This is Violence

January 18, 2012
Notes: 467
Tagged: sopa · pipa · LOL ·
#
jstn: LOL This would be funnier if it weren’t so truly pathetic. Taken paragraph by paragraph: - Neither of the bills in question is about “parties working cooperatively together”. Instead, it’s about a whole host of the companies that form the foundation of the web, and the public at large, being forced to surrender their own rights as the government that is supposed to be protecting those same peoples rights instead capitulates to a few influential industries and their no-longer-relevent business models. (run-on sentence, yes. But it’s a free internet - so I can do that.) - Further, there doesn’t seem to any evidence at all that there is “a problem that all now seem to agree is very real and damaging.” It’s opposite actually. As Tim O’Reilly put it: “In the entire discussion, I’ve seen no discussion of credible evidence of this economic harm. There’s no question in my mind that piracy exists, that people around the world are enjoying creative content without paying for it, and even that some criminals are profiting by redistributing it. But is there actual economic harm?” And that’s just it - the very foundational premise of this entire debate is assumed. This is frankly terrifying as a precedent for establishing law in this country. - The only “abuse of the power given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today” seems to coming from the very people responsible for this document. It’s frankly anathema to the free market ideals these same legislators and CEO’s claim to hold dear that they would push for a federal law protecting their own business model given, again, the complete lack of any evidence of actual harm. - In terms of “a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts” I’ll simply refer to the preceding bullet and note that I’m beginning to think this might actually have been written by the Onion. - Finally, I can’t think of anything “gimmick”-y about exercising one’s first amendment rights. And yes, this blackout IS “designed to punish elected and administration officials” - that’s what protests, and elections, are for. Perhaps the senator has forgotten who he’s there to work for?

jstn:

LOL

This would be funnier if it weren’t so truly pathetic.

Taken paragraph by paragraph:

- Neither of the bills in question is about “parties working cooperatively together”. Instead, it’s about a whole host of the companies that form the foundation of the web, and the public at large, being forced to surrender their own rights as the government that is supposed to be protecting those same peoples rights instead capitulates to a few influential industries and their no-longer-relevent business models. (run-on sentence, yes. But it’s a free internet - so I can do that.)

- Further, there doesn’t seem to any evidence at all that there is “a problem that all now seem to agree is very real and damaging.” It’s opposite actually. As Tim O’Reilly put it: “In the entire discussion, I’ve seen no discussion of credible evidence of this economic harm. There’s no question in my mind that piracy exists, that people around the world are enjoying creative content without paying for it, and even that some criminals are profiting by redistributing it. But is there actual economic harm?” And that’s just it - the very foundational premise of this entire debate is assumed. This is frankly terrifying as a precedent for establishing law in this country.

- The only “abuse of the power given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today” seems to coming from the very people responsible for this document. It’s frankly anathema to the free market ideals these same legislators and CEO’s claim to hold dear that they would push for a federal law protecting their own business model given, again, the complete lack of any evidence of actual harm.

- In terms of “a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts” I’ll simply refer to the preceding bullet and note that I’m beginning to think this might actually have been written by the Onion.

- Finally, I can’t think of anything “gimmick”-y about exercising one’s first amendment rights. And yes, this blackout IS “designed to punish elected and administration officials” - that’s what protests, and elections, are for. Perhaps the senator has forgotten who he’s there to work for?

(via irunfrombears)

December 23, 2011
Notes: 4
Tagged: Louis CK · sopa ·
#

Link: Louis CK Single-Handedly Undermines All Imagined Logic of SOPA

How weird is it that this could happen at the exact same time congress is listing to the bozo’s trying to push SOPA through?

December 21, 2011
Notes: 1002
#

manicchill:

OWS Invests In Unmanned Surveillance Drone Dubbed The ‘Occucopter’

For years we’ve seen images of the military’s unmanned aerial vehicles aiding soldiers in combat zones, and their evolution from surveillance tools to the heavily weaponized Predator drones. Now, the Guardian reports, Occupy Wall Street livestreamer Tim Pool hopes to use that technology as an additional set of eyes on the police department.

Tim Pool, an Occupy Wall Street protester, has acquired a Parrot AR drone he amusingly calls the “occucopter”. It is a lightweight four-rotor helicopter that you can buy cheaply on Amazon and control with your iPhone. It has an onboard camera so that you can view everything on your phone that it points at. Pool has modified the software to stream live video to the internet so that we can watch the action as it unfolds.

The Occucopter comes in response to police departments, across the country, stepping up efforts to prevent their actions from being recorded. Some have started covering up their names and badge numbers. Others attempt to stand in the way of recording devices, or declare “frozen zones” that are off limits to even the most credentialed reporters. Tim hopes that the Occucopter will allow protesters to monitor the police, and record any cases of brutality that may have otherwise remained undocumented.

In addition to modifying the Parrot’s software for internet livestreaming, Pool is also currently working on modifying the software for multiple controllers. He even hopes to add 3G functionality, so that even protesters and supporters outside of New York could aid in the monitoring process. When asked about his plans by the Guardian, he explained:

We are trying to get a stable live feed so you can have 50 people controlling it in series. If the cops see you controlling it from a computer they can shut you down, but then control could automatically switch to someone else.

Now you, much like myself, might find yourself wondering, “Isn’t he concerned that some officer(s) will just shoot it down?”

No…They can’t just fire a weapon in the air because it could seriously hurt someone. They would have no excuse because the occucopter is strictly not illegal. Their only recourse would be to make it illegal, but it is only a toy

So it would appear that we finally have an answer to a twenty five year old question. Tim Pool is watching the watchmen.

And doing a damn good job of it.

(images courtesy of Time/iPhoneZA/GeekAlerts)

(via npr)

December 17, 2011
Notes: 2173
#

“The fact that there was any debate over whether to call in experts on such a matter should tell you something about the integrity of Congress. It’d be one thing if legitimate technical questions directed at the bill’s supporters weren’t met with either silence or veiled accusations that the other side was sympathetic to piracy. Yet here we are with a group of elected officials openly supporting a bill they can’t explain, and having the temerity to suggest there’s no need to “bring in the nerds” to suss out what’s actually on it… The chilling takeaway of this whole debacle was the irrefutable air of anti-intellectualism; that inescapable absurdity that we have members of Congress voting on a technical bill who do not posses any technical knowledge on the subject and do not find it imperative to recognize those who do.

This used to be funny, but now it’s really just terrifying. We’re dealing with legislation that will completely change the face of the internet and free speech for years to come. Yet here we are, still at the mercy of underachieving Congressional know-nothings that have more in common with the slacker students sitting in the back of math class than elected representatives. The fact that some of the people charged with representing us must be dragged kicking and screaming out of their complacency on such matters is no longer endearing — it’s just pathetic and sad.”

-Joshua Kopstein, Dear Congress, It’s No Longer OK To Not Know How The Internet Works (via drinkyourjuice)

This friends, is the most important article you’ll read today.  (via shortformblog)

(via shortformblog)

December 12, 2011
Notes: 2
Tagged: Louie CK · DRM · brand ·
#

Louis

Louis CK: comedian AND expert brand manager.

That there is the note you find when buying Louis CK’s new comedy special and while not quite as progressive as Radioheads “pay if you want’ model, it’s another great example of how a really well managed brand doesn’t need to fear it’s customers or pirates or whatever.

The fact is: someone (probably a lot of people) will torrent this. But here’s another fact: someone (probably a lot of people) who has never seen him before will see this show because of that torrent and become a fan, and watch his show (which will add to his ratings), and will buy his next video, and will pay to see him next time his in their town, and become one of the vast majority of people who, like myself, WANT to pay for his videos.

Instead of spending his time and money finding strategies to wring every last cent out of any who ever might want to see him, Louis is spending his time and money making fans.

November 18, 2011
Notes: 104
#
shortformblog: Netflix to air new episodes of “Arrested Development in 2013: Oh, Netflix, we forgive you! Wow. Great move Netflix.

shortformblog:

Netflix to air new episodes of “Arrested Development in 2013: Oh, Netflix, we forgive you!

Wow. Great move Netflix.

November 07, 2011
Notes: 158
Tagged: David foster Wallace · Infinite Jest ·
#

“You can be shaped, or you can be broken. There is not much in between.”

-David Foster Wallace, Infinite Jest (via nomoreundead)
November 03, 2011
Notes: 1
Tagged: I love the 80's ·
#

Yeeeaaaah. That.

Man - if you grew up in the 80’s or early 90’s this is a YES for you.

November 03, 2011
Tagged: ugh · advertising · NIKE ·
#
Ummm, what? This is the disclaimer from the promo site for Carmelo Anthony’s new shoe. Order to look at your site I need to fully QUIT any other applications I might be working in, not only switch which browser I’m using but also close all the other sites I might have open in tabs. THEN, I need to open my browser preferences to allow you to popup additional browser windows - which I’m not allowed to click. All this so you can….what? Riiiiiight. But - it is HTML5, so…that’s a thing.

Ummm, what?

This is the disclaimer from the promo site for Carmelo Anthony’s new shoe.

Order to look at your site I need to fully QUIT any other applications I might be working in, not only switch which browser I’m using but also close all the other sites I might have open in tabs. THEN, I need to open my browser preferences to allow you to popup additional browser windows - which I’m not allowed to click. All this so you can….what?

Riiiiiight.

But - it is HTML5, so…that’s a thing.

November 02, 2011
Notes: 414
Tagged: David foster Wallace · language · writing ·
#

“The point of grammar is to facilitate clear and precise communication, to make language reflect thought and intention as closely as possible. On that front, a lot of colloquial bad grammar is actually GOOD grammar. I think focusing on grammar for grammar’s sake is a mistake.”

-

—John Green (via runalovegood)

This guy gets it.

(via sylviawrath)

Someone needs to tell all the AP kids….

(via zeenie)

I think this is mostly true, but not entirely true.

As someone who’s grasp of even basic grammatical rules is fleeting at best, and who is a fairly firm believer in power of slang and colloquialisms, and who only recently acquiesced to using apostrophes in possessives (I’m a child of the IM era), I recently had my eyes opened to an additional factor in this discussion by way of David Wallace’s essay “Tense Present” which is: the baseline effectiveness of relaying a concept is only part of the equation. Your choice of words and the way you structure them are also a critical aspect how you convey what you’re thinking in the context of the reader.

In this way, I think using slang and colloquialisms are 100% acceptable as long as their meaning as signifiers of larger concepts is something you want your reader to infer - like in Infinite Jest, for example (to stay with the DWF thing). If on the other hand, you’re writing for an audience that doesn’t use that sort of language you should make the choice to use it conscious of what you’re signifying by doing so.

(via zeenie)