It is very similar to the Arab Spring in Egpyt, which was inflamed by a man protesting economic corruption who received heavy handed treatment from the police.
Of course it should be mentioned that anything on Breitbart, especially video, should be considered highly suspect a priori and therefore unusable in news unless thoroughly checked. So, any self-styled "news source" that ran with it without checking fails journalism.
If given the ability, a corporation will never do anything other than exploit to the fullest any kind of feedback loop between acquisition of money and use of that money to bend rules to make it more money. Anything else would be suboptimal. And what people call capitalism nowadays is really just the competition between disparate entities to control more of that feedback loop.
That's bad enough, and it's almost tolerable. But now factor in the exponential increase of technology. We have always had overlords but there was always the possibility that the worm would turn and we'd have new overlords, some of whom might be us if we are smart and lucky. But when technology increases exponentially a time comes sooner or later, probably sooner, when whoever is in control will be able to use that technology to remain in control indefinitely. If you assume that world leaders and other power centers know this, you could view recent history as a bunch of different powers each jostling, allying, backstabbing, and piggybacking each other to try to time it so that their ascension is at just the right moment. Peak too soon or too late and you lose forever.
Does that help explain China's policies? Maybe they think it will be twenty or more years off, so they are husbanding their resources. Someone who was convinced it was coming sooner would be motivated to trash any value or institution to be in the right place at the right time. That could explain a lot about the behavior of the Republicans in the past ten years (except maybe they thought it was the Rapture instead of technological singularity).
Meanwhile corporations are fencing off the mind like they once did the prairie -- with barbed wire. It's an Oklahoma land grab in your head. They've already carved up the prime real estate and cheap energy sources and they're taking a close look at everything else now.
At least with physical property there is also physical responsibility. The monopoly society grants you to exclusive use of your auto comes with your obligation to insure it. If you mistreat your dog it will be taken from you. As much as many people like to deny it, physical property is not a God-given right. It might be a good idea, but it is granted by society only if its use does not harm society. It's not an entitlement, it's a contract. And if one person somehow legally obtained all the property in the world, how long do you think that would last? Physical property is tamed by all sorts of these conditions.
With intellectual property, the owners don't hesitate to collect their rents but where is the intellectual responsibility? The money/rules feedback loop is legislating out these liabilities. IP owners want to achieve maximum benefits from its special nature of being reproducible, but they want to deny society the same benefits. If a program has a bug, too bad, you licensed it as is. If patent hoarders slow down progress or let historical records be lost forever, there is no consequence at all. If content providers parrot propaganda, do you get your war back? If you pay for an online article and it turns out to be wrong, do you even get your money back?
So intellectual property is currently a gigantic rip off, because society is not getting its end of the deal from providing monopolies on the use of ideas. And if anyone starts to realize this and speaks up, their voice is drowned in wave after wave of spectacle and titillation spewing from television and, corporations would like, the internet. That often seems to me to be the main purpose of convergence. Because the most effective cage is the one that is invisible to the slave. Don't just remove degrees of freedom, remove the knowledge that they could even exist. What is the ratio of the readership of TechDirt to the viewership of American Idol? Tiny, but even that's too much for a feedback loop to leave lying around. Hence, the threats to network neutrality. You can have your free speech as long as you can only ever yell into a vacuum.
What is the main threat to this insane situation? Democracy: one man one vote. It's the governor, maybe the only governor, to the money/rules feedback loop. It prevents the runaway accumulation of wealth, because to the extent the people are not happy, they revolt with their votes. So, every step away from democracy is a step toward a runaway feedback loop. And every step toward democracy is a step away from actual revolt.
That's why this Citizens United issue concerns me greatly. It's a huge win for the money over the people.
That's also why one of the most important issues today is election integrity. There is no place in our election machinery for proprietary hardware or software, and yet it's everywhere. It's like having secret government regulations that govern the counting of votes. It's anathema. Fight it wherever you can. Not just the voting programs but also, of course, the operating system (currently almost universally Windows CE). There should only ever be one program running on an electronic voting machine, so there's no reason at all to have an operating system, even if that means you have to write your own hardware drivers, which also should be open source, or at least disclosed source.
Save the internet and save the elections, and we will at least have a chance. And support a constitutional amendment that will force the Supreme Court to back off: http://freespeechforpeople.org/.
Those labels have every right to be idiot assholes. But I still have the right not to buy their product, right? Wrong, not if everyone has to pay some kind of tax to them, which is what they would like. Now who's the pirate?
NBC already knows they will lose money televising the Olympics. I hope this is the point where the Olympics starts to bring less and less money in from networks and they get what they deserve. Very few organizations behave so obviously in contradiction to their stated ideals. Keep blogging every instance of Olympian storm-trooper tactics, Mike!
What I will never understand is why law enforcement isn't interested in projects such as this, at the very least because if the person in jail is innocent, then THE GUILTY PARTY IS AT LARGE. This happens even in cop-killer cases like the one in Iowa. It's the main thing that makes me doubt the motivations of these prosecutors.
Prosecutorial misconduct in a capital case should be a capital crime.
If My Team is Just a Sock Puppet then Count Me Out
Speaking strictly as a consumer, if the NFL is successful in its argument that the various teams are just its sock puppets, I will seriously consider canceling my subscription (season tickets, cable package, merch, all of it).
It's very short sighted of them. But then I guess the average fan won't care.
On the post: Righthaven Loses (Big Time) In Colorado As Well
On the post: Theaters On Prescreenings: Bring Your Firearms, But No Mobile Phones
On the post: House Version Of PROTECT IP To Cover Cyberlockers Too
On the post: How Not To Make Music Social: The Way Spotify And Facebook Did It
On the post: Who Do You Believe? NYPD? Or Video Evidence Concerning Cop Pepper Spraying Women?
On the post: UK Guy Trademarks Famous Gov't Slogan, Goes After Others For Using It
On the post: CNN Claims 'Something Must Be Done' About Anonymous Bloggers
On the post: Scary: It's 'Newsworthy' That A Newspaper Prints Facts
On the post: Don't Be A Jerk To A Minor In Louisiana Or Say Anything Sexually Suggestive In Scotland
On the post: Author's Guild Didn't Want To 'Pull An RIAA' But Still Misses The Point
http://www.riaaradar.com/
On the post: Google For President? If Corporations Are People...
That's bad enough, and it's almost tolerable. But now factor in the exponential increase of technology. We have always had overlords but there was always the possibility that the worm would turn and we'd have new overlords, some of whom might be us if we are smart and lucky. But when technology increases exponentially a time comes sooner or later, probably sooner, when whoever is in control will be able to use that technology to remain in control indefinitely. If you assume that world leaders and other power centers know this, you could view recent history as a bunch of different powers each jostling, allying, backstabbing, and piggybacking each other to try to time it so that their ascension is at just the right moment. Peak too soon or too late and you lose forever.
Does that help explain China's policies? Maybe they think it will be twenty or more years off, so they are husbanding their resources. Someone who was convinced it was coming sooner would be motivated to trash any value or institution to be in the right place at the right time. That could explain a lot about the behavior of the Republicans in the past ten years (except maybe they thought it was the Rapture instead of technological singularity).
Meanwhile corporations are fencing off the mind like they once did the prairie -- with barbed wire. It's an Oklahoma land grab in your head. They've already carved up the prime real estate and cheap energy sources and they're taking a close look at everything else now.
At least with physical property there is also physical responsibility. The monopoly society grants you to exclusive use of your auto comes with your obligation to insure it. If you mistreat your dog it will be taken from you. As much as many people like to deny it, physical property is not a God-given right. It might be a good idea, but it is granted by society only if its use does not harm society. It's not an entitlement, it's a contract. And if one person somehow legally obtained all the property in the world, how long do you think that would last? Physical property is tamed by all sorts of these conditions.
With intellectual property, the owners don't hesitate to collect their rents but where is the intellectual responsibility? The money/rules feedback loop is legislating out these liabilities. IP owners want to achieve maximum benefits from its special nature of being reproducible, but they want to deny society the same benefits. If a program has a bug, too bad, you licensed it as is. If patent hoarders slow down progress or let historical records be lost forever, there is no consequence at all. If content providers parrot propaganda, do you get your war back? If you pay for an online article and it turns out to be wrong, do you even get your money back?
So intellectual property is currently a gigantic rip off, because society is not getting its end of the deal from providing monopolies on the use of ideas. And if anyone starts to realize this and speaks up, their voice is drowned in wave after wave of spectacle and titillation spewing from television and, corporations would like, the internet. That often seems to me to be the main purpose of convergence. Because the most effective cage is the one that is invisible to the slave. Don't just remove degrees of freedom, remove the knowledge that they could even exist. What is the ratio of the readership of TechDirt to the viewership of American Idol? Tiny, but even that's too much for a feedback loop to leave lying around. Hence, the threats to network neutrality. You can have your free speech as long as you can only ever yell into a vacuum.
What is the main threat to this insane situation? Democracy: one man one vote. It's the governor, maybe the only governor, to the money/rules feedback loop. It prevents the runaway accumulation of wealth, because to the extent the people are not happy, they revolt with their votes. So, every step away from democracy is a step toward a runaway feedback loop. And every step toward democracy is a step away from actual revolt.
That's why this Citizens United issue concerns me greatly. It's a huge win for the money over the people.
That's also why one of the most important issues today is election integrity. There is no place in our election machinery for proprietary hardware or software, and yet it's everywhere. It's like having secret government regulations that govern the counting of votes. It's anathema. Fight it wherever you can. Not just the voting programs but also, of course, the operating system (currently almost universally Windows CE). There should only ever be one program running on an electronic voting machine, so there's no reason at all to have an operating system, even if that means you have to write your own hardware drivers, which also should be open source, or at least disclosed source.
Save the internet and save the elections, and we will at least have a chance. And support a constitutional amendment that will force the Supreme Court to back off:
http://freespeechforpeople.org/.
On the post: Bad Web Experience: This Article Removed Because Of Copyright?
Also, I don't understand. How could The Guardian's copyright expire on its own content? Or is that part just rubbish?
On the post: Many Innocent Users Sent Pre-Settlement Letters Demanding Payment For Infringement
On the post: Guardian Editor Details Why Paywalls Harm Journalism
On the post: As EMI Cites Harvey Danger Lipdub As Inducing Infringement, Harvey Danger Singer Says Lipdub Makes Him Incredibly Happy
On the post: US Olympic Committee Sues Organization Trying To Build Sports Museum
On the post: Wait, Someone Expects People To Pay To Let People Know When They're Being Sarcastic? That'll Work
On the post: Wait, Someone Expects People To Pay To Let People Know When They're Being Sarcastic? That'll Work
On the post: Chicago Prosecutor's Office Leaks Old, Unsubstantiated, Discredited Internal Memo To Smear Innocence Project Founder
Prosecutorial misconduct in a capital case should be a capital crime.
On the post: Quarterback Drew Brees Explains Why Supreme Court Should Block NFL From Having Exclusive Licensing Deals
If My Team is Just a Sock Puppet then Count Me Out
It's very short sighted of them. But then I guess the average fan won't care.
Next >>