But, in a way, it's a good thing. Your personal attacks and out-of-context quotes pretty effectively disarm Lanier's detractors. Firstly, the post above is completely correct. As stated "You're attacking a parody, a straw-man, rather than delve deeply into the complex issues he raises."
"Jobs have nothing to do with whether they are "pleasant."
Of course they are...there have been worker's rights movements from the dawn of the industrial age that demanded, if not pleasantness, then at least minimal unpleasantness. Otherwise, we'd live in a slave state. Capitalism works because the middle class has decided it would fight for pleasant enough jobs (in the form of living wages, lunch breaks, benefits, etc.) as opposed to communism/socialism. It's the goddamn cornerstone of the modern industrial capitalist state. Lanier simply attempts to put it into one simple sentence with the assumption that you, the reader, understands this.
Same goes for Lanier's micropayment system. It's a potential solution that he doesn't demand - he uses it to illustrate the problem. There's nothing wrong with that. And frankly, considering that it is now commonplace for brands and publishers to outright steal content, it is something that may potentially arise on the horizon. Copyright laws need a complete upheaval, and protecting everything that contributes to commerce is something that sounds great to me. It is just an extension of existing laws that protect the creative class in a vastly different media landscape compared to when those laws were enacted. It's not ridiculous at all, actually. So you fail on multiple fronts.
I don't know what Techdirt is, but I won't be reading it again if this is just another internet tech brat rag full of sensationalist attacks and arrogance.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Blindhead.
You're wrong...and here's why
"Jobs have nothing to do with whether they are "pleasant."
Of course they are...there have been worker's rights movements from the dawn of the industrial age that demanded, if not pleasantness, then at least minimal unpleasantness. Otherwise, we'd live in a slave state. Capitalism works because the middle class has decided it would fight for pleasant enough jobs (in the form of living wages, lunch breaks, benefits, etc.) as opposed to communism/socialism. It's the goddamn cornerstone of the modern industrial capitalist state. Lanier simply attempts to put it into one simple sentence with the assumption that you, the reader, understands this.
Same goes for Lanier's micropayment system. It's a potential solution that he doesn't demand - he uses it to illustrate the problem. There's nothing wrong with that. And frankly, considering that it is now commonplace for brands and publishers to outright steal content, it is something that may potentially arise on the horizon. Copyright laws need a complete upheaval, and protecting everything that contributes to commerce is something that sounds great to me. It is just an extension of existing laws that protect the creative class in a vastly different media landscape compared to when those laws were enacted. It's not ridiculous at all, actually. So you fail on multiple fronts.
I don't know what Techdirt is, but I won't be reading it again if this is just another internet tech brat rag full of sensationalist attacks and arrogance.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Blindhead.
Submit a story now.