4 ms·

There is a worldwide effort going on right now to put a ownership sticker on the worldwide internet, that goal has been failing, so now they are settling for an

by maeon3 14y ago

There is a worldwide effort going on right now to put a ownership sticker on the worldwide internet, that goal has been failing, so now they are settling for an "ownership of the internet in their jurisdiction", and that is failing too, so they do the next best thing: "Digital rights management" because oh god won't somebody think of the children with child pornography and music downloads! It's about expanding the power base, the ultimate goal here is for governments to acquire the ability to tax every bit and byte that travels across their borders. Kim stands for freedom. Government, stay out of my shit, you have a few defined jobs and you're not doing any of them here. Power corrupts and seeks more power, it's the human condition. I'm afraid a free neutral and open internet and the explosion of technology it brought will be a phenomenon for the history books either soon or eventually.

mistercow 14y ago
>"Digital rights management" because oh god won't somebody think of the children with child pornography and music downloads! I don't understand what connection you're drawing between CP and DRM.
- rohansingh 14y ago
  There is no good connection between them. However, I've seen legislators often conflate the two in order to promote pro-DRM legislation in the name of protecting the children.
  - mistercow 14y ago
    I was certainly aware of the connection between anti-CP and copyright, but I have never heard of a connection to DRM specifically. I thought the connections were limited to the shared interests of fighting CP and fighting copyright infringement, like monitoring peer to peer networks and requiring ISPs to keep records and comply with requests from law enforcement.
- graeme 14y ago
  CP is often used as a justification for stricter internet controls, which leaks over into non-CP areas. Common strategy. Use a cause that no one will argue against in order to push rules that serve a broader agenda.
  - mistercow 14y ago
    Yeah, but that only makes sense when there is a connection. Requiring ISPs to keep more detailed records of internet usage, while terrible, does at least make sense as an anti-CP measure, even if the real purpose is to make it easier to sue file sharers. But DRM doesn't have any plausible connection to CP. But OK, I'm not going to go too far down the road of imagining that legislators and lobbyists are behaving rationally. The more important point is that while I've seen plenty of examples of using the fight against CP as a front for the copyright agenda, all of those examples did bear some reasonable facade of plausibility. Can you give an actual example of where they've been so brazen as to actually try to claim DRM was a tool for fighting CP?
    - graeme 14y ago
      Oh, you're right. I read the original exchange too hastily. I think the OP was being a bit sarcastic. Now I read it as him expressing the spirit of the opportunistic conflation between the two issues, even though there isn't any literal case where CP was used to justify DRM. edit: Interesting side-note, I seem to get the same number of upvotes on comments where I have to say 'oops, you're right' as on comments where I don't. Hmm.
stephengillie 14y ago
"All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptable. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted." - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune, Missionaria Protectiva The exposure and removal of corruption is one of the ways in which the industry of societal governance is being disrupted and reformed.
- westicle 14y ago
  Upvoted for quoting Frank Herbert. So much interesting (sometimes convincing, often troubling) political philosophy in his books. Recommended reading.
kahawe 14y ago
>Kim stands for freedom I think you mean "...stands for the freedom to make money off of people in the same way he has been the last 2 decades, namely through at best shady and several times completely illegal and fraudulent means". Yes, even scumbags have rights, absolutely! No, don't ever paint this egotistical, opportunistic allegorical hyperbole of a man as any sort of "hero" or "freedom fighter". >It's about expanding the power base On this point, I could not agree more with you. It has been my own impression for a LONG time that all those "you wouldn't steal a car" ads and all the media attention the RIAA/MPAA-mafia are getting for their strong-arm methods is really nothing but a very clever and calculated PR campaign to implant this actually non-existent problem in people's minds so that they then can lobby and extort money and continue increasing their power and influence/leverage on governments the world over. So what I am saying is, it was never about changing people's minds to not copy a CD or a movie but it was mainly about rallying and lobbying for their cause; a self-feeding cluster-frakk because the topic is then obviously "en vogue" so politicians can no longer ignore them and have to give in to their demands. When actually they do not make less money now than they did 15 years ago. It is very sad to see how successful this has become, seeing NZ fold like that.
- pyre 14y ago
  > Yes, even scumbags have rights, absolutely! No, > don't ever paint this egotistical, opportunistic > allegorical hyperbole of a man as any sort of "hero" > or "freedom fighter". Larry Flint stood for freedom too, doesn't mean he's a humanitarian only thinking of the greater good of mankind. Even the 'Founding Fathers' of the US were rich landowners that didn't want to get taxed by England. For all of the "fluff" that the history books talk about them being warm and fuzzy about human rights, their philosophies didn't disagree with their pocketbooks. > When actually they do not make less money now than > they did 15 years ago. Their profits/revenues do fluctuate, but they use piracy as their scapegoat for everything. Is the economy down, so people have less disposable income to spend on consuming entertainment media? It's piracy at fault! It definitely could not be because people have less money to spend, therefore they spend less money in aggregate. Are other industries encroaching into the consumption media space (e.g. video games industry)? It's piracy at fault! It definitely could not be because people are now choosing to distribute spending of their finite amount of disposable income in other industries (e.g. buying few movies, and more video games).

by maeon3 14y ago

mistercow 14y ago

>"Digital rights management" because oh god won't somebody think of the children with child pornography and music downloads! I don't understand what connection you're drawing between CP and DRM.

rohansingh 14y ago
There is no good connection between them. However, I've seen legislators often conflate the two in order to promote pro-DRM legislation in the name of protecting the children.
- mistercow 14y ago
  I was certainly aware of the connection between anti-CP and copyright, but I have never heard of a connection to DRM specifically. I thought the connections were limited to the shared interests of fighting CP and fighting copyright infringement, like monitoring peer to peer networks and requiring ISPs to keep records and comply with requests from law enforcement.
graeme 14y ago
CP is often used as a justification for stricter internet controls, which leaks over into non-CP areas. Common strategy. Use a cause that no one will argue against in order to push rules that serve a broader agenda.
- mistercow 14y ago
  Yeah, but that only makes sense when there is a connection. Requiring ISPs to keep more detailed records of internet usage, while terrible, does at least make sense as an anti-CP measure, even if the real purpose is to make it easier to sue file sharers. But DRM doesn't have any plausible connection to CP. But OK, I'm not going to go too far down the road of imagining that legislators and lobbyists are behaving rationally. The more important point is that while I've seen plenty of examples of using the fight against CP as a front for the copyright agenda, all of those examples did bear some reasonable facade of plausibility. Can you give an actual example of where they've been so brazen as to actually try to claim DRM was a tool for fighting CP?
  - graeme 14y ago
    Oh, you're right. I read the original exchange too hastily. I think the OP was being a bit sarcastic. Now I read it as him expressing the spirit of the opportunistic conflation between the two issues, even though there isn't any literal case where CP was used to justify DRM. edit: Interesting side-note, I seem to get the same number of upvotes on comments where I have to say 'oops, you're right' as on comments where I don't. Hmm.

stephengillie 14y ago

"All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptable. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted." - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune, Missionaria Protectiva The exposure and removal of corruption is one of the ways in which the industry of societal governance is being disrupted and reformed.

westicle 14y ago
Upvoted for quoting Frank Herbert. So much interesting (sometimes convincing, often troubling) political philosophy in his books. Recommended reading.

kahawe 14y ago

>Kim stands for freedom I think you mean "...stands for the freedom to make money off of people in the same way he has been the last 2 decades, namely through at best shady and several times completely illegal and fraudulent means". Yes, even scumbags have rights, absolutely! No, don't ever paint this egotistical, opportunistic allegorical hyperbole of a man as any sort of "hero" or "freedom fighter". >It's about expanding the power base On this point, I could not agree more with you. It has been my own impression for a LONG time that all those "you wouldn't steal a car" ads and all the media attention the RIAA/MPAA-mafia are getting for their strong-arm methods is really nothing but a very clever and calculated PR campaign to implant this actually non-existent problem in people's minds so that they then can lobby and extort money and continue increasing their power and influence/leverage on governments the world over. So what I am saying is, it was never about changing people's minds to not copy a CD or a movie but it was mainly about rallying and lobbying for their cause; a self-feeding cluster-frakk because the topic is then obviously "en vogue" so politicians can no longer ignore them and have to give in to their demands. When actually they do not make less money now than they did 15 years ago. It is very sad to see how successful this has become, seeing NZ fold like that.

pyre 14y ago
> Yes, even scumbags have rights, absolutely! No, > don't ever paint this egotistical, opportunistic > allegorical hyperbole of a man as any sort of "hero" > or "freedom fighter". Larry Flint stood for freedom too, doesn't mean he's a humanitarian only thinking of the greater good of mankind. Even the 'Founding Fathers' of the US were rich landowners that didn't want to get taxed by England. For all of the "fluff" that the history books talk about them being warm and fuzzy about human rights, their philosophies didn't disagree with their pocketbooks. > When actually they do not make less money now than > they did 15 years ago. Their profits/revenues do fluctuate, but they use piracy as their scapegoat for everything. Is the economy down, so people have less disposable income to spend on consuming entertainment media? It's piracy at fault! It definitely could not be because people have less money to spend, therefore they spend less money in aggregate. Are other industries encroaching into the consumption media space (e.g. video games industry)? It's piracy at fault! It definitely could not be because people are now choosing to distribute spending of their finite amount of disposable income in other industries (e.g. buying few movies, and more video games).