Ok jed, l have learnt you have a believe in patents, which I do not. Otherwise I think you and I have similar views. I could say, because of age , it does not matter to me, what LENR is or is not (as Sheakspear said I do not say that it does not matter. As you said: ( my version) there are more things to life than money and greed. I am a believer in that people are basically nice and have morals. LENR would solve a problem we soon will have major issues and probably war over. That is what is important.
However,I am also an engineer (at least from an educational viewpoint ) and wouldn't it be great to design a commersial LENR. For the fame, for the money and all other human weaknesses. :) My point is that Darden like most others have more than one view of things and they are in no way in conflict. Blaze, it is not a percentage game. I think Rossi has something doing better than COP=1. If that is wrong then it is not much to talk about but the snow that fell last year. If that is true, then we should support the e-cat project. Do our best to help make it commersially viable. I am sure any contributer will be well rewarded. Maybe not monetary, maybe Axil, Mills or Storms has a nobel prize comming. Nobody will worry about the percentage - regardless of the outcome. . On Oct 21, 2014 5:23 PM, "Jed Rothwell" <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > I do not understand why the heading keeps going out of synch. It must be > the apostrophe. > > Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> ahaha, ok buddy. Unfortunately your brilliant analysis falls to the >> next sentence: "I just want to see it happen" >> > > Ahhaha yourself. Again, you seem to have a grade-school appreciation of > business strategy. > > Let me put it this way. Imagine you are Al Shugart, it is 1980, and you > have maybe 10% of the IP need for a personal computer. That is to say, you > have good hard disks. You yourself cannot make a personal computer, because > you do have the full range of skills or the capital. But it is very much in > your interest to see Apple and IBM make them. You just want to see that > happen. Even though IBM will make a lot more money from this than Shugart > himself makes, it is still in his interest. > > It is reasonable to assume that even if someone else beats Darden to the > market, Darden will have some IP that can enhance the technology and bring > him a lot of profit. Even if someone else gets a larger share. > > Furthermore, Darden is not just a capitalist. He is also a human being > here on earth, with a family and friends, and a community. He knows that we > face energy shortages, catastrophic global warming and many other problems > that cold fusion will solve. He is not looking at this only in terms of his > own narrow interests, but also in terms of what it will mean for his > future, and his children's future, and everyone's future. So am I. I have > sacrificed a great deal of money and effort for cold fusion, with no > likelihood of getting any of it back. This is philanthropic. It is > altruistic. > > People often do things for the greater benefit of society. For example, in > WWII, 292,000 Americans sacrificed their lives for the benefit of the > nation, and also to benefit Europeans and ultimately Germans and Japanese > people. I suppose you will say, "hahaha, they were suckers" or "no, they > did not want to sacrifice anything; they were forced into it." You > apparently believe that no one does anything for any reason other than > greed or personal benefit -- or at least, no capitalist does. You are > probably young. I suppose you do not know what it felt like in 1950s and > 60s, when the spirit of public service was still strong, and nearly every > middle aged man had willingly stepped up even at the risk of his life, for > the greater good. Money meant much less back then. It still means less to > those of us who experienced that, even second-hand. > > When my grandfather's generation sent their sons to war, I assure you they > would have gladly spent every dollar they had if only it could ensure the > safe return of their children. Money meant absolutely nothing in that > context. The war cost fantastic sums, and taxes were raised to 90%, but no > one complained. As one of top planners put it: we figured people wanted the > husbands and sons to come back alive way more than they wanted to save > money and fight the war on the cheap. > > Darden, and I, both know that if the energy crisis is not solved, and > severe global warming ensues, money will eventually be worth nothing. > Wealth will mean nothing. People rich and poor will suffer, and > civilization itself may be set back or destroyed. That is way more > important than near term profit. I know -- I know -- you don't believe it. > You don't think we actually feel that way. Because you have the vision & > experience of a self-centered second grader. Us grownups have an sense or > responsibility, and we do things for our children, not just for ourselves. > > - Jed > >
