Subject: [TS] ramblings
From: Andrius Kulikauskas (ms@ms.lt)
Date: Thu Mar 16 2000 - 04:23:35 EST
Hi Jack!
Good to "hear your voice".
"First question: who defines "best usage"?... If not, may I suggest that
you
take some time to recall the history of the Soviet Union. Personally, I
would hate to think that the money I earn and spend on a home for my
family
would turn out to be "better used" by, say, some homeless family. Not
that
I lack compassion, but, in my judgement, that wouldn't be the "best use"
of
resources I personally marshal."
I completely agree that you've nailed the big question. But who defines
"ownership"? I'm willing to start by saying that - morally - you
yourself define "best usage". Do unto others as you would have others
do unto you. I think that helps clarify morality and accountability.
Whatever we hate to think, it forces us to think. I wouldn't doubt your
better at spending money than many homeless families, it all depends. I
like the point of view because it doesn't change much, but it doesn't
let us take anything for granted, let us cling to anything.
Hi, Michael!
"The upshot is that TheBrain LLC's patent could kill off or alter the
course of a vital and developing area of software development by small
scale inventors and experimentors. This must be exactly what the patent
filers wished for. What a pitiful and destructive mentality. This is why
I've tried to bring attention to the issue; I think it could be a
"silent killer"."
You can't kill something that's not alive. There has never been a
mainstream tool for organizing thoughts, and there may never be. It all
depends on how our civilization goes. TheBrain is making a tremendous
effort. They have put in a concentrated five year effort - glacial in
Internet time - to get where they are. They have risked tremendous
amounts of money, I imagine much more than what they have gained from
licenses. They have been progressive in very many ways - both in terms
of how they foresee the importance of their product, and the
relationships they build with users, given their very limited resources,
their need to focus.
"Even if it costs the lab the support of TheBrain LLC. For whatever
they've
contributed,"
You're asking our laboratory to shut down - and for me to give up what
I've been working on, and spend a couple of years at a job I don't want
to pay about $35,000 in loans - for a principle that you haven't made
clear to me. And not get to live in Lithuania and find a sweetheart
there and raise a family.
"I am quite dissapointed if Minciu Sodas as a group will not register a
strong complaint with TheBrain LLC."
It wouldn't hurt if you became a member.
Even if you were a member, it's my job to make sure we stay on track.
So for us to organize action as a group, it has to:
a) relate to caring about thinking
b) get things done towards that
"TheBrain LLC now represents a threat to free thinking and expression in
this important area."
In chess, there is an expression - the threat is mightier than the
execution. People get so discombobulated over a threat on a pawn that
they lose touch with the bigger picture.
"Before, I had every reason to wish for the continued success of
Natrificial;
now I have every reason to hope for it's failure."
Minciu Sodas laboratory works for everbody's material success in our
endeavor to create an import/export standard, regardless of how we feel
about them. There is a very real possibility that Microsoft might
become a member. Certainly the Central Intelligence Agency spends a lot
of money on knowledge representation. The Department of Defense has a
lot of money available, too.
I don't have a complete set of rules, and I'm glad you're bringing up
this case because it helps to put them together. We're not going to
turn people away just because we don't like them. We probably will
pursue people we do like. But mostly we're going to have the people who
find us a good forum for work. The strength of our laboratory is that
we attract really great people. Maybe it helps that we have a
threshhold for participation. Maybe it helps that we work hard and have
bold dreams and actually are achieving them.
It also helps that we have people play by our rules. I have a lot of
companies say "public domain - why would we sponsor something in the
public domain?" So you can believe that I value those who do. If
Microsoft wants to support something in the public domain, I am open to
that. If they want to sponsor an investigation that pins them down as
to what they believe, and has us challenge it, I am open to that.
I don't think I'd want to judge people or companies based on what is
outside of my work with them. Maybe that will affect how much effort I
put in to approach them. I am not chasing after money from the Central
Intelligence Agency. If they want to work with me, fine, I will show
them how we have to work. I have experience negotiating with the KGB
and I never had problems because I never listened to threats and I never
compromised. Of course, they kicked me out of the country and
blacklisted me, but things worked out.
Michael, who do you work for? How do you deal with issues of right and
wrong? It would help if you gave some examples.
"The only two kinds of barriers that I can imagine they were hoping
would be
created would be (1) fear engendered by the threat of a patent
infringement
lawsuit, or (2) an actual patent infringement lawsuit. This is poisoning
the
well, the well of thought organization."
I will share my thoughts, which come from a different angle. I think
its normal to believe that Microsoft, the most obvious case, would
destroy a competitor, perhaps unintentionally. NetManage ECCO, to my
understanding, was done in by the inferior Microsoft Outlook being given
away for free with Microsoft Office. In our imperfect world, it seems
understandable that a company making tremendous investments would want
the protection of patents.
"(The patents) issuance creates a significant barrier to entry for
companies
considering developing similar technology and solidifies TheBrain.com's
position as the leading provider of visual information environments."
To my understanding, this is part of a press release. Who was it
intended for? Presumably venture capitalists. Note also that they
stress "visual information environments". That's a different direction
than organizing thoughts. All this shows, to me, is how difficult it is
to work in our world where things have to be bent to make them
attractive to venture capitalists who might not know the true worth. My
personal goal with regard to TheBrain - and with every member - is to
help them value and enjoy what caring about thinking is all about. I'm
trying to focus my energies so that TheBrain succeeds as a tool for
organizing thoughts. The import/export standard is vital for this.
With regards to the reach of the patent, I think it helps to know that
TheBrain is the invention of a really young man, Harlan Hugh, perhaps in
many ways similar to Ben Darnell. Harlan was very bold - and inventive
- in developing TheBrain, and his boldness is very fresh. Of course, we
want to support that. This young man is asked to honestly write down
what he accomplished so that they wouldn't become one more victim of the
impressively powerful Microsoft. He did this, perhaps enthusiastically,
in the spirit of a true discoverer. Certainly, TheBrain is grandiose.
Lo and behold, the patent office issued the patent. I don't know the
facts of patent law or even this case. My job is to make sure we have a
good attitude. All we know is that TheBrain has some trump cards. What
they are going to do with them, I don't know, nor what they're really
worth. So long as we're all working productively, I'm fine with it.
I think a more serious analogy would be the United States with 10,000
nuclear weapons. That's quite a trump card. There's a lot of good
reasons to disarm those weapons. There's some prudence in not disarming
them. We're certainly happy Lithuania or most any other country doesn't
have them. I think that countries which view the nuclear weapons of the
United States as a threat aren't going to get very far. They'll make a
lot more progress focusing on positive directions, some of which the
United States is overlooking. The real question is, what are we going
to focus on in life. I think if the people in this world focus on the
real needs, then the weapons will become more and more irrelevant.
That's why our laboratory's mission is to connect people from all over
the world, get them into the loop. That's why I'm crossing the border
to Tijuana, Mexico to find people who care about thinking.
If somebody is intimidated by TheBrain, I'm very willing to help. Step
up!
Andrius
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Offer-Earn 300 Points from MyPoints.com for trying @Backup
Get automatic protection and access to your important computer files.
Install today:
http://click.egroups.com/1/2344/3/_/6321/_/953198462/
-- Create a poll/survey for your group!
-- http://www.egroups.com/vote?listname=thoughtstream&m=1
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Aug 30 2000 - 22:01:01 EDT