None of those motivations you listed actually need IP to be abolished though.
If you're trying to differentiate yourself from the competitors, having IP protection is jn your favor. The large corporation you're competing with can't just swoop in and destroy you by making an identical product at a such a loss of profit until you run out of money.
If you're fueled by creating open source knowledge, well you can already do that. You can choose to release your IP into the world for anyone to use unrestricted.
And for a sense of community, well that's just the second point again. Abolishing IP was never going to make you feel community with Amazon. But having IP isn't preventing you from having community with individuals. You can still work on a project together without abandoning the idea of IP ownership.
If you use a definition that includes anything like "liked and admired" then she doesn't fit. Her service is busy but as this thread shows, most people openly state they only go to her because they have no other choice for these cracks.
Using popular hides how many people actively want to jump ship if only there was competition. It's like saying that Comcast is popular because they have so many customers who don't have a viable alternative to using them.
Even assuming they're mostly spam, you still need to listen to them in order to sort out which messages are legitimate.
I understand being annoyed by the task, but this is a job that's justifiable. It's not some petty make work bullshit (unless these messages have been collecting for months, then they can probably be safely ignored). Either way, it doesn't seem worthwhile to try and get all petty revenge about the situation.
That explains why when you're alone by the fire, but it doesn't explain why there's always one unlucky bastard when it's a large group. There's plenty of bodies so it's not just air pressure pulling the smoke. It's fate that someone must be the sacrificial smoked lamb.
So real world money that I can't actually take into the real world. This just feels like calling they're premium currency dollars and pretending it's not locked into their system.
I will not ask my fellow lemmy community members to blindly trust me on this.
This is the primary thing you are asking people to do. Literally everything else you said hinges on people blindly trusting you.
I understand wanting to protect your sources. But you're taking it to the other extreme by providing literally nothing except unprovable claims. Give us something, anything, even an easily faked email or pm. Just anything that requires even the slightest bit of effort beyond just typing up straight lies.
Exactly. You're unlikely to spend a significant percentage of the total cost on your third party inspection. But that third party inspection will give you information worth way more than they cost. Either the peace of mind that you're paying a fair price (and doing so fully aware of the issues that you may need to resolve), or encouraging you to negotiate lower/walk away. In all 3 situations you end up leaving the deal more confident that you made the best choice, and usually the inspector earns that money.
Shit, I did more due diligence than she was planning when I bought my $2300 motorcycle. And all I did was bring a knowledgeable friend.
If you are spending any amount that you couldn't comfortably survive losing entirely, make sure you bring in your own expert. Now obviously their level of expertise can vary based on value (I'll stake 2.5 thousand on my friends word, I wouldn't stake 100+ thousand without a licensed professional). But unless you're willing to call yourself knowledgeable enough, always have a second opinion.
And for bonus points, knowledgeable or not, that second opinion is uninvested emotionally. I fell in love with my bike as soon as I heard it fire up, same with my car. But in both cases, I brought someone knowledgeable who didn't give a fuck if I bought that vehicle. They were able to confirm if I was getting a fair deal without emotion clouding their judgements.
And neither of those cases were risking 6 digits worth of money. Nowhere near the price or due diligence of a house.
But you did go on to compare this situation to the war on VCRs. Which I think is a poor comparison. You gave your opinion, so I gave mine. That's kind of how this works here for everyone, not just for you.
By the sounds of it all they brought to it was the name and maybe some technical knowhow. Because everything else about their business seems to have been abandoned. The only way to get further off from "we'll make electric conversions with preexisting parts" is to abandon electric cars as a whole.
He may not deserve all of the credit, but it sounds like he deserves something north of 90% of it.
Then you thought wrong. The vast majority of the time notarized signatures are unnecessary. Adding that as a base requirement of all legal contracts is a terrible idea. Did you get a notarized signature last time you bought or sold your car (either with a dealership or privately). Because if not then you already failed to meet that standard.
I agree that letting things get so casual as to start "signing" by text is a bad thing. Handshake agreements are things you do with your neighbors, not with large businesses. But requiring a notary for every contract is going too far in the other direction.
The problem is that he had set the precedent. If you have the clear precedent that the text is only acknowledging that the contract is ready for you to look over then the judge would've likely ruled the other way.
If you're diligent that you always properly actually sign the contracts, that you're never giving final confirmation by way of a one word text. Then it's unlikely you'd get legally binding in this situation.
Besides, in this case the farmer was definitely in the wrong. He was trying to pull a sneaky because the cash price was over double the contract price at time of delivery. It wouldn't be any different if he had properly signed the contract except that he couldn't try the "but I never actually signed it" excuse.
He should've just ate the contract cancelation fee if he wanted to ride the crazy price. Plenty of other people did just that and there was minimal legal shenanigans involved.
awsamation @ awsamation @kbin.social Posts 0Comments 36Joined 2 yr. ago
None of those motivations you listed actually need IP to be abolished though.
If you're trying to differentiate yourself from the competitors, having IP protection is jn your favor. The large corporation you're competing with can't just swoop in and destroy you by making an identical product at a such a loss of profit until you run out of money.
If you're fueled by creating open source knowledge, well you can already do that. You can choose to release your IP into the world for anyone to use unrestricted.
And for a sense of community, well that's just the second point again. Abolishing IP was never going to make you feel community with Amazon. But having IP isn't preventing you from having community with individuals. You can still work on a project together without abandoning the idea of IP ownership.