If you invented a pc of tech that could change the world, would you release it? If so, how?

[RadicalResearcher]

If you could invent something that would change everything, would you release it? Knowing how some have been poorly treated for doing so would you, yourself take that risk? Many have, they have had issues for doing so. So, would you take the risk?

 

[Beholder]

I did, using a permissive open source license. It has a small but influental group of senior developers using the software. Haven't been paid a cent for it, but still getting fan mails and inspiring other developers that they can also build something huge on their own.

 

[RadicalResearcher]

I did, using a permissive open source license. It has a small but influental group of senior developers using the software. Haven't been paid a cent for it, but still getting fan mails and inspiring other developers that they can also build something huge on their own.

You didn't have any blow back from it from say those that would be offended by the tech release. We know everything is about money. Take away someone ability to make money and you have a target on your back.

 

[Beholder]

You didn't have any blow back from it from say those that would be offended by the tech release. We know everything is about money. Take away someone ability to make money and you have a target on your back.

I might have bankrupted my old bussiness associates for making a better product and releasing the source code, but software development is about innovation, so a bussiness model based on reinventing the wheel every year should not be paid by consumers to begin with. Just like you would not pay someone to reinvent the towel, passive income needs a deadline to allow money to flow where it's needed for new development.

 

[RadicalResearcher]

I might have bankrupted my old bussiness associates for making a better product and releasing the source code, but software development is about innovation, so a bussiness model based on reinventing the wheel every year should not be paid by consumers to begin with. Just like you would not pay someone to reinvent the towel, passive income needs a deadline to allow money to flow where it's needed for new development.

What if the said invention changed transportation forever?

 

[Beholder]

What if the said invention changed transportation forever?

Then you have to consider the safety concerns, so that it does not become like the electric scooters that blind people stumble on.

 

[8thsinner]

What if the said invention changed transportation forever?

Lets say you rediscovered antigravity tech or something, I would find a good hacker, get a worm to scrub email, facebook, telegram etc details in a collective program to distribute it from say 100,000 different servers on a time release as well as finding a good time and place for as many as possible live events world wide, election speeches, the olympics or some such and make sure you have a version of it shown in the background of all of them, if any of them are even real anymore and not green screen.
Either that or start smaller, get some working prototypes into peoples hands you trust, making sure the word spreads quietly would be difficult unless you could mask it into other tech.
If you have some sort of motor that generates from the zero point, start maybe switching the neighbours to your supply for a smaller fee making sure they don't all disconnect from their regular supplier at the same time. Use the money to start building more and spread it around big cities but not in them getting as many small places connected as possible, and teach those who use it how to make it.

 

[wileyb]

If you could invent something that would change everything, would you release it? Knowing how some have been poorly treated for doing so would you, yourself take that risk? Many have, they have had issues for doing so. So, would you take the risk?

You would need to be independently wealthy OR you would need to convince a venture capital firm or Kickstart investors that the thing would be not only life changing but profitable.

Consider this. Someone invented a light bulb that lasts 100 years. This is real. So why do we not have this tech? Because it's not profitable. So how do you get this great invention to the public? A company would be set up to sell these light bulbs and everyone would buy one. Great. And then what? You never have to buy light bulbs again. So sales would rely on new buildings and people breaking them on accident. Someone would create a product to prevent them from breaking. Then you go out of business. And the next generation doesent have these light bulbs. Those venture capitalists see no need to invest in this. It's not profitable. It helps the world sure but who's gonna pay for it to continously get into people's lives? The tax payer? Good luck passing a universal lightbulb act.


So consider this. Someone discovers the cure to cancer. This effectively threatens the cancer treatment industry which employs millions and is a multi billion dollar industry. These people would do anything to make sure that cure didn't see the light of day. Everything from publishing papers discrediting it to convincing people that the cure is worse than the disease (hmmmmm sound familiar conspiracy theorists of the pandemic age????)
So you would be better off creating a treatment. Hence chemo therapy. Hence the bi annual covid vaccine. Hence inhalers and $800 epi pens.

If I created a new form of energy that was cheap and plentiful and burned super slow, how do you think the oil industry would react?

Just look at how they and we reacted to renewable energy. We had to get the government to give rebates before people started installing Solar panels in mass numbers. Ur personal beliefs on climate change really mean jack shit.


Hey don't blame me. Welcome to capitalism? I'm just the messenger. U should've known this is how the world works.

 

[8thsinner]

You would need to be independently wealthy OR you would need to convince a venture capital firm or Kickstart investors that the thing would be not only life changing but profitable.

Consider this. Someone invented a light bulb that lasts 100 years. This is real. So why do we not have this tech? Because it's not profitable. So how do you get this great invention to the public? A company would be set up to sell these light bulbs and everyone would buy one. Great. And then what? You never have to buy light bulbs again. So sales would rely on new buildings and people breaking them on accident. Someone would create a product to prevent them from breaking. Then you go out of business. And the next generation doesent have these light bulbs. Those venture capitalists see no need to invest in this. It's not profitable. It helps the world sure but who's gonna pay for it to continously get into people's lives? The tax payer? Good luck passing a universal lightbulb act.


So consider this. Someone discovers the cure to cancer. This effectively threatens the cancer treatment industry which employs millions and is a multi billion dollar industry. These people would do anything to make sure that cure didn't see the light of day. Everything from publishing papers discrediting it to convincing people that the cure is worse than the disease (hmmmmm sound familiar conspiracy theorists of the pandemic age????)
So you would be better off creating a treatment. Hence chemo therapy. Hence the bi annual covid vaccine. Hence inhalers and $800 epi pens.

If I created a new form of energy that was cheap and plentiful and burned super slow, how do you think the oil industry would react?

Just look at how they and we reacted to renewable energy. We had to get the government to give rebates before people started installing Solar panels in mass numbers. Ur personal beliefs on climate change really mean jack shit.


Hey don't blame me. Welcome to capitalism? I'm just the messenger. U should've known this is how the world works.

The biggest secret about cancer isn't that there are cures, and hundreds of them in fact, it is what causes them in the first place.
I do agree though, capitalism sucks, and industries will do anything to keep their powers and money.
Doesn't have to be that way though. If people just united as large scale enough villages to be self supporting not just in food but also industry then you would be able to develop away from civil rule.

 

[Mayhem]

'If people just united as large scale'

People get greedy and thats all let by the way side, its the ones that dont have anything do this at times but get knocked down.