Today is the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi death camp Auschwitz.
Never.
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Yay censorship! Oh, wait a minute...
From the Colorado Indymedia: Officer Threatens To Arrest Woman For Anti-Bush Sticker.
Oh, and also... A Peaceful Transfer of Power.
Oh, and also... A Peaceful Transfer of Power.
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Response to comments
First, in case you didn't notice, I sided against the radicals more than against the conservatives, so :-P.
Secondly, and I quote, "[w]hile I sympathize with the radicals in that they don't want to be around people whose basic outlook on life includes segregation and hate (I wouldn't, either), there are a lot of people who are 'republican' or what have you that aren't." Seems like I mentioned that "[c]onservative and republican do not automatically equate a belief in segregation and hate." Maybe I should have said 'don't' instead of 'aren't,' and put quotation marks around some of that bit, which are not my own words, I should add.
In addition, yeah, the radicals have the privilege - they're the ones that first started holding 'All Queers' meetings. The moderator/facilitator, btw, was not a radical.
I also seemed to advocate for inclusiveness in the queer term, even the more conservative ones.
I will agree that radicals (far lefters, not the strange concoction by [who?] that are actually reactionary/fundamentalist) can be very black and white in the way that they see issues; I, however, though I do have strongly-held beliefs concerning politics and, well, actually lots of things, try to exercise balance and thoughtful consideration on issues (though I will admit I don't always succeed). That's one reason I have a blog: through dialogue with others I can ensure that my opinions are well thought-out, and that I have communicated them well.
Clearly you failed to read the entire post, and did exactly what I was complaining about - people not listening to each other.
As a parting shot, 'queer' was adopted by the "more extreme radicals" as a way of turning something hateful into something to be proud of, so if anyone has claim to it, it's the radicals.
Secondly, and I quote, "[w]hile I sympathize with the radicals in that they don't want to be around people whose basic outlook on life includes segregation and hate (I wouldn't, either), there are a lot of people who are 'republican' or what have you that aren't." Seems like I mentioned that "[c]onservative and republican do not automatically equate a belief in segregation and hate." Maybe I should have said 'don't' instead of 'aren't,' and put quotation marks around some of that bit, which are not my own words, I should add.
In addition, yeah, the radicals have the privilege - they're the ones that first started holding 'All Queers' meetings. The moderator/facilitator, btw, was not a radical.
I also seemed to advocate for inclusiveness in the queer term, even the more conservative ones.
I will agree that radicals (far lefters, not the strange concoction by [who?] that are actually reactionary/fundamentalist) can be very black and white in the way that they see issues; I, however, though I do have strongly-held beliefs concerning politics and, well, actually lots of things, try to exercise balance and thoughtful consideration on issues (though I will admit I don't always succeed). That's one reason I have a blog: through dialogue with others I can ensure that my opinions are well thought-out, and that I have communicated them well.
Clearly you failed to read the entire post, and did exactly what I was complaining about - people not listening to each other.
As a parting shot, 'queer' was adopted by the "more extreme radicals" as a way of turning something hateful into something to be proud of, so if anyone has claim to it, it's the radicals.
Monday, January 24, 2005
Linkage and All Queers
Summerisle over at Times of Hate, Times of Joy brings up some interesting points while discussing socialist rhetoric and how to move forward, and tells us that a vision of the possible future should be presented. I can't say that I agree 100% -- part of anarchy is allowing different world-views to come into being -- but, it would certainly help when I'm trying to explain anarchy to someone. Rather than using vague concepts, I would have all the answers and convince them and they'd become anarchists and everyone would live in (mostly) peace and harmony.
Of course, in doing so, they would have a preconceived notion of anarchy that was caused by me, and might act coercively to ensure that their own notion was implemented... and possibly be the only notion implemented, which also isn't right.
Hmm. It might be late. Well, regardless.
Last week, at the All Queers Meeting, there was some drama. Note that this is all second-hand. I've heard two people's stories, which means I see two sides to the whole thing, though there are, of course, many more. Basically, there was a more conservative element present which felt threatened by the more radical element that was also present, who felt threatened by the more conservative element, and instead of everybody listening to one another (which they are still not doing, and instead are gossiping), each side blamed the other for being who they are (basically) and got all angry.
Never mind that the meeting was an 'All Queers' meeting, not an official group meeting, and that anything decided would be carried out by whoever felt like carrying it out, and (most importantly, because this is something that the 'more conservative' side didn't seem to understand) no one was obliged to participate (which is the basic valid point I gathered from the radical side).
Meanwhile, the radical side seemed to be unaccepting of the desires of the more conservative side to work on outreach to the, um, 'even more conservative' (ie, queer republican) elements in the community. While I sympathize with the radicals in that they don't want to be around people whose basic outlook on life includes segregation and hate (I wouldn't, either), there are a lot of people who are 'republican' or what have you that aren't. And, again, it was an 'all queers' meeting, and that implies everyone who calls themselves queer, even the conservative ones (which is a couple of basic points from the conservative side).
Note that my use of 'radical' and 'conservative' throughout this post is to refer to the two main protagonist/antagonist groups that have emerged, and should in no way imply that I am not a radical.
In other news... Things are going well with Steve. Things are going well in general, except that I have a lot of homework. And I promise to write more, but it's now almost 12:30 so I'm going to bed.
Of course, in doing so, they would have a preconceived notion of anarchy that was caused by me, and might act coercively to ensure that their own notion was implemented... and possibly be the only notion implemented, which also isn't right.
Hmm. It might be late. Well, regardless.
Last week, at the All Queers Meeting, there was some drama. Note that this is all second-hand. I've heard two people's stories, which means I see two sides to the whole thing, though there are, of course, many more. Basically, there was a more conservative element present which felt threatened by the more radical element that was also present, who felt threatened by the more conservative element, and instead of everybody listening to one another (which they are still not doing, and instead are gossiping), each side blamed the other for being who they are (basically) and got all angry.
Never mind that the meeting was an 'All Queers' meeting, not an official group meeting, and that anything decided would be carried out by whoever felt like carrying it out, and (most importantly, because this is something that the 'more conservative' side didn't seem to understand) no one was obliged to participate (which is the basic valid point I gathered from the radical side).
Meanwhile, the radical side seemed to be unaccepting of the desires of the more conservative side to work on outreach to the, um, 'even more conservative' (ie, queer republican) elements in the community. While I sympathize with the radicals in that they don't want to be around people whose basic outlook on life includes segregation and hate (I wouldn't, either), there are a lot of people who are 'republican' or what have you that aren't. And, again, it was an 'all queers' meeting, and that implies everyone who calls themselves queer, even the conservative ones (which is a couple of basic points from the conservative side).
Note that my use of 'radical' and 'conservative' throughout this post is to refer to the two main protagonist/antagonist groups that have emerged, and should in no way imply that I am not a radical.
In other news... Things are going well with Steve. Things are going well in general, except that I have a lot of homework. And I promise to write more, but it's now almost 12:30 so I'm going to bed.
Monday, January 10, 2005
The Left Hand of Darkness
Ursula K. LeGuin
On the planet Winter, conditions are harsh and forboding. Temperatures rarely lift much above freezing, even in the summer. In the distant past, before the collapse of their civilization, the Hainish colonized this cold planet, and their descendents now inhabit the milder regions, though vast glaciers cap the poles. The Gethenians, though, have an acute advantage: most of the time, they are genderless, existing without sexual drive nor possessing any genitals per se. However, entering kemmer, they take on male or female characteristics, different ones each time, and are fiercely driven to mate. If impregnated, he returns to a gender-neutral state while she carries the child to term, and then returns to a gender-neutral state as well. Otherwise, both return immediately.
Genly Ai, an envoy from the Ekumen of Known Worlds, comes to Winter to negotiate a trade agreement. Being the first alien on Winter, and being of only one gender, and that constantly, he is regarded suspiciously, and considered a pervert. The Left Hand of Darkness tells how, through a series of hardships, he comes to understand the Gethenians as they are, rather than through a dichotomic lens.
I enjoyed this book, and, admittedly, even for our own time (the book was first published in 1969), the book has controversial themes. But, I read this book in the hopes of shaking my way of thinking about gender a bit, and I don't think that happened much. I don't know whether it's because I find it easy to imagine an entire planet of people lacking a specific gender, or if the book itself didn't go far enough. One of my complaints is that I wasn't constantly reminded of it; LeGuin uses 'he' for all the characters, with possibly an exception for those in a female phase of kemmer, which might also mean I've envisioned a world populated entirely by men that can have babies.
Otherwise, the book was interesting as science fiction (or, if you prefer, speculative fiction). LeGuin also deals with the common themes of politics, outsiders and mysticism, threaded throughout the narrative and seperate chapters with local legends and stories of Winter.
Overall, I recommend this book. LeGuin, even removing the element of gender, can write an intruiging story, well worth your time. Plus, you get to find out what the Left Hand of Darkness is. ;-)
On the planet Winter, conditions are harsh and forboding. Temperatures rarely lift much above freezing, even in the summer. In the distant past, before the collapse of their civilization, the Hainish colonized this cold planet, and their descendents now inhabit the milder regions, though vast glaciers cap the poles. The Gethenians, though, have an acute advantage: most of the time, they are genderless, existing without sexual drive nor possessing any genitals per se. However, entering kemmer, they take on male or female characteristics, different ones each time, and are fiercely driven to mate. If impregnated, he returns to a gender-neutral state while she carries the child to term, and then returns to a gender-neutral state as well. Otherwise, both return immediately.
Genly Ai, an envoy from the Ekumen of Known Worlds, comes to Winter to negotiate a trade agreement. Being the first alien on Winter, and being of only one gender, and that constantly, he is regarded suspiciously, and considered a pervert. The Left Hand of Darkness tells how, through a series of hardships, he comes to understand the Gethenians as they are, rather than through a dichotomic lens.
I enjoyed this book, and, admittedly, even for our own time (the book was first published in 1969), the book has controversial themes. But, I read this book in the hopes of shaking my way of thinking about gender a bit, and I don't think that happened much. I don't know whether it's because I find it easy to imagine an entire planet of people lacking a specific gender, or if the book itself didn't go far enough. One of my complaints is that I wasn't constantly reminded of it; LeGuin uses 'he' for all the characters, with possibly an exception for those in a female phase of kemmer, which might also mean I've envisioned a world populated entirely by men that can have babies.
Otherwise, the book was interesting as science fiction (or, if you prefer, speculative fiction). LeGuin also deals with the common themes of politics, outsiders and mysticism, threaded throughout the narrative and seperate chapters with local legends and stories of Winter.
Overall, I recommend this book. LeGuin, even removing the element of gender, can write an intruiging story, well worth your time. Plus, you get to find out what the Left Hand of Darkness is. ;-)
Tuesday, December 28, 2004
Quick Point
I'd like to point you to something that made me feel better, at least: God's Ex-Boyfriend shows us that "person of the year" isn't necessarily an honor.
Updates later. Things go well. I'd like to do a "year in review", too, soo hang on for that. Ciao.
Updates later. Things go well. I'd like to do a "year in review", too, soo hang on for that. Ciao.
Monday, December 27, 2004
Autonomy - Freedom of Thought
Jean-Michael Smith
Freedom of Thought, the first in Jean-Michael Smith's Autonomy series, is the first novel-length work of fiction I have read that was released under a Creative Commons license. When I first found it, almost a year ago, I believe, I was immediately entranced, which is not something that happens to me often when I am just beginning to read a book. Normally, a book is recommended to me or is by an author I already know I like, and so I allow a good number of pages before I can be hooked. But Jean-Michael is a very skillful writer, and knows how to allow a story to unfold at just the right pace.
Freedom of Thought is a science-fiction novel, set in the near future and located in the Physical and the Virtual. We are told two interwoven stories, that of Kyle Tate, Dr. Nolen, and Marguerite, and the virtual community that they establish, wherein subjective time is longer than in the Physical, and that of an FBI agent, Katy, who stumbles upon them and tries to destroy them before trying to understand them.
Throughout the story, the author uses suspense very well, letting us know just enough about what is happening to make us worry, without enough to be quite sure why. One can never know for certain what's around the next bend, but I, at least, was pulled through the story to the end, though a move and change of computers caused me to lose the URL for the book for some time.
Unlike Le Guin's The Dispossessed, however, this virtual Utopia is not ambiguous. The author has a clearly marked agenda with this story: it is an effort to warn against too much power being given to copyright and patent holders, and the dangers involved therein, as well as what can happen in an autonomous society, both good and bad, though the emphasis is clearly on the good.
All in all, a very compelling story, with plenty of things to think about, both in terms of technology and in terms of society. I recommend it highly, and since you can read it for free on the internet, as well as download it, print it, copy it, etc. due to the Creative Commons license, it's a pocketbook-friendly diversion.
Freedom of Thought, the first in Jean-Michael Smith's Autonomy series, is the first novel-length work of fiction I have read that was released under a Creative Commons license. When I first found it, almost a year ago, I believe, I was immediately entranced, which is not something that happens to me often when I am just beginning to read a book. Normally, a book is recommended to me or is by an author I already know I like, and so I allow a good number of pages before I can be hooked. But Jean-Michael is a very skillful writer, and knows how to allow a story to unfold at just the right pace.
Freedom of Thought is a science-fiction novel, set in the near future and located in the Physical and the Virtual. We are told two interwoven stories, that of Kyle Tate, Dr. Nolen, and Marguerite, and the virtual community that they establish, wherein subjective time is longer than in the Physical, and that of an FBI agent, Katy, who stumbles upon them and tries to destroy them before trying to understand them.
Throughout the story, the author uses suspense very well, letting us know just enough about what is happening to make us worry, without enough to be quite sure why. One can never know for certain what's around the next bend, but I, at least, was pulled through the story to the end, though a move and change of computers caused me to lose the URL for the book for some time.
Unlike Le Guin's The Dispossessed, however, this virtual Utopia is not ambiguous. The author has a clearly marked agenda with this story: it is an effort to warn against too much power being given to copyright and patent holders, and the dangers involved therein, as well as what can happen in an autonomous society, both good and bad, though the emphasis is clearly on the good.
All in all, a very compelling story, with plenty of things to think about, both in terms of technology and in terms of society. I recommend it highly, and since you can read it for free on the internet, as well as download it, print it, copy it, etc. due to the Creative Commons license, it's a pocketbook-friendly diversion.
Friday, December 24, 2004
Seizure!
On Thursday I had a seizure.
I hadn't been feeling well, but I thought it was just a fever coming on. I had had feelings of being overwhelmed twice before that day, one in bed and then one coming home from lunch. Each time, I also started having something that was akin to false memories... not hallucinations, though. Anyway, both passed without incident, so I kept going on my way.
Then, my dad and I were working on getting the "development center" set up in my parents' office. This basically involved moving some computers and desks around, which we had just finished and were working on getting them set up correctly. I got up to leave the room and was nearly out the door when I was overcome, again. Apparently, I fell against the door and was convulsing. I don't remember much, except the fever-dreams. I do remember Steve standing out in them, but I don't remember why. Or much else about them, either. I awoke, briefly, in the ambulance, strapped to a board to keep my body straight. They asked some questions, I think about my age and the day, before I lost consciousness again.
Once in the hospital, I woke up and waited a little bit with my parents before a nurse took me off for a CAT scan and X-rays. Then they unstrapped me from that painful board. I'm not sure about the order, but Amy and Brendan came, and so did Steve. The hospital staff also had me hooked up to an IV and I drained two whole bags of fluid rather rapidly. Finally, the doctor came back and told me that it looked like it was just a seizure from dehydration, which was plausible, because I hadn't had as much water as usual the past few days, and discharged me.
Afterward, we came home and had pizza (and water!). And I've been alright since, though a bit sore, and there's a big scrape on my back from where I must've hit the door. And, I've learned, and I hope you will take away, a valuable lesson: don't get dehydrated!
I hadn't been feeling well, but I thought it was just a fever coming on. I had had feelings of being overwhelmed twice before that day, one in bed and then one coming home from lunch. Each time, I also started having something that was akin to false memories... not hallucinations, though. Anyway, both passed without incident, so I kept going on my way.
Then, my dad and I were working on getting the "development center" set up in my parents' office. This basically involved moving some computers and desks around, which we had just finished and were working on getting them set up correctly. I got up to leave the room and was nearly out the door when I was overcome, again. Apparently, I fell against the door and was convulsing. I don't remember much, except the fever-dreams. I do remember Steve standing out in them, but I don't remember why. Or much else about them, either. I awoke, briefly, in the ambulance, strapped to a board to keep my body straight. They asked some questions, I think about my age and the day, before I lost consciousness again.
Once in the hospital, I woke up and waited a little bit with my parents before a nurse took me off for a CAT scan and X-rays. Then they unstrapped me from that painful board. I'm not sure about the order, but Amy and Brendan came, and so did Steve. The hospital staff also had me hooked up to an IV and I drained two whole bags of fluid rather rapidly. Finally, the doctor came back and told me that it looked like it was just a seizure from dehydration, which was plausible, because I hadn't had as much water as usual the past few days, and discharged me.
Afterward, we came home and had pizza (and water!). And I've been alright since, though a bit sore, and there's a big scrape on my back from where I must've hit the door. And, I've learned, and I hope you will take away, a valuable lesson: don't get dehydrated!
Wednesday, December 22, 2004
Yo ho ho, and a bottle of Schnapps! -- The Dread Captain Whitebeard (aka Santa Claus)
Well, it's almost Christmas again. Right now, I'm sitting in my parents' living room, right next to the "Christmas Palm". It's an artificial Christmas (fir) tree, put together... slightly different. Doesn't look half-bad, if you ask me. We even wrapped the trunk with gold/brown ribbon. The lights on it make it look pretty cool... they're wrapped up the trunk, and form a kind of net in the branches... from outside, in the dark, you can't see the tree, but you can see the lights. Makes me think of the World-tree. I'll see if I can get a picture up.
Now, you might be wondering what all of this is about. Well, my family, at least for the past couple years, has had a 'theme' of the holidays. Last year's was 'Merry Freakin' Christmas'. This year's is... Pirates of the Arctic Circle.
Arrr!
Unfortunately, I didn't buy (or make) any gifts to go along with the theme this year... I was considering getting my sister a pirates coloring book (she likes coloring books), but I got her something else instead (just in case she reads this, which I doubt she will).
Now, for lifeupdate:
I finished my exams last Wednesday, with the Modern Physics. I think I did alright, but I am still awaiting my grade for that class. For the others, I did both better and worse than I thought (or was afraid) I would: straight 'B's so far. That's good for EM1, but I was hoping for better in Morphosyntax. German Cultures, eh. I don't care. I could've gotten better, except that I didn't do about a third of the homework. ^_^
Because school's been out, I've been attempting to work more. There's one problem, though: they haven't been paying me or mom regularly since the end of September. Mom finally did get a paycheck the other day, but I haven't seen one for a while. Probably won't until the new year, which is good and bad. On the plus side, I don't think it counts as income for this year, so I won't have to pay taxes on it until next year, and that will also keep me in a lower tax bracket (potentially). Unfortunately, and obviously, I won't have the money.
Steve and I have been spending quite a bit of time together recently. We decided the other day that we both wanted to have the Civ 3 multiplayer expansion (well... and I wanted the game :-p), so we went to Best Buy and got each other the game for Christmas. It's fun; I think I do like it better than Alpha Centauri, though I still like Alpha Centauri, too.
He's off of school for a couple of weeks, so he's working full-time at the bank, and, come March, he's going to be taking online courses and working full-time with a promotion. That'll be good for him in terms of money, but I'm partly afraid that it'll make him much more stressed. And, I think it would probably be pretty easy for me to distract him from his studies, which isn't something I want to do consciously, but could very well end up being the case.
I spent the night at his place last night, and he asked me some questions about our relationship, as usual. Which is good, I suppose, except that I've been thinking about something that bothers me about him and trying to decide whether I'm just being silly, or if I need to take action of some kind. And, no, I'm not ready to discuss it here, yet, either. It bothers me, though, because I don't think he slept well because he was thinking about it, what it might be. And that was not what I wanted to do, but I didn't want to lie to him, either. He claims that he still doesn't find anything that bothers him about me. It's not that I don't believe him, but I do find it incredible that he can't think of anything. I don't think I deserve to be thought of the way he seems to think of me. Anyway.
Amy's back. She came in late at night last Thursday. I went out with my parents and her fiance to get her. She's going to be staying in Colorado, going to Front Range in the spring, and then CU come fall. It's both happy and sad. I'm glad that she'll be here, but I know that one of her big dreams was to go to MIT. Which she did, technically. And she still could do graduate work or postdoc work there, so it's not all over. But, still.
I've finally gotten my laptop to nearly work just right with Linux. (The biggest problem was the video card, which I finally got replaced not too long ago). It makes me happy. I've also been playing with my desktop, grendel. I installed a mail server on it, for fun, and also a jabber server on it, which is an open instant messaging protocol. It's actually pretty cool. I also started an account with the jabber.org server. You could, in theory, reach me through jabber (not email) at emeraldimp (at) jabber (dot) org . I also had to install a dns server on grendel, so that names would resolve properly inside the network at my apartment (this is important for jabber, because I can't point the client at just an IP address; it has to be a FQDN). And, I was having a problem using jabber at all from the windows portion of my laptop, and I finally figured out why: it was the Norton Firewall that was blocking it, even though it wasn't configured to actually do anything. There was also no way (that I found) to tell it to allow the jabber stuff. So, I turned off the firewall. And, since my subscription is expired anyway, I think I'll choose another program. I didn't find any reports of the same problem with McAfee, but my parents have a copy on their computer, so I'll be able to try jabber there, before I make any purchases.
That's about all for now. Best!
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
Autonomy - Freedom of Thought - A Passage
Just thought I'd share a passage from a draft of a book I just finished reading. I enjoyed it very much, and thought you might like to read it as well. There are many passages which I find well-written (though there are still a [relatively small, but noticable to a pedant like me ;-) ] number of grammatical errors that need to be corrected), but I thought the following was interesting.
The following excerpt is from Autonomy - Freedom of Thought (warning: large file, on an encrypted server) by Jean-Michel Smith, and is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 license.
More linkage tomorrow. It's bedtime.
The following excerpt is from Autonomy - Freedom of Thought (warning: large file, on an encrypted server) by Jean-Michel Smith, and is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 license.
Ms. Katy Sinclair
Special Agent, Intellectual Property Crimes
Federal Bureau of Investigation
I apologize that our conversation earlier upset you so much. No one can be expected to take the passing of a family member lightly, even one that happened so many years ago.
However, I believe you to be an honorable person, and if we find we cannot be friends, and are destined by our differing philosophies to be enemies, let it at least be for the right reasons, based upon an honest intellectual and philosophical disagreement rather than a misunderstanding exacerbated by incorrect information.
First, on the subject of your grandfather's financial difficulties which led to his suicide. Please find attached the text of his recording contract. You will notice that, while his compensation for CD (“compact disk,” a form of media in widespread use during the late 20th and early 21st century) was standard for the industry of the day (at USD $0.49 per copy sold), no compensation for songs and albums sold in electronic format was specified. As a result, he was only compensated USD $0.0023[6] per download. That is less than one quarter of a cent per copy! Worse, as the consumer market moved from CD to SmartChip media, the lack of a contractual clause specifying new and emerging media resulted in his compensation remaining low for physical sales (also USD $0.0023).
Look at the sale's figures of your grandfather's albums. His sales were at the top of the charts for several years after his royalties fell off to only a few thousand dollars per year. Not because his fans weren't buying his music (they were, in record numbers!), but because he had the misfortune of having most of his music sold after compact disks had been phased out by the industry in favor of DRM copy restricted SmartChips, sales of which his recording company compensated him less than a quarter penny per copy! I urge you to use your own investigative resources to verify what I have written here. The contract is still being honored, and is still on file with Media Associates, and may be easily compared with the copy I have provided here.
Once you have satisfied yourself on this account, I urge you to ponder the greater question of just how much the cost, to our society and our economy, of creating an artificial scarcity of information, be it human knowledge, through patents, or human expression, through copyright, can be justified.
You may not realize this, but copyright was originally created as a means of censorship by the British crown, to combat the free expression that threatened their control of public information with the advent of the printing press. The number of books printed were reduced to one third their former number immediately, and publishers were able to create a cartel which they continue to enjoy today. This concept was extended later to recorded music, video, and ultimately the creation of 'virtual machines' in the form of software. Indeed, in the technology sector the line between copyrighted expression and patented invention has been completely blurred.
At the turn of the century, with the passage of the now-infamous Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by the United States congress, at the behest of the media and copyright cartels of New York and Hollywood, copyright law came full circle, returning to its origins and once again becoming an effective tool of corporate and government censorship on what was at that time a new publishing medium: the Internet. This censorship persists to this day.
Not only has copyright failed to protect artists like your grandfather from the depredations of the recording industry, but it has crippled the ability of generations of artists from pursing their craft by fostering a cartel of publishers which maintain an iron fisted control of the marketplace. No author can be published, no musician heard, no filmmaker regarded, but through the channels controlled by their respective publishing cartels. The promise of the Internet as a means to bridge the divide between artists and their fans has all but been destroyed, thanks to legislation passed by your government and later integrated into our international accords, at the behest of the very cartels it should have circumvented.
Even more appalling, consider Brazil's successful battle against AIDS, waged in direct violation of international patent law, against tremendous pressures brought to bear on them by the American and European governments at the behest of western pharmaceutical companies.[7] Recall the number of researches who had to give up their scientific inquiries in search of treatment for AIDS, and breast cancer, when presented with Cease and Desist letters from patent attorneys employed by pharmaceutical companies alleging that such research violated patents already granted. This delayed a cure for AIDS by several years, at least, and still ties up cancer research to this day.[8] We know today that patents nearly always stifle rather than promote research, and that privatized, twenty year monopolies locking down new lines of technical and scientific development have a profound, domino effect in restricting and even preventing progress.
If our current technical lead over your crippled industry, as represented by the equipment which you and your colleagues already have in their possession, isn't enough to underscore this point, allow me to present one more historical reference: the airplane. Invented at the beginning of the twentieth century by the Wright Brothers, it was truly an invention worthy of a patent by any standard. New, innovative, truly an invention the world had not seen before. Anyone believing that the patent system is an appropriate methodology for compensating inventors would surely agree that the inventors of powered flight more than deserved the patent they were granted.
Yet, with the onset of the First World War it became very clear to the United States Government that aviation technology in the Unites States lagged woefully behind that of Europe, which was not encumbered by the a patent on airplanes. This was such a concern that the United States government, in an unprecedented action and a tacit admission that patents impair, rather than promote, progress, essentially nationalized the Wright Brothers' patent, granted them a default 1% royalty, and threw the technology open for competing companies to develop and improve upon.[9] The result as a tremendous leap forward in aviation technology, so much so that, in later decades, the United States became the world leader in the production of aircraft.
No one creates in a vacuum. All of us, whether we are artists, researchers, inventors, or scientists, stand upon the shoulders of others. No novel can be written, no movie filmed, no song recorded, no device invented, without it incorporating some aspect of another's work, some early bit of human expression or knowledge. Copyright locks up expression for generations ... with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the US Congresses propensity for retroactively extending it, virtually forever.[10] Patents cripple progress in a variety of fields, from software development to medical research, locking down the building blocks for each successive step in development for twenty years in a government mandated and enforced, twenty year monopoly entitlement. There was a time when progress was thought to be exponential, but as each new area of human endeavor fell beneath the yoke of the US and world patent system, this exponential progress was lost. Pundits and intellectual property attorneys euphemistically refer to this as a “maturing market,” but in truth none of the technologies have ever had a real chance to mature, even today, and the markets in question would more accurately be described not as mature, but as stagnant.
So long as we take the shared knowledge of humankind and treat it as a private possession limited to a few through patents, so long as we take the common culture we all share and treat its expression as a private possession through copyright, we will as a society find our technological progress stifled and our ability to express ourselves subject to corporate and government censorship of the worst kind.
I, and others, have chosen to reject this. Our reward for doing so has been a return to exponential scientific and technological progress, our punishment has been to become hunted, by you and your colleagues.
We mean you no harm, we offer you no threat. We only asked to be left alone, to pursue our own interests and our own destiny, independent of the one you have chosen for yourselves.
Please, leave us in peace and allow us to do the same for you.
Thank you, and best regards,
Marguerite
More linkage tomorrow. It's bedtime.
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
Plus, a petition
A petition asking California Senator Barbara Boxer to contest the 2004 election results when the US Congress reconvenes in 2005. For those of you who have seen Farenheit 9/11, you remember how there wasn't even one senator that time? I think all the trouble in Ohio is worth a look, don't you?
In addition, petition your own senators! For Colorado. I have prepared a simple text; you may, of course, modify it or write your own!
In addition, petition your own senators! For Colorado. I have prepared a simple text; you may, of course, modify it or write your own!
Senator [name],
After reading about the continued problems in Ohio, not only involving the actual election but also the recount, including Secretary Blackwell's illegal (under Ohio state law) sealing of ballots, I urge you to contest the 2004 election in the United States Congress before inauguration. Because of the Electoral Count Act of 1887, one senator and one House Representative are required to contest an election prior to inauguration.
Please show [state name] that you support fair and auditable elections.
Thank you,
[Your Name]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)