As long as our bandwidth and/or content is in the hands of corporations who'd rather fuck us than cultivate virtuous, reciprocally beneficial relationships, we will never be free.
I always worried, as a kid, that one day I'd grow up and think nostalgically back to days before the internet had been made dull and sterile by government rules.
I wasn't imaginative enough then, or even as a young adult, to predict this kind of nonsense would happen instead.
The internet is destined for a bleak period. We care, we're pissed, sure. But most people aren't. Most people don't even know. And wouldn't care if they did.
This law, or one like it, will be subverted in breathtaking and terrifying ways. Thought using the DMCA to shut down early thanksgiving coupon sites was bad? That's going to seem cute by comparison to what you can do when a moronic, bureaucratic authority can disappear entire websites at will.
I've been scratching my head for years trying to think of a way out. But I just can't. The most powerful means of distribution and communication in human history is either in the hands of inept, short-sighted, unimaginative buffoons or subject to regulation from the same.
I'm excited for the practical and technological revolution that upends this control. But I can't imagine what it would look like or how it would work. And that leaves me a pretty sad panda while we wait for it. But – this kind of stupidity is bad for everyone. Even the morons who want this law passed. So I'd like to believe that this period will pass with the same inevitability that will bring on its start.
>I've been scratching my head for years trying to think of a way out. But I just can't. The most powerful means of distribution and communication in human history is either in the hands of inept, short-sighted, unimaginative buffoons or subject to regulation from the same.
if you think about it, the Earth's most advanced political systems - the US and the other Western democracies - are just refined implementations of 2000+ years old architectural principles - the Greek's "democracy" (decisions and laws are made by a group of people limited to the size of the big room, the modern refinement of this ancient system is that the members of that group are supposedly elected instead of just being rich and powerful elite of the society) and the Rome's "rule of law" (a law overrides moral and any other motivation/rationale). It's somehow disappointing that human race hasn't been able to come up with (or more precisely - hasn't evolved enough for) a better system. [The most recent attempts to build new, and thought at the time as significantly improved, systems - fascism and socialism/communism - turned out to be catastrophic disasters.]
>I'm excited for the practical and technological revolution that upends this control. But I can't imagine what it would look like or how it would work.
every time significant technological development happens - be it steam engine, Smith&Wesson, radio, cars, phone, television - it looks like it would change the world and free the people from the control of the system ... well, as it happens, the system just absorbs the technological development as a more advanced tool for the control. And it is happening the same way with the computers and the Internet. All the improvement in the society comes from improvement in people (which of course is frequently technically facilitated and accelerated by the technological advances). "Peasants are also humans, not a property", "women are also humans, not a property", "blacks are also humans, not a property", "gays are also humans", ..., (some day we will even evolve enough to recognize the rights of animals and look back in horror to today's treatment of them as property) - all this is just a change in people minds, not a change in law (which follows the change in minds) and not a change in technology (which though does usually help a lot)
>And that leaves me a pretty sad panda while we wait for it.
Look at the "Occupiers" - like the new born kittens they don't know what to do, where to go, yet they have already "born" while we're sitting and waiting :) [ note : i don't have illusions - many of the Occupiers will become lawyers, government employees, political officials ... - ie. indistinguishable part of the system and will try to forgot their "stupid mistakes of youth", yet just for a moment they are "born" and it became an undeletable part
of the whole human race history and evolution]
some day we will even evolve enough to recognize the rights of animals and look back in horror to today's treatment of them as property
I don't know, that one is a little fuzzy. Animals are difficult legally. Pets, for example- if we decide they have their own will and it should be illegal to prevent them from going outside, many of them will just up and get eaten.
Now, maybe they have a right to get eaten. But I think it safe to assume they don't want to be eaten. So, it's fuzzy.
>I don't know, that one is a little fuzzy. Animals are difficult legally. Pets, for example- if we decide they have their own will and it should be illegal to prevent them from going outside, many of them will just up and get eaten.
we somehow manage it with 2-4 year old children which is what most advanced animals (cats, dogs, dolphins, killer whales, apes) are known to be as smart as (the animals may be even smarter, we just can't yet recognize it and communicate accordingly)
Looking back at the history, it was, for example, normal to sell children or to castrate children for specific practical purposes, like Chinese eunuchs or Italian castrati, ie. treating them just like property. Today we are evolved enough to not do it. The same with animals.
>So if we are not to sell pets, does that mean we need to give birth to them ourselves?
200 years ago it would sound like a valid issue about slaves. Today it sound like absurd.
As long as you are boxed inside the "owning" paradigm, your issues sound valid and arguments are sound. Yet, once the paradigm shift in people minds happens - from "owning" to "coexistence" - the issues and the arguments would become either moot or absurd.
lets suppose there is an alien race present in the neighborhood of the Solar system that's technologically and mentally superior to human race. Applying our current human standards it would be natural if the aliens apply the "owning" paradigm toward humans - we'd make such a funny, easily trainable pets! They would control our population through neutering and mass euthanizing as to them it would sure look like we aren't able to manage it on our own. They would keep us "inside" as otherwise we can go outside and hurt ourselves (if we brought to other planets) or start a brawl or even war among ourselves if we left to our devices on Earth.
Lets suppose that after some time the aliens would notice that humans are also intelligent beings, with intelligence that would seem to the aliens as much inferior, yet still intelligence, and these rough sounds produced by humans is actually a meaningful, though as would seem to the aliens very primitive, communication. And if the aliens would try to imagine changing "owning" to "coexistence" model they would naturally ask each other the question "So in the coexistence model, how would things work? I'm genuinely curious how you see things functioning." Would you have anything to say to the aliens in response to such a question? :)
[Note: the obvious elephant in the room of the human/animals relationship - meat eating - will be addressed in a few decades by synthetic meat which by superceding natural meat in energetic efficiency and biological fitness for human body would make eating natural meat a stupid disgusting obsolete habit like smoking. Note to the note : i'm not a vegetarian and quit smoking 10+ years ago]
>It's somehow disappointing that human race hasn't been able to come up with (or more precisely - hasn't evolved enough for) a better system.
A little off topic, but since it was bought up, I am going to mention that I have been thinking of a systems where members of Parliament or Congress are hired by a committee from the general public and then last for something like 20 years terms (unless he or she themselves resign of course). It would take advantage of the separation of powers spreading power out among different kinds of people, so it would not have the problems a dictatorship or monarchy have. It would also allow specialization.
it sounds like a hybrid between Supreme Court and the corporate board/CEO scheme.
To me the problem lies deeper - it is in the principle that government/state is a concentrated power (taken away from people by force) and what behaves like a violent force against the people. Any tweaks to the current system is tweaks with who and how authorizes the application of that violence.
The government should get it power through willful delegation from people. The US was a nice attempt to implement the idea. Unfortunately the "willful" isn't there anymore. And without it the government looses moral ground under its violence.
The next stage would be government/state system that acts not through force. What can be used instead of force? Persuasion/education, consensus...? it is though too far fetched for any specifics.
Actually, randomly selecting people from a state or province, similar to a lottery draw, may be a better idea. The key is to make sure it is a large variety of people.
In this case, it is the content industry that think they can "control" content. Not sure if it is possible, but I wonder if retraining legacy MBAs would help.
I always worried, as a kid, that one day I'd grow up and think nostalgically back to days before the internet had been made dull and sterile by government rules.
I wasn't imaginative enough then, or even as a young adult, to predict this kind of nonsense would happen instead.
The internet is destined for a bleak period. We care, we're pissed, sure. But most people aren't. Most people don't even know. And wouldn't care if they did.
This law, or one like it, will be subverted in breathtaking and terrifying ways. Thought using the DMCA to shut down early thanksgiving coupon sites was bad? That's going to seem cute by comparison to what you can do when a moronic, bureaucratic authority can disappear entire websites at will.
I've been scratching my head for years trying to think of a way out. But I just can't. The most powerful means of distribution and communication in human history is either in the hands of inept, short-sighted, unimaginative buffoons or subject to regulation from the same.
I'm excited for the practical and technological revolution that upends this control. But I can't imagine what it would look like or how it would work. And that leaves me a pretty sad panda while we wait for it. But – this kind of stupidity is bad for everyone. Even the morons who want this law passed. So I'd like to believe that this period will pass with the same inevitability that will bring on its start.