Sure, I don’t think I agree with the broader claims you’re making yet. But I do agree with the narrow one that selling info is technically possible.
RE: “If I just start producing your product commercially without a deal with you, then I'm operating on the fraudulent (non-voluntary) side of things.”
——This must be assuming there’s a contract between you and the other party - right? Like some valid way that you’ve told them you won’t use their work.
Haha. Well help me out here. It feels like that undermines the possibility of contracting.
Does this mean that before contracting with you I need to know whether you believe in the morality of the contract?
When you say “isn’t sellable” do you mean “is immoral to sell”?
Seems like this may be what’s driving the disagreement.
I’d agree with nostr:npub1y02f89rpykzhqmrjjz99uwgyl9gh06sg0vpjmklu62rzxpx8mxps7zfvpl that it’s technically possible to exchange money for an object with 0s and 1s burned into it like a CD, or for that matter a promise to connect computers together and tickle each other’s wires just right so the recipient ends up with 1s and 0s in all the correct places.
I’d argue it’s not an agreement to “own” the information, rather to do or not do certain things in the future.
So in the example, there is obviously no agreement/obligation. And claiming IP doesn’t change that.
But are you nostr:npub1s277u5rww60te98w9umz6p7pjcxuus96cegdsf4y978qcqvu8jtq88dsym saying that one cannot choose to commit themselves to a future course of action?
People should probably do what they say they will do.
But to clarify, I’d suggest specifically discussing the case where a person claims IP, and you happen to have the information on your computer with no foul play involved (maybe let’s say they sold you their old computer but never wiped the drive)
I’m not saying I would have. Just thinking through what the dynamic is as the civilians get increasingly involved.
Would you not then have dropped the bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima?
One who goes outside the norm for rules of engagement.
Just removing ambiguity, nostr:npub1l2h50te8u00qd6plx3hudn82p24lcafqmqhlayxy3h7dwsxxnj4q28n2lz your turn 😂
Step one: get kinda cold
Step two: sit motionless in the sun wearing dark clothes
Step three: pleasure overload 🌞🫂
I’d say that depends entirely on how smart/flexible you want it to be.
I think your example looks fairly simple. Some people might expect it to work with much more complicated emails. Building it to either fail gracefully or succeed on those more complicated ones would be hard.
But just that example, I think you could it in an iOS shortcut in an hour or two.
Breaking this task down:
Verify contact information - ❌
Compose email - ✅
Open email application - ❌
Send email - ❌
But if you write your own code those could all be ✅
Related: the hedonic treadmill