If the recipe is so secret, do not patent it. Some companies forgo patents for that reason. Here nobody is compelling anyone. My anti patent point just means not letting the government enforce IP rights. In case like these, it is not just ideology - it is morally wrong as explained in the quote.

I am fairly against IP laws as well without being capitalist. My point was that the argument in the quote, "If you accept that axiomatically, then by the same logic when you withhold access to lifesaving medication that's murder. From a moral standpoint it's an imperative to enact theft to prevent murder.” was not a capitalist argument itself.

Forcing people to give up property that was legally acquired, to avoid a worse evil, seems more socialist than anything else to me

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#15

Post by mertd »

monochromatic wrote: post #9

> After a few minutes of gloating about pharma bro Martin Shkreli “rotting at Fort Dix” for raising the price of Daraprim Except that’s totally unrelated to why he’s in prison.

He went due to securities fraud but one could argue that, if it weren't due to the drug price thing, he could have flown under the radar, since the investors didn't lose any money.

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#16

Post by darawk »

> “The rhetoric that is espoused by people who defend intellectual property law is that this is theft,” Laufer told me. “If you accept that axiomatically, then by the same logic when you withhold access to lifesaving medication that's murder. From a moral standpoint it's an imperative to enact theft to prevent murder.”

If it's murder to apply intellectual property law and withhold drugs...what do we call the untold number of deaths that will result in the absence of a profit motive for developing new medicines? Is that murder?

The views of these people are childish and dangerous. I love their spirit, but their actual message here is just stupid and illiterate of basic economics.

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#17

Post by klipt »

darawk wrote: post #12

> Indeed, Laufer and his collaborators can’t stop pissing off powerful people because Four Thieves is living proof that effective medicines can be developed on a budget outside of institutional channels. Synthesized. Not developed. Synthesizing medicines is easy. Developing them is extremely difficult.

I can "render" a movie onto my harddrive from bittorrent in minutes. I don't know why Pixar has to spend so much time on their rendering! /s

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#18

Post by blhack »

darawk wrote: post #16

> “The rhetoric that is espoused by people who defend intellectual property law is that this is theft,” Laufer told me. “If you accept that axiomatically, then by the same logic when you withhold access to lifesaving medication that's murder. From a moral standpoint it's an imperative to enact theft to prevent murder.” If it's murder to apply intellectual property law and withhold drugs...what do we call the untold n…

Well if we could just rich people to find their projects.

/s

Re: The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective

#20

Post by darawk »

blhack wrote: post #18
darawk wrote: post #16

> “The rhetoric that is espoused by people who defend intellectual property law is that this is theft,” Laufer told me. “If you accept that axiomatically, then by the same logic when you withhold access to lifesaving medication that's murder. From a moral standpoint it's an imperative to enact theft to prevent murder.” If it's murder to apply intellectual property law and withhold drugs...what do we call the untold n…

Well if we could just rich people to find their projects. /s

Ok. Let's imagine a world where he achieves his dream. We've democratized access to molecular synthesis with no quality issues. Anyone, anywhere can safely and effectively produce any medicine of their choosing, without regard for IP laws.

Now what? Well, on the one hand, everyone on earth will have cheap, timely access to every medicine that currently exists. That's pretty awesome. On the other hand, who's going to fund the development of new medicines? I'm certainly not going to invest in it, are you?

Post reply on HN