6 ms·

I'm sick and tired of being in such a lazy-ass, apathetic society that possesses zero regard to freedom. Stallman may be a nut, but when you think long and har

by kunai 13y ago

I'm sick and tired of being in such a lazy-ass, apathetic society that possesses zero regard to freedom. Stallman may be a nut, but when you think long and hard about what he says, and think about SOPA, PIPA, and this lobby, in horror, your face twists in fear and you watch, helplessly, as your fellow citizens bend over backwards and let the government have their way. I don't even know what to do anymore. Nobody will lobby against Hollywood; people already gobble up TMZ and are too obsessed with celebrity pseudo-culture and movies and pop music that they won't do it. We need more activists. And without them, we are fucked.

obviouslygreen 13y ago
And your answer is Stallman? Yes, he is a nut. In the sense of "no one will ever take him seriously, especially anyone involved in mainstream decision-making, who has ever read anything he has written," which is in this case the most relevant metric. Stallman is never going to be any help here, nor is anyone like him, because any "normal" person -- that is, one that other people won't ignore out of hand -- will ignore him out of hand. This includes politicians, to whom said "normal" people are the all-important majority. "We need more activists" is bullshit. You think we need more activists? More of those outliers that get lampooned in every media outlet for railing against the status quo? Because that's what activists are to most people: Nuts and/or malcontents. Of course, my real problem with this statement is exactly the same reason I'm not making it. You think we don't have enough activists? GO BE ONE. If you think they can do any good and you believe that "we are fucked" without them, stop posting on HN, get off your ass, and DO SOMETHING. Otherwise get back on the bench with the rest of us, because all your whining about mass media and celebrity culture is just that. You can gripe all you want that people aren't doing anything, but as soon as you start telling people what they SHOULD be doing, either you'd better be doing it yourself or you'll have to excuse those of us -- everyone -- who will not take you seriously. In the event that you actually are interested in backing up your hollow rhetoric: The only way to work this system is from the inside. So start campaigning, or start schmoozing, because while real change is essentially impossible, the only way to mitigate damage is by convincing the relevant politicians that it's in their best interests to do so.
- kunai 13y ago
  Do you really think that Aaron Swartz, Larry Lessig and the masses of people protesting Capitol Hill last year when SOPA came around didn't make a difference? They were activists. Do you really think we'd have so much free/open source software today without the contribution of Eric S. Raymond, Stallman, et al.? They're activists. Do you really think that we'd be here today if Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington never existed? They were -- yep, you guessed it -- activists.
  - yareally 13y ago
    For what it's worth though, Ben Franklin was much more diplomatic and compromising than RMS. RMS would be more like a modern day Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine or Samuel Adams. Though all mentioned parties during the revolution played a key role in the independence of the United States. So I guess one could say it "takes people of all sorts."
  - mtowle 13y ago
    The flow of human events isn't bound to individuals. Names merely get played up in the remembering, and the events downplayed. E.g., America was going to revolt regardless of whether T.J., et al had ever been born. Really amazing that a war is misremembered as activism....pass the K-Y.
    - dkuntz2 13y ago
      Not actually true. The colonies could have received the things they wanted had they actually attempted to fight for them (and by 'things they wanted', I mean the things we wrote about England (and specifically a king with little political power at that time (it was all parliament's by that point)) not giving us). The American Revolutionary War was started because of political activism. They saw a chance to start a new country in whatever manner they pleased, and leapt at the opportunity. Even just a little effort put to really trying to get a voice in parliament would have worked fine, but instead we went and write the bloody Declaration in an attempt to rally support of other nations not really pleased with England (I'm looking at you France), and filled it with rhetoric, half-truths, and blatant lies. Okay, maybe not blatant, but they're there. Really amazing that a war is mistaught to most American students. Okay, it isn't that amazing, I mean, you're going to teach your country's history in the most favorable light possible, but, still...
beedogs 13y ago
I lobby against Hollywood by refusing to give them a thin dime of my money.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
- ISL 13y ago
  Since there are few corporations that have a corporate interest in "freedom," then the money and resources have to come from individuals. I'd disagree. The majority of corporations have a financial interest in freedom. Getting them to commit resources to any lobbying effort is the challenge.
  - dkuntz2 13y ago
    Basic economic theory says you're wrong. Corporations don't have incentives to be good outside if their bottom line long-term, the only reason they occasionally do good is due to social or regulatory pressure. For the most part, corporations are going to do what's good for their bottom line without carrying about the long-term effects.
seandhi 13y ago
This paper barely even mentions music or movies, and its proposals are for going after foreign entities who steal intellectual property, such as R&D, to develop counterfeit goods. This is less about going after little Timmy for downloading a movie and more to do with a Chinese firm stealing biotechnology secrets from a U.S. company to produce its own products.
- manifesto 13y ago
  Then why would Hollywood propose that with its own money about an issue it don't care about? Surly it won't mention movie download because it doesn't want to stimulate you. But it will screw you.
  - seandhi 13y ago
    What gives you the impression that Hollywood is behind it? The BoingBoing article completely misrepresents what is in the paper, so I would not be surprised if they got that part wrong, too. Have you read it? It proposes protecting American companies from foreign entities stealing our technology and using it to develop products. Here are the members of The Commission of the Theft of American Intellectual Property, the commission that authored the paper: Dennis C. Blair (co-chair), former Director of National Intelligence and Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Command • Jon M. Huntsman, Jr. (co-chair), former Ambassador to China, Governor of the state of Utah, and Deputy U.S. Trade Representative • Craig R. Barrett, former Chairman and CEO of Intel Corporation • Slade Gorton, former U.S. Senator from the state of Washington, Washington Attorney General, and member of the 9-11 Commission • William J. Lynn III, CEO of DRS Technologies and former Deputy Secretary of Defense • Deborah Wince-Smith, President and CEO of the Council on Competitiveness • Michael K. Young, President of the University of Washington and former Deputy Under Secretary of State Which of those is from the MPAA?
    - kunai 13y ago
      At this point, does it even matter? This lobby still has the backing of the entertainment industry, and it doesn't matter if it's stolen IP, trying to create an exemption for installing rootkits on remote machines is the entertainment industry's dream.
vy8vWJlco 13y ago
"I don't even know what to do anymore." Code. People use Skype because there's no clear alternative (maybe work on Jitsi... It still needs a server for the good stuff). People use Facebook because there's no alternative (maybe work on RetroShare). People let their government tell them what to do because they think it's better than anarchy (maybe work on a political Kickstarter). Copyright enforcement against BitTorrent users has gone into high gear because BitTorrent is good at sharing but weak in anonymity. Fix that. Don't make tools to break laws, just make tools. Write software to empower individuals and make institutions unnecessary and you won't have to spend as much time cleaning up after institutions and the egos that run them when they get carried away. Promoting open-source software as a way to counter spyware, and general activism, is better than nothing, but the best way to change the world is still to invent it IMHO. (Just don't throw yourself on the fire unnecessarily either... Bitcoin's author was wise to keep his identity out of it.)
- kunai 13y ago
  I love to write software, but unfortunately, I don't think that will solve the problem at hand, which is the MPAA's DRM lobby. They have millions and millions of dollars' worth of support behind them. What's a few hundred hackers to a huge industry? If we want to really make a difference, we need all the support we can get. Perhaps even start an organization to lobby against the MPAA/RIAA similar to what sinak has done, but with far greater support. How many times will this happen? People must wake up.
  - vy8vWJlco 13y ago
    Ideally, IMHO, copyright would be non-transferable.
ChuckMcM 13y ago
We need more activists. And without them, we are fucked. You can change the system from within as well. While it is impractical to go out and run for President and hope to win, one of the things I hope the current crop of young adults will see is that they have the power to become the system and change it. First build a resume in public service (city council, county supervisor, state representative) then use your training to help you and your fellow revolutionaries move into a position of power and change. One of the saddest things is that the folks in power have convinced the youth of America that they are powerless and nothing can be done forcing them into acts of "activism" which allows them to be identified and eliminated. Perhaps an example that doesn't resonate with you but has been doing what your compatriots have not, is the Tea Party. These folks have shown you that it isn't about dominating the world, its about setting a theme, recruiting to your cause, and then using the institutions that are in place to allow you to affect change, to work for you.
- asveikau 13y ago
  I didn't mind what you said until you brought in the horrible example of the tea party. Even ignoring its political message it was pretty much all astroturf, pumped up and hyped by established players. A few election cycles later it's pretty much gone.
  - ChuckMcM 13y ago
    I appreciate that the example can be distasteful. However, I have looked into the astro-turfing dismissal argument as well. Generally, astro-turfing (the use of a PR engine to create the appearance of grass roots support) is designed to get a candidate elected (or issue passed) that favors the money financing the campaign. We have seen a number of these in California and there has consistently been a strong correlation between benefit and later funding source analysis. However, some really earnest but ineffective people were elected under the guise of the 'tea party'. Much to the disgust of the Republican Party power infrastructure (the speaker of the house cannot count on all of his own party's votes for that reason). Generally, power interests that are trying to manipulate the system don't throw random people into the mix like that. My conclusion after looking at the folks who were elected that way is that a large number of them, perhaps the majority of them, were elected by people fed up with the system and not an interested third party. But lets set that aside for a moment. Lets say you and your friends can get elected to city government. If your city runs well, and you don't put up with the baloney that sometimes passes as politics these days, you can parley that into county government. And that into state government. Assuming that you are good enough to learn the skills you need to make that trip. It can take you 6 - 10 years to go from city supervisor to state representative. Once enough people around you know who you are, you can chose to focus on local elections or national ones. The starting point though is that in order for this to work someone with the idea of doing public service to serve the public and not their own interests has to step forward. Waiting for someone else to step forward has never been a good idea, either seeking out people and supporting their efforts or putting your hat in yourself are the workable choices.
sliverstorm 13y ago
I'm not sure we need be this terrified. Gear-heads made similar claims about freedom as cars became more complicated and less user-serviceable. But you know what? While cars have their issues, and are indeed now more difficult to service, they have continued to get better- a lot better. The last totally user-serviceable cars were made in the 60's and early 70's. Many of the improvements come from improvements to manufacturing, but the sophisticated electronic control systems are integral. Now, the internet is of course not an automobile. But my point is, batshit insane legislation aside, perhaps maintaining the maximum amount of freedom is not as valuable as we think? I'd hate to be stuck with late 60's cars.
- kunai 13y ago
  Your analogy is completely flawed. Automakers aren't putting root exploits in vehicles that allow override by the government when it detects you're going to an "unauthorized" music dealer. And are late 60's cars really that bad? There weren't any of the fallback mechanisms we take for granted, such as airbags, so people drove better. Styling is questionable, but many cars on the road look and drive like bloated, lifeless wagons. The cars were actually fun to drive... Maybe I'm being romantic about 60's vehicles, but if you care to argue, please do so.
  - sliverstorm 13y ago
    I probably wasn't clear enough, but I wasn't trying to compare cars to rootkits. I agree this rootkit thing is ridiculous. Rather, I was thinking about the general idea that ordinary Joes ought to be as worried about freedom as we are being. Late 60's cars are not horrific or anything like that. But be realistic- the performance, longevity, emissions, driveability, and weight of engines have all come a very very long way, and in my personal experience a multitude of other characteristics have made leaps and bounds as well, such as suspension- though that is mostly just more sophisticated now, rather than more electronic. I love old sports cars, and I love their soul. But if we are talking engineering, ground yourself- take a gander at this article: http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/soccer-moms-revenge/ http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/soccer-moms-reveng...

by kunai 13y ago

obviouslygreen 13y ago

And your answer is Stallman? Yes, he is a nut. In the sense of "no one will ever take him seriously, especially anyone involved in mainstream decision-making, who has ever read anything he has written," which is in this case the most relevant metric. Stallman is never going to be any help here, nor is anyone like him, because any "normal" person -- that is, one that other people won't ignore out of hand -- will ignore him out of hand. This includes politicians, to whom said "normal" people are the all-important majority. "We need more activists" is bullshit. You think we need more activists? More of those outliers that get lampooned in every media outlet for railing against the status quo? Because that's what activists are to most people: Nuts and/or malcontents. Of course, my real problem with this statement is exactly the same reason I'm not making it. You think we don't have enough activists? GO BE ONE. If you think they can do any good and you believe that "we are fucked" without them, stop posting on HN, get off your ass, and DO SOMETHING. Otherwise get back on the bench with the rest of us, because all your whining about mass media and celebrity culture is just that. You can gripe all you want that people aren't doing anything, but as soon as you start telling people what they SHOULD be doing, either you'd better be doing it yourself or you'll have to excuse those of us -- everyone -- who will not take you seriously. In the event that you actually are interested in backing up your hollow rhetoric: The only way to work this system is from the inside. So start campaigning, or start schmoozing, because while real change is essentially impossible, the only way to mitigate damage is by convincing the relevant politicians that it's in their best interests to do so.

kunai 13y ago
Do you really think that Aaron Swartz, Larry Lessig and the masses of people protesting Capitol Hill last year when SOPA came around didn't make a difference? They were activists. Do you really think we'd have so much free/open source software today without the contribution of Eric S. Raymond, Stallman, et al.? They're activists. Do you really think that we'd be here today if Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington never existed? They were -- yep, you guessed it -- activists.
- yareally 13y ago
  For what it's worth though, Ben Franklin was much more diplomatic and compromising than RMS. RMS would be more like a modern day Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine or Samuel Adams. Though all mentioned parties during the revolution played a key role in the independence of the United States. So I guess one could say it "takes people of all sorts."
- mtowle 13y ago
  The flow of human events isn't bound to individuals. Names merely get played up in the remembering, and the events downplayed. E.g., America was going to revolt regardless of whether T.J., et al had ever been born. Really amazing that a war is misremembered as activism....pass the K-Y.
  - dkuntz2 13y ago
    Not actually true. The colonies could have received the things they wanted had they actually attempted to fight for them (and by 'things they wanted', I mean the things we wrote about England (and specifically a king with little political power at that time (it was all parliament's by that point)) not giving us). The American Revolutionary War was started because of political activism. They saw a chance to start a new country in whatever manner they pleased, and leapt at the opportunity. Even just a little effort put to really trying to get a voice in parliament would have worked fine, but instead we went and write the bloody Declaration in an attempt to rally support of other nations not really pleased with England (I'm looking at you France), and filled it with rhetoric, half-truths, and blatant lies. Okay, maybe not blatant, but they're there. Really amazing that a war is mistaught to most American students. Okay, it isn't that amazing, I mean, you're going to teach your country's history in the most favorable light possible, but, still...

beedogs 13y ago

I lobby against Hollywood by refusing to give them a thin dime of my money.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

ISL 13y ago
Since there are few corporations that have a corporate interest in "freedom," then the money and resources have to come from individuals. I'd disagree. The majority of corporations have a financial interest in freedom. Getting them to commit resources to any lobbying effort is the challenge.
- dkuntz2 13y ago
  Basic economic theory says you're wrong. Corporations don't have incentives to be good outside if their bottom line long-term, the only reason they occasionally do good is due to social or regulatory pressure. For the most part, corporations are going to do what's good for their bottom line without carrying about the long-term effects.

seandhi 13y ago

This paper barely even mentions music or movies, and its proposals are for going after foreign entities who steal intellectual property, such as R&D, to develop counterfeit goods. This is less about going after little Timmy for downloading a movie and more to do with a Chinese firm stealing biotechnology secrets from a U.S. company to produce its own products.

manifesto 13y ago
Then why would Hollywood propose that with its own money about an issue it don't care about? Surly it won't mention movie download because it doesn't want to stimulate you. But it will screw you.
- seandhi 13y ago
  What gives you the impression that Hollywood is behind it? The BoingBoing article completely misrepresents what is in the paper, so I would not be surprised if they got that part wrong, too. Have you read it? It proposes protecting American companies from foreign entities stealing our technology and using it to develop products. Here are the members of The Commission of the Theft of American Intellectual Property, the commission that authored the paper: Dennis C. Blair (co-chair), former Director of National Intelligence and Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Command • Jon M. Huntsman, Jr. (co-chair), former Ambassador to China, Governor of the state of Utah, and Deputy U.S. Trade Representative • Craig R. Barrett, former Chairman and CEO of Intel Corporation • Slade Gorton, former U.S. Senator from the state of Washington, Washington Attorney General, and member of the 9-11 Commission • William J. Lynn III, CEO of DRS Technologies and former Deputy Secretary of Defense • Deborah Wince-Smith, President and CEO of the Council on Competitiveness • Michael K. Young, President of the University of Washington and former Deputy Under Secretary of State Which of those is from the MPAA?
  - kunai 13y ago
    At this point, does it even matter? This lobby still has the backing of the entertainment industry, and it doesn't matter if it's stolen IP, trying to create an exemption for installing rootkits on remote machines is the entertainment industry's dream.

vy8vWJlco 13y ago

"I don't even know what to do anymore." Code. People use Skype because there's no clear alternative (maybe work on Jitsi... It still needs a server for the good stuff). People use Facebook because there's no alternative (maybe work on RetroShare). People let their government tell them what to do because they think it's better than anarchy (maybe work on a political Kickstarter). Copyright enforcement against BitTorrent users has gone into high gear because BitTorrent is good at sharing but weak in anonymity. Fix that. Don't make tools to break laws, just make tools. Write software to empower individuals and make institutions unnecessary and you won't have to spend as much time cleaning up after institutions and the egos that run them when they get carried away. Promoting open-source software as a way to counter spyware, and general activism, is better than nothing, but the best way to change the world is still to invent it IMHO. (Just don't throw yourself on the fire unnecessarily either... Bitcoin's author was wise to keep his identity out of it.)

kunai 13y ago
I love to write software, but unfortunately, I don't think that will solve the problem at hand, which is the MPAA's DRM lobby. They have millions and millions of dollars' worth of support behind them. What's a few hundred hackers to a huge industry? If we want to really make a difference, we need all the support we can get. Perhaps even start an organization to lobby against the MPAA/RIAA similar to what sinak has done, but with far greater support. How many times will this happen? People must wake up.
- vy8vWJlco 13y ago
  Ideally, IMHO, copyright would be non-transferable.

ChuckMcM 13y ago

We need more activists. And without them, we are fucked. You can change the system from within as well. While it is impractical to go out and run for President and hope to win, one of the things I hope the current crop of young adults will see is that they have the power to become the system and change it. First build a resume in public service (city council, county supervisor, state representative) then use your training to help you and your fellow revolutionaries move into a position of power and change. One of the saddest things is that the folks in power have convinced the youth of America that they are powerless and nothing can be done forcing them into acts of "activism" which allows them to be identified and eliminated. Perhaps an example that doesn't resonate with you but has been doing what your compatriots have not, is the Tea Party. These folks have shown you that it isn't about dominating the world, its about setting a theme, recruiting to your cause, and then using the institutions that are in place to allow you to affect change, to work for you.

asveikau 13y ago
I didn't mind what you said until you brought in the horrible example of the tea party. Even ignoring its political message it was pretty much all astroturf, pumped up and hyped by established players. A few election cycles later it's pretty much gone.
- ChuckMcM 13y ago
  I appreciate that the example can be distasteful. However, I have looked into the astro-turfing dismissal argument as well. Generally, astro-turfing (the use of a PR engine to create the appearance of grass roots support) is designed to get a candidate elected (or issue passed) that favors the money financing the campaign. We have seen a number of these in California and there has consistently been a strong correlation between benefit and later funding source analysis. However, some really earnest but ineffective people were elected under the guise of the 'tea party'. Much to the disgust of the Republican Party power infrastructure (the speaker of the house cannot count on all of his own party's votes for that reason). Generally, power interests that are trying to manipulate the system don't throw random people into the mix like that. My conclusion after looking at the folks who were elected that way is that a large number of them, perhaps the majority of them, were elected by people fed up with the system and not an interested third party. But lets set that aside for a moment. Lets say you and your friends can get elected to city government. If your city runs well, and you don't put up with the baloney that sometimes passes as politics these days, you can parley that into county government. And that into state government. Assuming that you are good enough to learn the skills you need to make that trip. It can take you 6 - 10 years to go from city supervisor to state representative. Once enough people around you know who you are, you can chose to focus on local elections or national ones. The starting point though is that in order for this to work someone with the idea of doing public service to serve the public and not their own interests has to step forward. Waiting for someone else to step forward has never been a good idea, either seeking out people and supporting their efforts or putting your hat in yourself are the workable choices.

sliverstorm 13y ago

I'm not sure we need be this terrified. Gear-heads made similar claims about freedom as cars became more complicated and less user-serviceable. But you know what? While cars have their issues, and are indeed now more difficult to service, they have continued to get better- a lot better. The last totally user-serviceable cars were made in the 60's and early 70's. Many of the improvements come from improvements to manufacturing, but the sophisticated electronic control systems are integral. Now, the internet is of course not an automobile. But my point is, batshit insane legislation aside, perhaps maintaining the maximum amount of freedom is not as valuable as we think? I'd hate to be stuck with late 60's cars.

kunai 13y ago
Your analogy is completely flawed. Automakers aren't putting root exploits in vehicles that allow override by the government when it detects you're going to an "unauthorized" music dealer. And are late 60's cars really that bad? There weren't any of the fallback mechanisms we take for granted, such as airbags, so people drove better. Styling is questionable, but many cars on the road look and drive like bloated, lifeless wagons. The cars were actually fun to drive... Maybe I'm being romantic about 60's vehicles, but if you care to argue, please do so.
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  I probably wasn't clear enough, but I wasn't trying to compare cars to rootkits. I agree this rootkit thing is ridiculous. Rather, I was thinking about the general idea that ordinary Joes ought to be as worried about freedom as we are being. Late 60's cars are not horrific or anything like that. But be realistic- the performance, longevity, emissions, driveability, and weight of engines have all come a very very long way, and in my personal experience a multitude of other characteristics have made leaps and bounds as well, such as suspension- though that is mostly just more sophisticated now, rather than more electronic. I love old sports cars, and I love their soul. But if we are talking engineering, ground yourself- take a gander at this article: http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/soccer-moms-revenge/ http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/soccer-moms-reveng...