-----Original Message-----
From: Technotranscendence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2001 4:47 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Handicapping the 2001 Noble Prize in Economics
...
Of course, there's no need to wait for the Nobel people to do that. You can
always just form another award and hand that out on the criteria you feel
are more relevant.
I believe there are too many awards and too many awards ceremonies. I'm
more interested in the work then the award or the awards process. I guess
they are signaling devices, but some of them seem woefully distorted and I
wonder what they really signal. (The Nobel Prize might be one of the better
ones, in terms of this, BUT look at who gets the peace prize. In the past
decade or so, it looks more like a popularity contest than anything else.)
Cheers!
Daniel Ust
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/
---
Because government violence must be used to protect intellectual property
rights, I have mixed feelings about such protection when "copying" does not
take anything material from the one with the original. Yes, copying reduces
market value, and therefore market rewards for creativity, etc., and if
there were no patents or copyrights, possibly progress would be inhibited.
Still, when my car is stolen, I don't have it. When my idea is copied, I
still do. That's a huge difference, to me.
I can imagine many, many, different and varied awards (ad nauseum?), as an
alternative market reward for the creative innovators, especially those
whose ideas are most frequently copied. It's a pleasant fantasy, as I burn
my own CDs...
Tom Grey
PS sorry about the other post. Send, delete, what's the difference?
