51–60 of 66 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't natural biology... it's engineered biology. That's a big difference.
Then they should engineer it to be seedless too so they don't have this problem. I really can't believe we're living in a society where a corporation can successfully use the courts to make natural reproduction illegal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you kidding? There have been a number of studies on hive collapse, organ failure and other problems that appear to implicate Monsanto that have been widely discussed on HN. To be clear I'm not saying that any one of these studies absolutely conclusively points a finger of blame on Monsanto - I'm saying that there is enough suspicion of harm that saying we hate them just because they are incorporated is an even mo…
Organ failure from Roundup-Ready soy?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Organ failure from Roundup-Ready soy?
Claiming people hate Monsanto just because they're a corporation?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Claiming people hate Monsanto just because they're a corporation?
Non sequitur. I asked for you to expand on the "unprecedented harm" caused by Monsanto, and you gave me "organ failure". I asked a question about that claim, and you dodged it. Want to try again?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Non sequitur. I asked for you to expand on the "unprecedented harm" caused by Monsanto, and you gave me "organ failure". I asked a question about that claim, and you dodged it. Want to try again?
You asked me to expand on "unprecedented harm" in the context of reasons people hate Monsanto, and I gave you the 2 reasons I hear most often from people who hate Monsanto: hive collapse, organ failure, both of which I originally heard about on HN. Google either one and you'll see that these are exactly what I said they are: widely suspected as being caused by Monsanto GMO. The former, I'll agree, has practically bee…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look I'm no proponent of Monsanto, but they do have a point here. Roundup will kill all non-monsanto plants; they change the formula every year to make sure that you have to keep buying seeds. In this case, the farmer grabbed a ton of seeds, sprayed everything with roundup and kept only the seeds which survived; the seeds he knew to be from Monsanto. I don't like the idea that Monsanto can go to your farm and throw s…
Oh I'm sure I am probably in the legal wrong. I think that if cable companies broadcast encrypted signals in through my house, I should legally be able to decrypt them. (But I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to do that.) I think that if I find a scanner for cell phone conversations and find cell phone conversations that are unencrypted, I should legally be able to listen to them. (But I am pretty sure it is cu…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh I'm sure I am probably in the legal wrong. I think that if cable companies broadcast encrypted signals in through my house, I should legally be able to decrypt them. (But I am pretty sure it is currently illegal to do that.) I think that if I find a scanner for cell phone conversations and find cell phone conversations that are unencrypted, I should legally be able to listen to them. (But I am pretty sure it is cu…
You think it should be legal to steal people's phones and break them apart? Why?! Isn't that the "Finders Keepers Losers Weepers" doctrine?
I didn't say "steal" anyone's phones.
And I didn't say it was ethical behavior.
But yes, I think if you lose your trade secrets, your product, whether it's a phone or whether it's the formula for Coca Cola, or KFC, then yes it's lost, and it's your fault.
"If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because man, they're gone"
I don't really see too many laws enacted to ensure the stuff I lose gets back to me, and so because of that I don't understand why there are laws to protect an enormous corporation's property in ways that my property is not protected.
If you can convince me my own personal property is protected in the same manner, I will be happy to change my mind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You think it should be legal to steal people's phones and break them apart? Why?! Isn't that the "Finders Keepers Losers Weepers" doctrine?
I said lose, not steal. I didn't say "steal" anyone's phones. And I didn't say it was ethical behavior. But yes, I think if you lose your trade secrets, your product, whether it's a phone or whether it's the formula for Coca Cola, or KFC, then yes it's lost, and it's your fault. "If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because man, they're gone" I don't really see too many laws enacted to…
It is illegal to take things that other people use and appropriate them for yourself. If someone finds your phone on the street, they need to try to return it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I said lose, not steal. I didn't say "steal" anyone's phones. And I didn't say it was ethical behavior. But yes, I think if you lose your trade secrets, your product, whether it's a phone or whether it's the formula for Coca Cola, or KFC, then yes it's lost, and it's your fault. "If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because man, they're gone" I don't really see too many laws enacted to…
Picking up someone's phone that they left at a bar and doing a teardown on it is theft. Not in a "I think this is equivalent to theft" sense; it is theft in the legal "you can be charged with theft for doing it" sense. It is illegal to take things that other people use and appropriate them for yourself. If someone finds your phone on the street, they need to try to return it.
I know this because I know this is what happened to Gawker.
It is illegal to take things that other people use and appropriate them for yourself. If someone finds your phone on the street, they need to try to return it.
I don't know this. That's what I've been saying. Can you point to laws that succinctly state that? Can you point to stories of law enforcement actually investigating such losses?
You might be right, but I've never encountered anyone saying that they lost something and the law helped them get it back. With the exception of money I've never encountered anything in any class growing up detailing what the citizen's duty was when finding a lost article. And even with money, it's pretty clear the responsibilities of the authorities differ from location to location and much of it is on the order of "turn it in, if no one comes for it within 30 days, it's yours".
Is there law that states that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Picking up someone's phone that they left at a bar and doing a teardown on it is theft. Not in a "I think this is equivalent to theft" sense; it is theft in the legal "you can be charged with theft for doing it" sense. It is illegal to take things that other people use and appropriate them for yourself. If someone finds your phone on the street, they need to try to return it.
Picking up someone's phone that they left at a bar and doing a teardown on it is theft. Not in a "I think this is equivalent to theft" sense; it is theft in the legal "you can be charged with theft for doing it" sense. I know this because I know this is what happened to Gawker. It is illegal to take things that other people use and appropriate them for yourself. If someone finds your phone on the street, they need to…
705.102 Reporting lost or abandoned property.— (1) Whenever any person finds any lost or abandoned property, such person shall report the description and location of the property to a law enforcement officer. ... (3) It is unlawful for any person who finds any lost or abandoned property to appropriate the same to his or her own use or to refuse to deliver the same when required. (4) Any person who unlawfully appropriates such lost or abandoned property to his or her own use or refuses to deliver such property when required commits theft as defined in s. 812.014, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.*
Similar laws are on the books in many US jurisdictions. It is actually quite common to bring police into these matters. (P.S. You might reasonably think of e.g. an envelope with one paycheck worth of money as the upper bound on property likely to be found abandoned, but a lot of the legal cases for this sort of thing involve cash hordes or doing things like abandoning e.g. a building or very valuable capital machinery.)
There's a locally famous case in my neck of Japan where a construction company, hired to break ground on a new building, discovered approximately $300,000 in cash buried in a tin can. It actually went before a magistrate, quite unusually for Japan, because it was very unclear who owned the money. The ruling was that the construction company received 25% (for having legal control of the work site) and the workers received 75% (for having actually found the money), while the land owner received 0%, because they had "no cognizable interest in property which they were unaware existed", and the (unknown) owner of the property had forfeited any interest in it by abandoning it in circumstances where they could not reasonably have precluded others from accessing it.
The court might have been smiling as it said that, particularly to the land owner, because the "Everybody knows it and nobody is saying it" conclusion was that the only reason somebody buries $300k and refuses to acknowledge it when it is unearthed is because the money is dirty. (The rumor was "untaxed proceeds of mob operations.")