When the constitution of the US was established, it was determined that the free expression and mixing of ideas was good for the society as a whole. In the process of consolidation of power to create a constructive oligarchy, the idea that an individual might gain from the skill he has and that society as a whole would also prosper has become a farce. The method of implementation has been changed to favor those who hold power. If I came up with a new solution, it could be confiscated by the government, it could be held in perpetual litigation, it could simply be stolen and sold. To imagine that the principle that was established is actually being applied is absurd. The only way to circumvent this perversion of the rights of people is to simply release all information without restriction. I can see that this concept is counter to the intent of the industrialists as it makes an end run around their control of technology. They must respond to maintain their power when they see it as a sufficient threat. The way this has been done in the past is to infiltrate and poison the process that monopolists see as dangerous to their goals of personal enrichment. It is difficult for a moral and responsible scientist or person to appreciate the extent of corruption of those in power.
Without the application of a "silver bullet" to the process, it will continue to fester like a disease. It is apparent that scientists and technologists are cracking wise to the fact that every bit of technology is being twisted for the personal gain of a few in power and that any action to further the cause of this despotic practice is counterproductive to people in general and scientists in specific.
There are two ways that the stupidity of the concept is representing itself. One of them is that I keep technology which I know is effective for numerous applications, solely for my personal use and the detriment of the government. I see that it will not lead to a better life for me to share some ideas because they will simply be used to deny the common right to the tools and in the process, even my own personal right to them. The second major way that this influences technology is the fact that there is becoming an elite sub society that spans the borders of nations and seeks to keep the reasonable and rational principle that openness can lead to the benefit of all.
I think it come down to one simple rule. If I have a position of power, and I am so inclined to used that for personal gain to the detriment of all others, then it is a valid tool for power. It does not make any difference if the ultimate result of that process is death of the human race. The reasoning of the individual involved is based solely on their own sense of comfort. Reason has no part in this. I know I have ranted on this basic flaw before and I will continue to do so until I find a tool that neutralizes it. ( An antibody to make an analogy ). It is a systemic sociological flaw and as such must be dealt with in that way. I see that there is no real problem to the separation of resource to be applied with those who are skilled, it is the fact that someone has placed themselves between those who benefit and those who create, to be a "Bill Gate", a non functional element that functions and expands on the application of power in whatever form it exists. It is a widget with no benefit to the process as a whole. A wormhole of personal indulgence that saps the process and drains the result to randomness.
The application of power to be a gateway between any resource and it's use without any additional gain is truly a dunsel and on top of that it is a destructive dunsel.
I suppose I could establish a gang that stood in front of people's houses with a gun and charged them 10$ to use their key. It wouldn't work because you would be interfering with the government's process to do the same exact thing.
0 comments:
Post a Comment