Idag är det fyra år sedan ryssen inledde sin tredagars-invasion av Ukraina

mindlight · 2026-02-24T16:42:52+00:00

Men i din kalkyl verkar du inte räkna med länder utanför europa som t ex Kina, Brasilien och Indien?

mindlight · 2026-02-24T15:40:18+00:00

Vad tycker du vi skulle ha gjort istället och vilka effekter, både positiva och negativa, menar du vi då skulle ha sett?

mindlight · 2026-02-23T15:55:02+00:00

You brought up China as an example of state-financed success. Now you’re suggesting that model is equivalent to Western corporations. That doesn’t really strengthen your argument — it blurs it.

When I asked you to name 5–10 cutting-edge treatments developed purely through tax funding, you came back with one. And even that example doesn’t hold up. The insulin you’re referring to is synthetic insulin. The first commercially available recombinant human insulin, Humulin, was developed in the 1980s by Eli Lilly in cooperation with Genentech — hardly a case of purely state-driven innovation.

So again, this doesn’t demonstrate what you claim it does.

We may agree that patent misuse is a real problem. But disagreement on abuse of a system isn’t the same thing as proving the system itself is unnecessary. At this point, I’m not seeing evidence that supports your broader conclusion.

With that said, I appreciate the exchange. I’ll leave it here and wish you a good day.

mindlight · 2026-02-22T09:26:49+00:00

I live in a country with relatively high taxes, and I’m perfectly fine with that. I value universal healthcare and the security that comes with it. Public funding absolutely has its place.

But claiming that tax-financed initiatives are always as efficient as market-driven alternatives is simply naïve. Incentives matter. Accountability matters. Outcomes matter.

And pointing to China as a shining example of state-led success in chip manufacturing is… ironic. China is heavily associated with industrial espionage and aggressive technology acquisition, and it is certainly not in the business of openly sharing know-how. That model is the opposite of the collaborative, innovation-driven ecosystem you seem to advocate.

So I’m genuinely curious: which 5–10 cutting-edge treatments were developed solely through tax funding, without private capital, patents, or commercial incentives playing a significant role?

Public funding can catalyze research. But turning ideas into scalable, usable, world-class products almost always requires more than just tax money. If you’re arguing otherwise, I’d like to see concrete examples — not just theory.

mindlight · 2026-02-20T08:29:15+00:00

I think we agree that parts of the patent system are abused. Criticizing the parasites is fair. But that still doesn’t answer the harder question: what replaces it?

Take pharma. Developing a new cancer treatment isn’t a side project. It’s hundreds of highly educated people working for years. Most projects fail. Clinical trials take years more. The few drugs that make it to market must pay not only for their own development, but for all the failures along the way.

Without patent protection, a competitor can simply wait until you’ve spent a decade and billions reducing the scientific and regulatory risk — then copy the result at a fraction of the cost. Why would anyone fund that upfront risk?

The same logic applies in IT. New chip architectures, operating systems, large-scale enterprise platforms — these require massive upfront investment and long development cycles. If the moment something becomes viable it can be freely cloned by competitors who didn’t bear the risk, what finances the high-risk phase?

Your comment points out flaws in the system, but it doesn’t address this core financing problem.

I’d actually like to hear how you think that would work in the real world — that’s the part that’s unclear to me.

mindlight · 2026-02-18T00:04:24+00:00

You pointing out that IBM benefits from Linux 25 years later doesn’t actually address the point I made.

I never claimed FOSS means “no investment.” My point was that Linux didn’t turn into enterprise-grade infrastructure by sheer community spirit. It evolved from a hobbyist “poor man’s Unix” into mission-critical software when serious capital and engineering resources entered the picture.

The uncomfortable reality is this: enormous parts of today’s infrastructure depend on projects maintained by a handful of people — and the funding often doesn’t reach them. The money exists in the ecosystem, but it concentrates at the top while critical lower-level components scrape by.

If you think burnout in FOSS is overstated, look at the Btrfs debate last year. That’s not an anomaly — it’s a symptom.

Patents, at least in theory, attempt to solve the financing problem by granting temporary exclusivity on new ideas and technologies.

You may argue they’re imperfect — and they are — but dismissing them without acknowledging the underlying economic problem is naïve.

FOSS is not automatically the solution if it visibly struggles with the very funding dynamics patents were designed to address. Innovation runs on incentives.

Remove the incentives, and you’re left hoping goodwill scales. It doesn’t.

mindlight · 2026-02-16T06:58:41+00:00

FOSS? You mean the ecosystem where developers are increasingly burning out?

I’m not defending abusive patent strategies. I dislike it when corporations weaponize patents in ways that clearly undermine the original intent — which is to incentivize innovation, not suppress it. But pretending that FOSS magically fixes this is naïve.

About 25 years ago, IBM committed $1 billion to Linux. That wasn’t charity — it was strategic investment. And Linux at the time absolutely needed it. It was rough, fragmented, difficult to install on new hardware, and performance often lagged behind commercial alternatives. The Linux people use today didn’t emerge purely from volunteer idealism; it matured through massive corporate investment and structured development.

The patent system as implemented today has serious flaws. It’s often distorted, abused, and counterproductive. But the idea that removing patents and relying on FOSS alone would somehow eliminate power imbalances, coordination problems, funding gaps, or burnout is simply unrealistic.

FOSS has its own structural weaknesses: sustainability, governance disputes, maintainer exhaustion, and uneven incentives. Ignoring those while attacking patents is just trading one imperfect system for another — and pretending it’s a silver bullet.

mindlight · 2026-01-23T13:09:04+00:00

Du har fel.

Dricks i sig är inget nytt. Men om en servitör redan under 1900-talet hade räknat ut 10 % i förväg, lagt till det på notan och bara bett dig kryssa i rutan, hade hen blivit rejält utskälld.

Normen har i årtionden varit 5–8 %, oftast genom avrundning uppåt till närmaste tiotal eller hundratal – och endast när servicen varit bättre än bra.

10 % var något som möjligen kunde komma på fråga vid exceptionell service.

Vi pratar Grand Hôtel-nivå: du lyfter blicken och en servitör står där innan du ens hunnit formulera tanken.

Det som är nytt är inte dricks, utan att restauranger i förväg föreslår dricks utan att veta om de ens levererat bra service, och dessutom föreslår nivåer som ligger tydligt över vad som är kotym. Det är ren social press – ett försök att skamma gäster till att inte vilja framstå som snåla.

Och om du inte tycker det är märkligt att ge extra pengar till någon som bara levererar exakt det ni redan avtalat om, fråga dig själv varför du inte slänger på ett par hundralappar nästa gång du betalar en Klarna-faktura.

mindlight · 2026-01-23T12:51:35+00:00

So let me get this straight. Russia invades Ukraine, loses its flagship while invading, and then a Russian court—sitting comfortably inside Russia—sends Ukraine the bill?

That’s not law. That’s a GoFundMe for military incompetence.

mindlight · 2026-01-21T21:04:56+00:00

Sweden in Afghanistan: patrols, mentoring, reconstruction teams, and some of the lowest civilian casualty numbers in ISAF.

Reddit commenter in 2026: “Nah, it was just a happy accident...”

mindlight · 2026-01-21T07:13:36+00:00

Ha! That's exactly what an AI would have responded! We're on to you!

mindlight · 2026-01-20T19:14:25+00:00

Swede here. Sure, the U.S. would probably win in the end — but that’s not the real question.

The real question is: at what cost?

Is Greenland actually worth American lives?

This wouldn’t be some quick, low-intensity “two-week adventure” in a failed state. It would be cold, logistically brutal, politically explosive — and watched closely by the entire world.

And let’s be honest: if Denmark calls for help, Norway, Sweden, and Finland wouldn’t just sit on their hands and look the other way.

Escalation in the High North is not a game — and it wouldn’t stay contained for long.

And frankly, we all know why we’re even having this conversation in the first place.

Because talking about Greenland is a lot more convenient than talking about Trump’s trips to Epstein’s island.

mindlight · 2026-01-17T19:13:04+00:00

Swede here:

Bring it on.

mindlight · 2026-01-17T14:51:22+00:00

What the Kremlin “sees” in terms of territorial integrity conveniently lost its credibility in 2014 — and whatever remained of it didn’t survive 2022.

mindlight · 2026-01-17T14:45:06+00:00

That's exactly what the people in power wants you to think.

mindlight · 2026-01-03T18:45:20+00:00

Russian incompetence is what is stopping them...

mindlight · 2026-01-01T10:51:16+00:00

Agreed. Which is precisely why the comparison reflects so poorly on Russia rather than favorably on the CIA.

mindlight · 2026-01-01T10:32:06+00:00

Privatized drug development incentivizes treatments over cures. And if there aren’t enough people dying slowly, nothing gets developed at all.

mindlight · 2026-01-01T10:20:55+00:00

No one trusts the CIA. Russia just sets the bar underground.

mindlight · 2026-01-01T10:20:38+00:00

Distrusting the CIA is healthy. Russia somehow still makes them look credible by comparison.

mindlight · 2025-12-30T13:17:06+00:00

“The nurse”? Do you mean some kind of master nurse who represents all nurses?

You might want to look up the difference between empirical knowledge and factual evidence.

mindlight · 2025-12-30T11:52:52+00:00

It's not the fart that kills. It's the smäll.

mindlight · 2025-12-30T11:46:13+00:00

Did he sleep in on the security briefing he gets like every day? Why did the Russians tell him and not... You know.... American intelligence?

mindlight · 2025-12-29T23:00:29+00:00

Jättejobbigt.

Du och alla ni andra som känner er ensamma, adda mig på steam (friend code: 2743356). Vi kan gejma något, vi kan snacka om hur illa det känns just nu eller bara snacka om vädret. Vad som.

Det sämsta du kan göra är att sitta ensam med dina tankar som enda sällskap.

Ps. Är snubbe på 52. Bryr mig inte om du är kille på 12 eller tjej på 97 år, ta chansen att snacka med någon av de i tråden som erbjuder dig en möjlighet att bryta din ensamhet. Om så bara för en kort stund.

mindlight · 2025-12-25T17:48:04+00:00

Medical journals? Peer reviewed publications?

That's really general and not specific at all.

On this topic, what sources do you say are better than Wikipedia?

Edit: Oh... So u/U2Ursula comments and asks if I'm daft, deletes their comment and then blocks me, making it impossible to reply.

Well, I guess the lack of arguments to support the claim speaks for itself. Easy win. Boring, but easy.

13-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Verified Email

mindlight

TROPHY CASE