• Steve@communick.news
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Ownership is when one is allowed to keep all others from accessing or using a thing.

    If that one is a person or corp., or the thing is physical or imaginary, it doesn’t change the nature of ownership itself.

    A person or a corp could make different choices with their ownership rights. And ownership of physical or imaginary things have different enforcement challenges. But none of that changes the fundamental concept of ownership.

    But as I said elsewhere: “The real point I meant is that fake concepts can still be useful. Like the concept of ownership.”

    • zwekihoyy
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      ownership of tangibles and intangibles (specifically information) are entirely different, regardless how you wanna define ownership or whatever.

      • Steve@communick.news
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The enforcement of that ownership is entirely different, yes.
        Basically the only way to maintain ownership of intangibles is to keep them a secret.

        Also, don’t all intangibles fit the definition of information? I don’t recall running across any that wouldn’t, but I’m curious. Can you give an example of what you mean?

        • zwekihoyy
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          i couldn’t think of anything either I was just covering all my bases lol