Thoughts on Current Economics

It's often argued that natural consequences of technology are both moral and unpreventable, but this
is argued inconsistently.  I often read, as an example, that private businesses collecting DNA where
feasible is both fine and inevitable, since man sheds genetic material constantly, and so to prevent
the construction of such databases is foolhardy.  I always recall, however, that digital information
can be copied and shared at effectively no cost, and yet there are many laws making sharing illegal.

It's very clear to me that the laws in my society exist to enable powerful corporations, against the
weak masses, and thus arguments as to the natural consequences of some technology are irrelevant so.

It's not unreasonable to pay regularly for services, as the very word means something is done within
each interval.  The ``ideal'' service as defined by ``economists'', however, has no recurring costs,
only recurring revenues, and therefore isn't a service, by definition.  I've seen within my lifetime
how computers enable this ``ideal'' service, by purposefully crippling software and then selling the
crutches primed to disintegrate at the first moment past the payment period or after a suitably long
vacation from the Internet.  The Internet allows proprietary software to serve its lone true master.

In everything I see, corporations prefer the advantages of technology and wish to have a monopoly on
them.  Businesses love to sell digital information as if it be scarce, and to make sharing such data
afterwards illegal.  This is what ``economists'' offer humanity, and what they deem to be ``ideal''.