John Fenderson's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
from the all-hail-eris dept
I've been hanging around Techdirt for a few years now, so hello to my old friends as well as new. One of the things I like the best about this place is that Techdirt is only a technology blog when looked at with one eye. It really covers the intersection of technology and culture. You may or may not know this about me, but I am a Discordian. We are in particularly chaotic times right now. Old systems and businesses are fighting to their death while new ones are discovering the world to be more complex than they supposed. All anyone can say with real confidence is that tomorrow will not look much like yesterday.
With chaos comes opportunity, however. It is during these times, when change is guaranteed but the nature of it is not, that we have a rare chance of shaping the nature of it. Big money corporate forces and a systemically corrupt government are consciously aware of this and are actively working at a fever pitch to shape it in their best interest. What they don't want you to know is that chaos is a great equalizer. Great power requires order to maintain it, but individuals do not. In times like this the playing field is closer to being level. It becomes possible for you, or I, to individually change things for the better. Collectively, we can change everything.
Let's look back at the last week and see what chaos had brought us.
Computers That Accurately Guess What Gangs Did What Crimes
I can tell you one of the most frequent things people misunderstand about chaos. Chaos is not randomness, or a kind of randomness. Chaos is actually order -- apparently disorganized order, but order nonetheless. Chaotic systems are those which are extremely sensitive to initial events. But chaotic systems are not necessarily unpredictable systems.
We, The People, Are Sarcastic And Not Easily Mollified By Bland Political Non-Answers
Not unpredictable at all.
Why PROTECT IP/SOPA Is The Exact Wrong Approach To Dealing With Infringement Online
That is, unless you are one of the greyfaces whose fear of change has caused blindness preventing the ability to see solutions that may be different than the old comfortable ones, but actually have a chance of working.
Lessons Learned From 'Pay What You Want'
Even when the solution might be counter to everything that you think is true.
A History Of Hyperbolic Overreaction To Copyright Issues: The Entertainment Industry And Technology
Even when an industry's entire history is riddled with examples of the same blindness.
Free As In Freedom: But Whose Freedom?
Richard Stallman, love him or hate him, has the admirable quality of being unafraid to give his unvarnished opinion on matters that interest him. Some might suspect him of insanity, communism, hippiness, or dementia, but they're all wrong. What he is is a firebrand, and like all firebrands he will invariably say something irritating or offensive to some people. Firebrands are an essential part of society. We need them to shake us out of our mental ruts and shock us into actively thinking out our positions, whether those positions agree with them or not. It's OK that he confuses fraud with copyright violation. Lots of people do.
Canadian Actor Claims Mashups Are Morally Wrong And Should Be Illegal
Leah Pinset gives us an interesting example of the process of forming chaos to shape reality. The reality she experiences and wants to make us all live in is one where she can declare certain types of music immoral because she doesn't like it much.
She's got lots of company. Here, we have RIAA doing the very same thing, but opposite:
RIAA Explains Its Interpretation Of SOPA; Which Doesn't Seem To Be Found In The Bill Itself
In this case, RIAA wants legislation that would do great harm to every aspect of society. No, I'm not talking about SOPA -- SOPA isn't what they want, it's what they're currently willing to compromise to. They know that what they actually want is a political nonstarter. It would be rejected handily by almost everybody. So they give us SOPA, which is exactly as egregious as they thought was politically possible. That looks less possible now, so they are taking the tack that the Justice Department wanted the ability to do: they are lying.
Justice Department Drops Its Request To Be Allowed To Lie In Response To FOIA Requests
Oh, here's the lying! The Justice department wanted to be able to legally lie to us about the mere existence of records that we citizens collectively own. They've changed their minds and are ok with having to lie about lying like they used to.
DOJ: Secret Interpretation Of PATRIOT Act Just Like Grand Jury Subpoena If You Ignore 'Factual Context'
It's not all untruthfulness, though. It's easier to avoid lying if you can just avoid talking about it. That "it" is the laws that you and I are supposed to be subject to, and therefore presumably should know about, is irrelevant.
Understanding Anonymous: The Culture Of Lulz
There's a law of nature recognized within Discordianism. It is simply this: nature seeks a balance between order and discord. When one grows too strong, the pendulum will always shift. For example, increased social disorder gives rise to grand displays of order through more oppressive laws and policing. And the other way around.
Building Company Realizes That Threatening A Blogger With Bogus Libel Suit Was A Bad Idea; Sincerely Apologizes
In small ways as well as big.
Despite Publisher Apprehension, Good Old Games Proves A Market For Old DRM-Free Games Exists
You can't compete with free? The hundreds I've spent at Good Old Games argue otherwise.
Barnes & Noble Claims That Microsoft Patent Shakedown Over Android Is An Antitrust Violation
I've done my share of software engineering contract work for large companies in the past, and one of the things I've learned is that being the outsider is a powerful position. The outsider can often speak truths that cannot be spoken by people who are invested in the company. The outsider can take radical action with less fear due to simple ignorance of the minefield they're walking through. Barnes & Noble is an outsider in this space and, as such, can take action that is simply impossible for the established players. I never thought I'd see Barnes & Noble as a force for positive change in my industry, but I'm not too surprised, really. It had to be someone I wouldn't have expected.
Really, unless you are in the 1% or are a large corporation, you are an outsider in the political world right now. Which means you have a chance to shape the future. You have more power now than you have likely had in your lifetime. Seize it, and make the future a good one.


Re:
I can't answer for Mike, but personally, yes, domain registrars should be able to register domain names for anybody. They should not be involved with determining who is or is not a criminal.
Re: Re: Re: WHOA! Stop at: "everyone just wants stuff for free".
No, they came about as a result of advances in technology causing the oligarchy of media companies losing their effective monopoly on the means of distribution.
Pirates are the excuse, but not the reason.
Re:
That's not unique to democracy by a long shot.
Re: I don't think Nintendo is wrong, but...
So they get a pass because they could be worse? My, how our cultural standards have fallen!
I don't think I have ever heard Nintendo referred to as "nice enough" before. "Nasty den of vipers," I've heard, mostly from the days when they were strongarming retailers and game developers. Remember, they got slapped down for their monopolistic practices back then.
Still, they did stop doing their majorly evil things a while ago, so perhaps this is a redemption story: stop being unacceptably awful and eventually people will forgive.
Are you listening EA, Apple, Microsoft, etc.?
Re: Off topic....
Most phones are impossible to turn off completely. You can long-press the power button to turn them "off", but they still aren't fully off. They are at least on enough that pressing the power button causes them to restart. Since these power switches don't physically interrupt the power themselves (they signal the phone to do so), this means that the device has to still be on at least a little.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It is virtually impossible. But I do my best by reducing the amount of data that can be collected. For example, I don't use shopper affinity cards or pay with a credit/debit card when shopping. What they don't know, they can't sell. This is also why I block internet ads. And I lie a lot when filling in forms.
Nonetheless, in my ideal world, no information about me would be shared with anybody without my specific and active consent.
I'm genuinely shocked
67% turn their devices off (not just put them in airplane mode?) I find that percentage stunningly, shockingly high. I would have guessed it was closer to 10%.
Re: Re: Pharmacies outside US have no inherent right to US trade!
In The Good Old Days, corporate charters contained a clause that required them to act in the public's interest (since being able to incorporate is a privilege granted by the state, this was the quo to the quid). Further, when corporations failed to do so, they had their charter revoked.
There is no legal reason why we cannot return to that practice. And we should.
Re: Privacy concerns legit; single sided critique via grandstanding
Yes, but not by Congress (at least at this point).
Re: Re: Objects are not Actors
To be fair, "firearm" regulations are really about keeping the firearms out of the hands of bad actors. It's not about the firearms per se.
Re: WHOA! Stop at: "everyone just wants stuff for free".
Not only does that not encapsulate the whole argument, it only encapsulates a tiny, and the least important, part of the range of arguments.
Re: Re:
But it could equate to a guilty verdict (regardless of actual guilt) when you're being extradited to a nation where a fair and just trial is impossible. Such as the US, if you're Dotcom.
Re:
If you're involved in law enforcement or the judicial system, breaking any laws at all makes you a bad guy.
Re: Ubiquity is scary
Video surveillance by undetectable cameras is already ubiquitous.
Re: Re:
That's impossible to know, but irrelevant anyway.
Only the entities that I specifically and actively select to have it.
Not actually true. It just requires greater vigilance to keep nowadays -- and I think this is the source of people's nervousness about Google Glass.
Re: Re:
I think "grandstanding" is entirely fair. Why are they having a hissy fit about this, but they completely ignore the other, even greater, privacy infringements that we've been subject to for years (CCTV, the consolidation of electronic data, internet surveillance, etc.)?
They're picking this as their target because they smell the ability to generate and capitalize on a populist outrage while not even beginning to address the real problems.
That's the very definition of grandstanding.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But the technology is not new.
Re: I'll tell you why...
While people hate change (when the pain of change is greater than the perceived benefits), I don't think that's the source of peoples discomfort with this at all. I say this as someone who doesn't have any greater discomfort with this than with any other public use of cameras.
Also, "people hate change" has become the standard way to dismiss critics out of hand without having to actually address their issues. In other words, whatever merit it may have, it's become meaningless as used today.
Re: Re:
I agree with you that this reason for reducing yellow light times is totally unacceptable, but please let me defend the use of "legitimate".
(Disclaimer, I am an engineer and look at these things through that lens). This is a classic case of an engineering tradeoff. Optimizing for one variable (reducing gridlock) often deoptimizes another variable (reducing intersection accidents).
To reduce the yellow light timings to ease gridlock is a legitimate engineering solution. It is not an acceptable public policy decision in my opinion, as it is optimizing for the wrong thing -- but that's not the sort of call an engineer typically makes. He's just told "optimize for 'x'" by his bosses. If he's really good at his job, he'll already have submitted an analysis to his bosses explaining all the various consequences of doing what they want, but it's still their call.
Re: Trust of breach
Indeed it is. Most people don't realize that county Sheriff is one of the, if not the, most powerful law enforcement position in the US.