[Vo]:Motivators and Innovators ... was: meeting next month with this inventor

2007-10-15 Thread Jones Beene

Michel Jullian wrote:


If someone says they have the secret to an Overunity device, and they want to 
sell it, then you

should ignore any positive gut feelings.  That person is a con artist;


Not necessarily, they could just want to make a profit from a genuine working 
idea couldn't they?


This exchange seems to highlight the fact that there are at least two 
valid perspectives (opposing but legitimate perspectives) towards the 
'intellectual property' surrounding any purported alternative energy 
device, and especially if that device involves new physics (i.e. 
so-called overunity).


Then there are the illegitimate perspectives - the con-artists and 
patent trolls.


On this forum we seem to get an assortment of postings from all four POVs

1) Legitimate, but for profit -
2) Legitimate, but not for profit -
3) Scam artists
4) Patent trolls, or wannabe (lurking) patent trolls

Needless to say, postings and commentary from those few who expect to 
reap financial gain from the input of others are often hollow. More 
often we suspect that type of individual is lurking, collecting, and 
never posting.


Fortunately (from my perspective) this forum tends to attract older 
retired engineers, scientists and inventors who are relatively content 
with their lives and do not have an overriding greed or motivation for 
profit. I think Horace Heffner would be a prototype for that ideal.


I would also like to salute Ron Stiffler for his selflessness in this 
regard, inoffering, and at great personal sacrifice, his decades of 
experience and discoveries. Even if replication does not quickly follow, 
there is much of value in what he has done and presented.


Possibly the 'old farts' like myself realize that, given the normal 
economic cycle and the time it takes getting from idea-to-product, means 
that they would never benefit much anyway from the next big thing even 
if they are instrumental in getting the concept from brain to 
drawing-board. The best gift many of us can bestow on the next 
generation is to freely share experience and insight to make the world a 
better place.


But still we hope and do not expect the scum-bags of the group-4 variety 
(above) to read something here and rush-off to a patent attorney and try 
to claim (steal) the freely-given idea as their own.


I do not have any problem whatsoever with the profit-motivation - our 
whole economy (almost) depends on it. But the thing which makes the 
free-enterprise system work best, by tempering unbridled greed (of the 
Gordon Gekko variety) ...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Gekko

...is the so-called gift economy - where there are active a small 
minority of either wealthy of still-productive and experienced thinkers 
who are willing to freely give, with no expectation of a return - and to 
share either funding or valuable ideas for the greater good. These 
individuals tend to seek out the niche where there is the greatest need 
for help and advancement. Or the greatest injustice from the greed-mongers.


There is little doubt to many of us that the area of greatest need for 
benefiting future society centers around energy ... and furthermore 
that conservation is not enough, and further exploitation of fossil 
fuels will lead to more war, poverty and injustice.


Even if, in our heart-of-hearts, we suspect that mainstream physics is 
mostly correct on all pronouncements regarding cracks in the Laws, we 
still present the outlook that there is a huge missing piece of the 
energy puzzle which the mainstream is missing... even if we do not 
buy-into the full extent of supression nonsense.


I have to laugh and cringe at some of the postings which one sees on 
other forums from individuals (most often not using their real name) 
whose motivation and greed cannot be disguised, or whose gullibility is 
laughable, or whose idealism is so far ahead of their abilities that 
their input is counter-productive.


Jones




Re: [Vo]:Motivators and Innovators ... was: meeting next month with this inventor

2007-10-15 Thread Harry Veeder

Are there any laws against patenting something which has been copy righted
first?

I would imagine that a patent right could be denied or nullified on basis of
a copy right infringement.


Harry

On 15/10/2007 10:16 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


 
 This exchange seems to highlight the fact that there are at least two
 valid perspectives (opposing but legitimate perspectives) towards the
 'intellectual property' surrounding any purported alternative energy
 device, and especially if that device involves new physics (i.e.
 so-called overunity).
 
 Then there are the illegitimate perspectives - the con-artists and
 patent trolls.
 
 On this forum we seem to get an assortment of postings from all four POVs
 
 1) Legitimate, but for profit -
 2) Legitimate, but not for profit -
 3) Scam artists
 4) Patent trolls, or wannabe (lurking) patent trolls
 
 Needless to say, postings and commentary from those few who expect to
 reap financial gain from the input of others are often hollow. More
 often we suspect that type of individual is lurking, collecting, and
 never posting.
 
 Fortunately (from my perspective) this forum tends to attract older
 retired engineers, scientists and inventors who are relatively content
 with their lives and do not have an overriding greed or motivation for
 profit. I think Horace Heffner would be a prototype for that ideal.
 
 I would also like to salute Ron Stiffler for his selflessness in this
 regard, inoffering, and at great personal sacrifice, his decades of
 experience and discoveries. Even if replication does not quickly follow,
 there is much of value in what he has done and presented.
 
 Possibly the 'old farts' like myself realize that, given the normal
 economic cycle and the time it takes getting from idea-to-product, means
 that they would never benefit much anyway from the next big thing even
 if they are instrumental in getting the concept from brain to
 drawing-board. The best gift many of us can bestow on the next
 generation is to freely share experience and insight to make the world a
 better place.
 
 But still we hope and do not expect the scum-bags of the group-4 variety
 (above) to read something here and rush-off to a patent attorney and try
 to claim (steal) the freely-given idea as their own.
 
 I do not have any problem whatsoever with the profit-motivation - our
 whole economy (almost) depends on it. But the thing which makes the
 free-enterprise system work best, by tempering unbridled greed (of the
 Gordon Gekko variety) ...
 
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Gekko
 
 ...is the so-called gift economy - where there are active a small
 minority of either wealthy of still-productive and experienced thinkers
 who are willing to freely give, with no expectation of a return - and to
 share either funding or valuable ideas for the greater good. These
 individuals tend to seek out the niche where there is the greatest need
 for help and advancement. Or the greatest injustice from the greed-mongers.
 
 There is little doubt to many of us that the area of greatest need for
 benefiting future society centers around energy ... and furthermore
 that conservation is not enough, and further exploitation of fossil
 fuels will lead to more war, poverty and injustice.
 
 Even if, in our heart-of-hearts, we suspect that mainstream physics is
 mostly correct on all pronouncements regarding cracks in the Laws, we
 still present the outlook that there is a huge missing piece of the
 energy puzzle which the mainstream is missing... even if we do not
 buy-into the full extent of supression nonsense.
 
 I have to laugh and cringe at some of the postings which one sees on
 other forums from individuals (most often not using their real name)
 whose motivation and greed cannot be disguised, or whose gullibility is
 laughable, or whose idealism is so far ahead of their abilities that
 their input is counter-productive.
 
 Jones
 
 



Re: [Vo]:Motivators and Innovators ... was: meeting next month with this inventor

2007-10-15 Thread R.C.Macaulay


Jones wrote..


There is little doubt to many of us that the area of greatest need for
benefiting future society centers around energy ... and furthermore
that conservation is not enough, and further exploitation of fossil
fuels will lead to more war, poverty and injustice.

Even if, in our heart-of-hearts, we suspect that mainstream physics is
mostly correct on all pronouncements regarding cracks in the Laws, we
still present the outlook that there is a huge missing piece of the
energy puzzle which the mainstream is missing... even if we do not
buy-into the full extent of supression nonsense.


Howdy Jones,
Mainsteam physics will become obsoleted.  Discipline is waning and another 
breed of scientist is emerging with absolutely no respect for the old 
ways. At present, it  may remain difficult to earn that PhD with this new 
posture but the mold has been broken. The reason is that today's youth are 
taught to cast off the past/ existing ways ( Shades of Toffler's book 
Future Shock). They are taught that change is the norm .
This situation is most evident in the corporate CEO culture and manifested 
and encouraged by the innovators like Goldman-Sachs that simply merge 
firms for profit, regardless of the fit. How this new culture of change 
translates within the manufacturing world remains obscure.
Our own small manufacturing companies devote much  time to head scratching 
simply trying to decide what is real or bogus in trends. It takes us an 
average of 14 years to move an industrial product from the time of 
conception to profitability. The chances of this ever happening are near 
zilch-zero. We spend an average of   300k per 1 mil in sales for researching 
new
ideas and products with most ending in failure or obsoleted by competition 
or market trend.
Many believe they can design and produce a quality product if they  had the 
money. Never happens except in rare cases.
Ever notice that huge firms buy out firms that have successfully produced 
an innovative new product. These huge firms DO NOT design and build ( unless 
with gov't military money. This has become another new culture described as 
Boeing the moment).
Study the link for the new energy list. Of these ideas perhaps one or two 
may actually pass the prototype stage.

http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Congress:Top_100_Technologies_--_RD

The good news is there is an interest and desire toward new energy 
advancement. As this momentum continues, there will be a breakthru and then 
an avalanche. There is really no stopping it now.


Richard