Tomorrow: Internet Freedom Experts Team Up For A Giant Reddit AMA
from the join-us dept
All day tomorrow, Wednesday, October 24, a bunch of people heavily involved in internet freedom causes -- from the SOPA fight to the Declaration for Internet Freedom to work around cybersecurity and the fight against ACTA/TPP are all teaming up for a giant Reddit AMA (Ask Me Anything -- or, basically, a big Q&A session). I'm included as one of the folks taking part, but there are plenty of much more interesting people involved, including Alexis Ohanian (Reddit, HipMunk, Breadpig), Ben Huh (Cheezburger), Michael Geist (Canadian copyright expert), along with people from EFF, Public Knowledge, Public Citizen, Open Media, ACLU and a bunch of others as well. It's basically going to go all day, starting from 9am ET. So stop by, ask some questions, and talk about internet freedom... Update: The link to the AMA.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: alexis ohanian, ama, ask me anything, ben huh, copyright, internet freedom, michael geist, sopa
Companies: reddit
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
So is "internet freedom" a euphemism "not getting caught"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And the really amazing thing is that we're out there fighting for your internet freedom as well, so that you make batshit crazy ignorant statements like this one.
You can thank us later.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Reasonable minds can achieve reasonable compromises to address issues associated with certain uses being made by means of the platform. It is a certain kiss-of-death to suggest here that many groups concerned about what is being distributed via the platform do raise very legitimate points in matters such as copyright, breaches of national security, etc. Nevertheless, I happen to believe that their concerns deserve to be taken into account and given fair and thoughtful consideration.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Maybe they could. Maybe they couldn't. The copyright claim has the significant counter claim that the 'Industry' in its current form doesn't get the Internets. If they did we would not be having this discussion. (Think no DRM, low and competing prices, purchase not licensed but bought, no regions, no stepped releases, received as I want it (streaming, local copy to view when off-line. other, etc.(might the fight not come down to how many people have a copy of my work?)) (think right of resale), no forced FBI or other warnings, no forced previews, etc.). Isn't it interesting how the protections for video, music and text (books) differ and yet are similar! Reasonable minds might envision a different IP World today.
The issue of making money is different than the issue of creation. One is done for purely emotional-esoteric reasons. The other is cold crass commerce. Should they be combined? History has differing answers. Patronage, busking, communal support (a form of Patronage) and with the advent of technology the concept of 'royalties' (think about that word and it's roots for more than a few minutes!) came along with printed, recorded, and eventually transferable works.
So, after thousands of years of IP being generally supported in such a way that no one was impaired from inventing anything; we get to the point where anything you invent must pass muster with an incomplete and defective database and analysis system where the losses are relational to the initial price of the prosecution expense (this usually a civil action means that they with the biggest law firm wins.).
The national security question should be down to a very basic metric. How many 'actual' (not including 'suspects' that are coerced into their 'act') terrorist have been caught? There is an argument here about pro-activeness=prevention, but what is the cutoff?
When is it security theater and when is it actually, metrically preventing harm? If competing methods were used in various markets, and one was more effective than others, why would we not go in the direction of the more effective one. (Think how Israel does airport security vs how the US does airport security.).
How are we going to eventually balance fear (rational or irrational) against freedom? What is the cost/fear analysis? How does one create such an analysis? At what point do we dismantle the military/industrial complex? When do we take back our country?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Seriously - are you really that naive?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No, this is you, Average_Joe, who lies about being a law student, yet doesn't realise that in law, when you accuse someone, you must have evidence. There is no evidence presented for your accusations because there is none. Those groups have done nothing wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There'd have to be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's see, who, what... uh, WHERE?
But don't bother on my account. If it's at reddit.com, that's long been in my hosts file so I can't get to it by accident, nor can at least 3 of their ad servers hit me. Therefore I suggest a topic of being free from unwanted sites and their damned ad servers, it's THE most crucial point of freedom as otherwise commercial interests will ruin the fun entirely.
----------- 2nd topic
Have to point up your unwitting self-reference in "And the really amazing thing is that we're out there fighting for your internet freedom as well, so that you [can] make batshit crazy ignorant statements like this one." -- Now, Mike, "average_joe" asked a question: 'So is "internet freedom" a euphemism "not getting caught"?' -- Then YOU made the statement, that by its internal evidence is "batshit crazy ignorant", SO can only be referring to yourself! In my view that's whatcha call a Freudian slip.
AND an Ivy League professional presumably hoping to attract other professionals to his site instead of wannabe pirates, spitting "batshit crazy ignorant" at anyone is just SO laughably typical of teh Internets and what passes for "freedom" on it. Keep it classy, Mike.
--------- further on topic -----------
Here's a site I ran across just today, with essentially my view regarding reddit and their notions of "free speech":
"Bullshit :: troll boy [violentacrez] should have been outed by Reddit proper years ago � total leadership fail.
[... (the following ellipses are in original)]
I have granted people license to FREE SPEECH on this site :: but I have FREE SPEECH too � and it�s my responsibility to exercise it whenever I see the license I�ve granted being abused to harm innocents. The bigger I get � the truer that gets. There is no freedom in pure freedom. Your words and actions online can have a dramatic effect on people�s in real life lives. FREE SPEECH is not about speech without consequence or responsibility :: it can�t be � or they�ll have the excuse they need to take it away from us."
http://saltydroid.info/hulk-hogan-sex-tape-prequel/
Plenty of salty language there for those who like it that way, yet when used correctly, even vulgarity can still add emphasis.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's see, who, what... uh, WHERE?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Let's see, who, what... uh, WHERE?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's see, who, what... uh, WHERE?
Also the statement contradicts itself, if free speech is without consequence or responsibility then it *cannot* be the excuse to take it away as the removal that would be a consequence of the free speech.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's see, who, what... uh, WHERE?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's see, who, what... uh, WHERE?
HEY MIKE! I've got an idea. When this starts, give us the link but send it via e-mail to all registered members on this site (making sure you exclude Average_Joe). We don't want clueless trolls mucking up the conversation. We want to discuss with those on the other side of the copyright debate, with those who can have reasoned and sane responses (then again, in my view, that can't happen, in that if you support copyright, you're already unreasonable and insane...but that's just my opinion. And Joe, hasn't_got_a_clue, bob, that's MY opinion, not Mike Masnick's).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For a candidate to not publicly and aggressively proclaim that the scope of IP needs to be substantially reduced should result in political suicide.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Not that democrats are any better of course.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pirate apologists!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a) no one in power takes any notice of what is being said, because no one is throwing any money into their coffers and they dont understand a damn thing about the internet
b) because whatever is decided here and how bad bills like ACTA are and how they are defeated, the exact same entertainment industries oriented parts are reintroduced through another bill. the defeats mean nothing!
c) until there is a provision that when something is defeated, it cannot be reintroduced under another bill, law or 'trade agreement' just because the name has changed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike Where on reddit will this be held?
/r/WhatIsThisPart
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike Where on reddit will this be held?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike Where on reddit will this be held?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike Where on reddit will this be held?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]