> For an advanced country that actually has to create new things, the cost:benefits shifts in favour of more IP then the earlier stage.

This is a myth; a very destructive myth.

To quote professor Mazzucato:

”According to conventional wisdom, innovation is best left to the dynamic entrepreneurs of the private sector, and government should get out of the way. But what if all this was wrong? What if, from Silicon Valley to medical breakthroughs, the public sector has been the boldest and most valuable risk-taker of all?

[Mazzucato] comprehensively debunks the myth of a lumbering, bureaucratic state versus a dynamic, innovative private sector. In a series of case studies—from IT, biotech, nanotech to today’s emerging green tech — Professor Mazzucato shows that the opposite is true: the private sector only finds the courage to invest after an entrepreneurial state has made the high-risk investments. In an intensely researched chapter, she reveals that every technology that makes the iPhone so ‘smart’ was government funded: the Internet, GPS, its touch-screen display and the voice-activated Siri.

Mazzucato also controversially argues that in the history of modern capitalism the State has not only fixed market failures, but has also actively shaped and created markets. In doing so, it sometimes wins and sometimes fails. Yet by not admitting the State’s role in such active risk taking, and pretending that the state only cheers on the side-lines while the private sector roars, we have ended up creating an ‘innovation system’ whereby the public sector socializes risks, while rewards are privatized.” [1]

Also, what is your definition for 'advanced country’? Are you talking about global north countries like the US, UK etc.?

What you likely see as making up an 'advanced country’ I see as global north imperialist institutions designed for gatekeeping and withholding important knowledge; and denying all of the working class access to our inheritance - a process that Ha-Joon Chang calls 'kicking away the ladder' [2].

> It's still possible to have too much restriction though, I think the copyright duration is ridiculous for example.

If you're only critiquing copyright - and not patents, trade secrets and others - what do you personally see as the redeemable parts of those other forms of IP (and the systems used to enforce them)?

We're in an age where instantaneous digital planetary replication and transmission technologies could give birth to an enormous collaborative web of cooperation, at an incredible near-zero marginal cost; which would enable the working class to get on the same page globally (and stay there) in order to further develop technologies in a beautiful mutually-beneficial dance (described more by people like Steele [3], as well as many socialist/marxist researchers [4]).

Why is it, according to you, beneficial to continue to have the private-property enforcing capitalist state hand out monopolies to profit-seeking entities/capitalist firms, which gives them 'ownership' over decontextualized/siloed scientific knowledge and technology and allows them to prosecute other humans for using this (or ‘their’) commoditized knowledge? In the end all knowledge is derivable and re-derivable, which is why many discoveries in the past were made in tandem in different (unconnected) places around the world [5]. Many forget this.

Scientific discoveries are essentially 'built into' the universe, and I believe they emerge at the right time for us to tackle the biggest challenges of our times (now climate change + 6th mass extinction event). Back on topic: does this mean those who make new discoveries are lone geniuses? No, not even close; they build on the things left by behind by those who came before. Yet unfortunately the capitalist lone genius myth is the predominant (and harmful) story of our time. [6]

What bottlenecks do you see for an emergent open, universally accessible, scientific commons-centered world? A world that doesn't allow the commodification and monopolization of our shared inheritance?

I think humanity has been waiting for patterns to emerge that allow for radically participative, distributed and open collective sense-making systems. I believe that the organizational patterns that help to remedy the current collective challenges have finally started to emerge in the form of http://valueflo.ws and holochain. I'm talking about intricate distributed systems that do a much better job of meeting the high level of variety in our world, and which allow us to govern our global commons without compromising on individual agency, as today’s systems do.

Our world today is divided in two: the working class and the propertied class. The propertied class unfairly dominate by 1.) having created knowledge hierarchies by setting up harmful artificial-scarcity -enabling systems of law - in effect weaponing knowledge, as well as 2.) having created undemocratic and private systems and symbols for measuring and communicating/expressing wealth, in the form of a.) siloed capitalist resource measuring systems (through capitalist Enterprise Resource Planning software that obscures economic human relations), and b.) centrally controlled and centrally issued currencies instead of mutual credit systems and protocols that allow mutual issuance and evolution (hence why I linked to Valueflo.ws, since it uses the Resources-Events-Agents ontology).

In other words: so far, today's systems are violent capital-enabling straightjackets because we have not been able to “encode as much variety as exists in the system it wants to control” (the system I’m referring to here being our global interconnected civilization) [7]. The cybernetic concept described above is called Ashby’s ‘law of requisite variety’ which I first learned about through Eric Harris-Braun, one of the people who stumbled on this novel pattern for fully distributed protocols now known as holochain, which “combines ideas from BitTorrent and Git, along with cryptographic signatures, peer validation, and gossip.“.

[1] https://marianamazzucato.com/books/the-entrepreneurial-state

[2] https://anthempress.com/kicking-away-the-ladder-pb

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/j...

[4] https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/01/abolish-silicon-valley

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_discovery

[6] https://www.technologyreview.com/2015/08/04/166593/techs-end...

[7] https://eric.harris-braun.com/blog/2007/12/07/id-58