Slashdot Mirror
Do Geeks Have a Political Voice?
ion asks: "The software community has been putting up with a lot of political turmoil lately (patents that should never have been considered, DVD decryption, copyright issues left and right). My question is: 'How is it that some of the best-paid workers in the world marketplace have almost no political voice?' We have all sort of software advocates like ESR and RMS, but where is the US Congressman or UK rep in Parliament (or other representative in some world government) that have pledged to support the ideals of our community? How can we form some sort of world geek lobby? How can we help the people like Jon Johansen who are victims of the outdated system?" (Read More)
A good question. Geeks are suddenly finding themselves in positions of wealth and power, and with that comes the burden of politics. Many geeks seem to think politics below them, or consider it something best ignored and left to those who can handle it while they concentrate on 'the real work' of solving the problems that need solving. However, I think the 21st century will usher in a time when those who were once shunned and cast out start flexing some formerly-unused political mojo.
How that mojo is used -- and for what -- depends entirely on us.
Your, elitist attitudes based on irrational thought sicken me. If windows and coldfusion work, there is no problem whatsoever. If they were willing to pay the money for such a product and it works, what does that have to do with their credibility? I challenge you to draw correlation from the claim that running windows and coldfusion have to an effect on their activities.
I'm really getting sick of this "love us, or leave us" attitude pervading from some members of the slashdot community.
Demand exceeds supply by far. An increase in h1b visas isn't going to have much of an effect.
Unions? Absolutely not. Unions are leftist, and therefore they are morally wrong and have no Scriptural basis. They cannot be tolerated by good and decent people. Look at the monstrosity that is the AFL-CIO. You really want something like that for software developer, system administrators, and the like? Good God, get real!
Alas, geeks are not even united on those issues. For every geek that says the government should spend more money on research funding or public access broadband or tax breaks for education, there's another geek who doesn't want it. You see, we're all pro-technology (I think), but not necessarily in favor of government funding.
There is no Geek Platform, other than "Enjoy Geeky Stuff".
We may not be discrimitated against. However, our interests are being ignored. And even though there is much diversity in the geek/nerd community, we all pretty much have similiar interests.
Blame me. I am responsible.
I appreciate your candor, but I do, and you are.
What makes me truly sad is that, after the present economic squeeze has continued long enough that the disenfranchised underclass will have no recourse save armed revolution, you'll probably be safe and snug in a compound protected by your private security force, and the ones who *really* suffer will be the ones who don't deserve it.
Are you a communist in an idealogical or nationalist standpoint? The latter is a utopian promise that ends in mediocre disaster. It ignores and even rejects human nature outright. Marx has some interesting things to say, but central planning and a central point of corruption really do not work (our current version of so-called capitalism has some of these problems as well).
Truly free markets sprinkled with a couple dashes of philanthropy and socialistic notions baby.
Uh, who exactly do you think it is that is filing all those patents and coming up with the encryption ideas? GEEKS.
This is some sort of wierd Troll, right?
UNIONS!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
You make me laugh so hard I wet myself.
Anonymous Coward is right. If you *want* political strength, if you don't want to be stepped on, maltreated, fired at any time, then you have to stick your neck out. Strength is impossible without weakness.
If the weakness and vulnerability frightens you to much, then throw your hands up, coward, and give up. Let the system herd you to where *it* wants you to go, pumping down your throat ideas like you are actually "free" to choose your job and the power you have in your job, feeding you the double think of freedom is slavery.
Frightened? What scares you more, the fact that the power in your hands without unity, without solidarity with the millions of others in your position, is so infitesmally small that you can be disposed of in an instant? Or is it frigtening what they will do to you when you refuse to be kicked down, when you unite with others to gain the strength to fight back?
Better to die on your feet fighting, than live in servitude on your knees.
Because, as individuals, you are parts of more important groups other than this website tries to define you as. Also, because you are non-ideological, any attempt at political action could only be fascism.
I am glad to see this idea surface on such a prominent site. It is time that gifted Individuals started getting more involved with the political process. Until now politicians have counted on the high achievers of our nation (& the world) to be too busy to get involved. This gives them little opposition to their never ending march for more and more. Over 47% of every dollar(US$) I earn is claimed by the U.S. Government before I ever see it. I'm tired of being an indentured slave. I'm tired of working half of the year for Government before I ever see a penny of my own. I'm tired of some politician that has been purchased by some lobby effort to pass a law that restricts what I can or can't do. I'm tired of watching the constitutional rights that so many died for be given away by weak-minded sheep in this country for promised security and less responsibility. In about eight months from now each of us (In the U.S.) will have the opportunity to make a choice to elect someone who is for returning this country to the values and freedoms that are guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution. For me this means I will lose some income while I devote my time to support a candidate and party. It means I will be scoffed at, ridiculed, but I believe it is time to make a stand. If I wait much longer, I may not the right to in this country. I will respectfully suggest that you investigate the Libertarian party. No matter which candidate you choose to support - vote. It could be your last chance to make a difference.
Whoa. I was responding to your anecdotal "gee, there are a lot of geeks in these two places" with "gee, there are a lot of geeks in these other places as well".
You, as a logged-in /. user, presumably wish to uphold your reputation for In{formative,sightful,teresting}ness. Personally, I enjoy the freedom of being an AC, but whatever. So far I haven't seen any actual numbers w/r/t geek demographics enter this discussion. Care to provide some?
You suck. We don't disagree.
I am surprized that no one has mentioned the ACM public policy committee. Perhaps I missed it. See http://www.acm.org/usacm/
While Jello Biafra is amusing, he is a flaming moron and an insult to punk's and green's. He's well intentioned, but still a fool with incredibly polarized views. I'm guessing he took too much acid in the 70's and 80's.
:)
If you're going to vote green, then vote Ralph Nader.
If you're interested in punk, Bad Religion is better than The Dead Kennedy's any day.
(I know it was a joke, but I thought I would play devil's advocate anyway
Yeah, sharecroppers making 6 digits a year. Get over the "poor me" crap, punk.
Nobody owes you a damn thing -- that includes respect for your piddly opinions.
You think you have it so hard? Instead of investing your money in Red Hat in VALinux, why don't you go buy a farm from somebody? Maybe then you'll find out what real work is. I promise that sitting on your fat butt in front of a keyboard will start to look pretty good after a while.
Unfortunately, much of King county would probably agree with you that this is a good idea.
Yeah janitors.... Janitors with stock options, making 2-3 times what their non cs classmates do, buying "luxury homes" and 911's at 23, we really got shafted on this one all right.
I'm gonna tell the next headhunter that calls and offers me a 10% pay hike and a fat signing bonus that I won't clean up his shit no more.
Funny story, at a company I used to work for we got a new Project Manager. He was looking over a list of people on the team and their salaries, probably trying to figure out who he can fire to save money on a sinking project. He happens on the Lead Software Engineer, erhm I mean Lead Janitor, whom he realizes makes more than him.
Funnier story, you know how that Lead Software Engineer got such a high (round 150k from what I hear) salary? He came in as a consultant and when the company wanted to bring him on full time, gave such a high salary requirement he figured the company would surely say no. They didn't blink.
It's simple really, don't wanna work 60+ hour weeks, tell them that in the interview and if they demand it of you later, quit. Wanna influence politics do it like everyone else, or if you're lucky just use some of the IPO money to buy a state legislator's seat.
"now, if one is proud to be individualistic, s/he is almost bound to be antisocial"
:)
I'd disagree with this point in the sense that there are different types of community. "Old world" communities are based on strict conformity through social indoctrination and learned fear of speaking out or being different. "New world" communities are based on respected individual thought, where differences can be respected, but similarities still causing attractions (we all have interests after all).
Communities such as this on the internet (Slashdot is hard to categorize as a community though, because the frequency of postings between particular people limits interaction beyond a few lines of ideas - and the individual is therefore reduced because we have a hard time drawing correlation between particular ideas and people due to difficulty in tracking.), academic, as well as scientific communities exhibit such traits. The more people get on the internet, the more this type of community will form - on and off the internet - due to shifts in culture and new societal values.
"is the worst condition to engage in anything overly social, let alone political"
Naw. I have lots of philisophical and political conversations with people all the time. It's just not particularly smart to do so if you don't know a person too well. Unfortunately, much of this etiquette in doing everything to not offend the other person at all, is a form of repression of individuality through social pressure. It's why I'm glad there has been a lot of anti-politically-correct feelings lately, at least in the united states. I'd gladly allow the complete moron speaking priveledges if I can be given the chance to skeptically question without being looked at in a weird way. Anyway, such intelligent discussion sure ensnares a lot of girls - for me, at least)
Eccentric is good !
Brand new Navigator parked in the garage of my new Mission townhouse.
The problem is that us geeks are free thinking individuals with not much more than technical skills in common. We can't be herded into a political cause through religious indoctrination, fear, or the inability to think. The comment forum on this story further bolsters my claim. Look at the differences in opinion.
IEEE-USA/HARRIS POLL: U.S. PUBLIC OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSED TO H-1B VISA EXPANSION WASHINGTON, September 16, 1998 -- More than four out of five Americans oppose substantially increasing H-1B visa limits, according to a survey released today by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers - USA (IEEE-USA) and conducted by Louis Harris & Associates Inc. The U.S. House of Representatives will vote tomorrow on H.R. 3736, a bill that would raise by 190,000 the number of temporary foreign high-tech guest-workers allowed into the United States over the next four years. According to the IEEE-USA/Harris Poll, 82 percent of a national cross-section of 1,000 adults opposed Congress "allowing U.S. companies to sponsor 190,000 additional foreign technical workers, as temporary employees for up to six years." Only 16 percent were in favor, while 2 percent were unsure. Respondents, asked their level of agreement with several assertions made by proponents and opponents of H-1B expansion, overwhelmingly agreed with concerns expressed by H.R. 3736 opponents -- including IEEE-USA -- about the effects of substantially increasing visa levels. The statement, "lower wages paid to temporary foreign workers harm U.S. professional wages," was strongly or mostly agreed to by 75 percent of those polled, while only 23 percent disagreed. In addition, 77 percent versus 22 percent agreed that "allowing companies to hire additional temporary foreign professionals reduces employment opportunities for U.S. technical workers." And a whopping 86 percent -- with just 13 percent in disagreement -- concurred that "U.S. companies should train U.S. workers to perform jobs in some technical fields, even if it is faster and less expensive to fill the jobs with the foreign professionals." Respondents were not swayed by most of the proponents' assertions. A majority -- 66 percent versus 31 percent -- disagreed that "without adding additional temporary foreign workers the United States might be forced to transfer work overseas." Furthermore, 61 percent disagreed with the statement that "without adding additional temporary foreign workers U.S. companies might fall behind international competitors," while only 36 percent agreed. Only one argument -- that "there is a shortage of technical professionals in the United States" -- achieved a plurality of agreement, with 51 percent of respondents saying they "strongly agree" or "mostly agree" and 41 percent indicating they strongly or mostly disagree. The poll also revealed a broad public lack of awareness of H-1B legislation. Only 14 percent were "very familiar" or "somewhat familiar" with the pending bill, while 86 percent were "not very familiar" or "not at all familiar." According to IEEE-USA President John R. Reinert, "Special-interest groups have been trying to push this bill through using legions of lobbyists and big campaign contributions. But now it's clear that the American public is adamantly against a vast expansion of the high-tech guest-worker program. Members of Congress might want to keep this in mind as voters prepare to head to the polls in several short weeks." IEEE-USA promotes the careers and public-policy interests of the 220,000 U.S. members of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., the world's largest technical professional society. NOTE TO JOURNALISTS: For survey charts and raw data or for an interview with IEEE-USA President John R. Reinert or President-Elect Paul J. Kostek, please contact Chris Currie at 202-785-0017, ext. 342, 301-887-1901 (h), or c.currie@ieee.org. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.--United States of America 1828 L Street, N.W., Suite 1202 Washington, DC 20036-5104 Phone: 202-785-0017, Fax: 202-785-0835.
No. They wouldn't tolerate guest workers competing for their jobs.
Er, how do you conclude the AC is a Christian Coalition type? Actually, what s/he said makes a lot of sense.
This is bullshit. I'd bet $1000 that we don't have anything resembling a small revolution in the US over the next 25 years.
.sheesh.
"the ones who *really* suffer will be the ones who don't deserve it"
power comes from the barrel of a gun and all that. .
moderate this up! This is what proves that the U.S. is not a properly functioning democracy, so it's important that everyone knows about it!!!
I'm a liberal that listens to Limbaugh because I get a kick out of it. Rush is a funny fat man that is angry at pretty much the entire world. When I'm at work, a lot of times I'll turn him on and enjoy his paranoid-delusional rantings about "the liberals" this, "the liberals that", "I can't kick Mexicans in public anymore" etc. I fully support Limbaugh even though he is a right-wing nut, and would be quite upset if he ever went off the air. Mega-liberal-dittos, motherfscker! :)
That's based on the ex-USSR national anthem, right? The text sounds very familiar :)
I'm confused. . .where did the guy talk about welfare.
isn't "geeks" just a term to describe a bunch of essentially unrelated people, who don't share much, except their love for technology/code/hardware/tinkering? some of them even consider themselves artists, and as evidenced every day here on slashdot, most of them are probably above all individualistic. now, if one is proud to be individualistic, s/he is almost bound to be antisocial. if "geeks" weren't antisocial, they would have spent their teens and twens hanging out at parties or joining clubs of all sorts, and they probably would have chosen to be lawyers/managers/whatever it is that people do who love to engage in social chit-chat. in short: geeks are antisocial, that's why they became geeks. it's not a bad thing. but it certainly is the worst condition to engage in anything overly social, let alone political. of course, exceptions confirm the rule. if geeks were not geeks, the radio amateurs would not have let a few monopolists take over the airwaves.
In order for Unions to work, not only in the IT community but everywhere, geeks must form a new set of principles upon which new Unions are built.
Geeks head the technological revolution, which put us in the position of knowing how future organisation must be to work: bottom up organisation, with free, completely open membership and information.
Unions of the past are ridiculous today. The whole idea of having negotiations with employers without that information being completely free and open to all immediately leads not only to corruption, but manipulation and subversion. We know that such closed-source meetings *are no longer necessary*, because of the capability of technology. We know that we can have a voting system with little or no problem through software polling; on the web we can have information presented in a clear, easy to read form, instead of countless speeches, one after another, where information and facts become mixed up.
Geeks will form a Union to represent themselves; and the only such union that will work, is one that adheres to the principles of the "Open-Source" movement. Fees, just like for distributions of Linux, are still necessary, but the key is that such things are not only completely open and easy to access, but spending and decision making is decided easily by the union as a whole through technology.
It will neither be perfect nor easy, breaking new ground and establishing a new order never is. But it is something we must achieve.
And did you notice the union was spending some of your money for political advertising and lobbying? There's supposed to be a way to get your money back so they can't spend it on such things...
Just thought you'd like to know.
The left is morally wrong? No scriptural basis. I always figured old JC'd probably done a beret if he where bout these days, he certainly didn't apreciate those churchhall traders. Anyway. Wtf is wrong with an ideology that places people above profit, freedom above control? That fights for the rights of underpaid workers, the poor, the unvoiced. A truly open source movement not locked up in republican cathederals and corporate crusher halls. Ever heard of liberation theologies?. Didn't think you had.
"that I have no particular problem with the MPAA or the RIAA, in thier efforts to protect intellectual property and the revenue stream artists and producers deserve"
The problem does not lie in their rational efforts to protect their intellectual property. The problem lies in their willful infringement of fair use to bolster their profits. There are plenty of ways to solve such an issue without punishing everyone to catch a few infringers. Criminalizing fair use and reverse engineering is not the way to go. Doing so would ignore how the entire PC revolution took place.
Note, however, that there are obvious problems at hand for the RIAA and MPAA in easily distributable digital formats. I predict that within 10 to 15 years, if unconstitutional legislative barriers aren't put in place, all these companies will have to change their business models to adapt to new technology and the free market (imagine that).
The ask slashdot question prompted me to search for existing Science and Technology Lobbies and this is one of the links I found. It's just a nice little list of various computer and internet related associations and organizations in the US, Canada and Europe. So, the political voice is there, although it may still be at the grassroots stage. http://www.surfer.ch/opendir/Top/Society/Issues/Sc ience_and_Technology/Computers/Internet/ Organizations/
"the next referendum gonna be the winning one"
It's not going to be any time soon, because public opinion polls say otherwise. May I ask what your strong public opinion regarding this is anyway? Most francophone quebecers I have met haven't been able to properly articulate to me reasons why they should separate. This leads me to believe that old scars are never forgotten and they transcend society for hundreds of years unless completely extinguished through opressive regimine. I mean, from some of the rhetoric coming from people like Lucien Bouchard, you would have it that francophone quebecers are an opressed people. The truth, however, is far from that.
Of course, there are rational reasons for splitting with canada - namely that our government sucks. However, from what I hear, many have advocated splitting from canada, but retaining support - which is just stupid.
Anyway, if I was exposed to some real examples of Canada opressing quebec, I might think otherwise. AFAIK, there aren't many.
Point is they do not need any airtime or such tricks, because they have other means of expressing their opinions. (And some of them even legal.)
One of the reasons why Jesse was voted in because he did a very good job at attempting to stay above the mud slinging and limit his "promises" down to the *BARE* bones. Which put a lot of political fokes up in arms and their reoccurring theme of "Where does Jesse stand? Why won't he committe to XYZ?" I don't agree with everything he has done/said, but I think over all he is doing a damn good job of attempting to put priorities and not making promises he can't keep.
That merely means that they are voters someplace other than where they are working. They're Canadian voters, but they are Indian voters.
It is possible geeks lack political power because high tech work is generally not unionized. Like it or not, unions provide a strong political voice to those they represent.
No. They can sure whine better than anyone else, though.
Next question?
See that is part of the problem, when over half the country doesnt vote it is impossible to get an accurate measure of the public's real opinion, i believe that it is safe to say that if at least 15% more people voted then it would make quite a difference in who became the leaders of the country from my stand point those whose vote now are those who are strongly for one party or principle so they vote to promote their idea however those who dont vote are usually not sure which ground they stand on or they dont care if this could be changed and more people would vote then elections would probably be based more on who has the best ideas rather than which party they are in, I personally am a strict conservative probably border line liberatarian however i realize that it is impossible to vote for a third party because it will take votes away from a more a vialbe canidate, this is what happened to bush in the 1992 election, if more would vote then this would not be such an issue and peole would be a little more likely to stray from the current party lines
So to agree with Enderwiggnz, if you really want to make a difference then get off your lazy ass and vote or if you dont vote then dont complain
What, you think that the risk takers all have trust funds or something? Talk to most people who have started a company. A common theme you will find is early sacrifice. Personally, I started a company by borrowing on credit cards (which, statistically, is actually pretty common). I ran up $70K in debt, and took out another $50K loan against my house before the company started making money and I was able to get VC financed. If the company had tanked, that would have been real, personal debt I would have owed. And by the way, I am married with one child.
If my company ends up going public, let me tell you I will have earned every penny after the personal risk and 80-100 hour work weeks.
There's no shame in not wanting to take huge personal risks like this. But don't believe for a second that the people who succeed somehow have unfair advantages that you don't have (other than balls).
if someone were to make a website with information about the various political candidates...
not propaganda or FUD, but real information,
written by geeks, for geeks as it pertains to
geeks, perhaps with a map-like interface to the
website... hmm that would be neat.
i would vote but i dont feel like listening
to a bunch of political hogwash so that i can,
I simply dont have time.
I would love to vote armed and educated about
the various candidates, not with facts
about abortion etc, but with facts about issues
*I CARE ABOUT*
Dear Sir: I have often wondered whether to buy a congressman. They seem like such a poor investment, since, unlike honest politicians, congressmen do not stay bought. Thus I am forced to recall : "The War Inevitable" A speech by Patrick Henry March 1775 No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the house. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the house is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at the truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings. Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the numbers of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free--if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us! They tell us, Sir, that we are weak -- unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of People, armed in the Holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Beside, Sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of Nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, Sir, is not to the strong alone. It is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, Sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable. and let it come! I repeat, Sir, let it come! It is in vain, Sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace! -- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the North will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that Gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery! Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
It is so simple... the "geek lobby" should stand for protecting us from the clown. You all think it is so funny that I can't sleep, but it will happen to all of you eventually. I have been in the computer industry since Ronald Reagan joined forces with the religious right to create a political atmosphere that pleased the clown. Never forget that John Wayne Gacy was a friend of the Reagans. It is no coincidence that this is when the clown's power over me increased exponentially. Before that, he could only haunt me in an undisclosed midwestern farmhouse. Now he has been released to hunt me everywhere. I must go now, a message on my cell phone has instructed me to fedex some pharmacological items and a document on genetic engineering to Florida. I envy those of you who have normal lives and are home now enjoying your evening. My work never ends, but I hope to prevent the clown from chasing all of you as he does me.
Save me the agony of the post next time and just post The Mentor's "Hacker's Manifesto" instead of regurgitating it and passing it off as your own.
/20%/, of the world has access to, affect social change on the order of, say, famine, plague, or nuclear holocaust, as your overblown prose would suggest.
On to the bluster...
"Some of the best tools ever created to effect social change in this country, nay, the world at large(!!!!!!!!)" Uhh, no? I guess maybe we have marginally affected the social order of a bunch of white, upper middle class surburbanites, and oh yeah, allowed more than a few businessmen to make gobs of money. I have yet to see the Internet, which by the way only richest 1/5, that's
And apparently, someone wanted to hear l0pht, BTW, considering that they (Congress) broke with 200+ years of tradition and allowed them to testify under assumed names.
We have them, they have us, who's on first, fight the man, barf. Nothing like invoking the ol' group martyr complex to curry fraternal mod points. You really have this down to a science.
if they have millions of bucks to buy access, not that MS crap, I'm talking about real access. First name buddy buddy with sInators. You know, like those foreiners do.
Most geeks (myself included) did not interest themselves in politics in, say, High School. We were too busy off doing our own thing instead of trying to win popularity contests. Most geeks have better things to do than shake hands and kiss babies, and this is not likely to change soon.
:-) feel any need to the geek commuinity, and we get a real sense of disenfranchisement.
Couple this with the fact that few politicians (from High School on up
Granted, this is s chicken-and-egg argument, but my feeling is that geeks and politics don't mix very well.
Yeah, It's those undefined Christians that don't have lobbying groups.
And if you had failed, you would be totally fucked. And you would have ended up owing money to people who very likely were born into wealth, who are not as smart as you nor as motivated.
Indeed. That's what risk-taking is all about. However, at least in my experience, the number of people "born into wealth" is just not that high. Most people at the top are not just "posers" whose father pulled strings. I'm sure it happens, but at least from where I'm sitting, that's mostly cliche rather than reality. Most of the time you have to be able to do the job in order to stay at the top.
In fact, most of the VCs I've dealt with have an entrepreneurial background.
What is your company? What kind of cut do the VCs get?
The company is an educational company. The VCs took about 40% for $4M. That sounds like a lot, but $4M is a lot of money. What really opened my eyes up to not being greedy on the percentage was a seminar I went to one time. A VC guy was giving advice on raising money, etc, and he quoted the usual percentage VCs asked for. The audience was fairly aghast, but what he said was, "do you want all of a grape, or a slice of watermelon?" That really put it in perspective for me.
If you're interested in more information about the VC game, the latest issue of Business 2.0 has a huge section on everything from raising money to building boards of directors.
- The "Geek Community". (i.e. the social side of the net... USENET, websites like Slashdot, even chat rooms).
- Patent & IP Law. (i.e. the bits of gold/valuable technology that make companies money/they love to monopolize for profit).
- The Web & Internet Backbone. (i.e. owning some or all of the visible "space" on the net that is so traversed by many).
I think all the corporate interests/governments are much more interested in the last 2, and could mostly care less about the first unless it intrudes too much on the domains of what others find comfortable (such as the more hard-core Quake "fragging" activities disturb some).If we're to take control of the last 2, it involves realizing that there is a LOT of corporate and gov. interest trying to grab hold of it since there is so much potential money involved.
As many have noticed, these people play for keeps, and are plenty willing to even create new laws just to get their way.
Well...a wise man once said: "Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber." Plato
... thing PJ O'Rourke's friend noticed, when seeing a protest in DC over some issue of the moment. There were people there with signs, marching and protesting for the latest leftist issue d'jour. "Where are all the conservatives?" O'Rourke asked. "Working." His friend replied.
Just because something is illegal and shunned by the black-turned-white hats does not mean there aren't substantial reasons why it has become a trend.
Give me a break. Why did you become a hacker? You wanted to understand everything, down to the little electrons flowing through the wires, and you want to prove the beauty to this system to everyone.
A lot of crackers ARE hackers and do not do stupid things like mindlessly vandalize web sites - we should not exclude them so readily from admission into our little "geek" club. Once we are divided, we are easily conquered. It is fallacy to believe in a self-image so pathetic that we cannot look past the over-simplified labels the media creates.
agreed on all points
I am simply sugesting that the solidarity aspect of unions, and their ability to gather resources and hire political types makes them a powerful tool for any group to gain political voice. They essentially buy a piece of democracy for you. I know everyone hates unions because they are corrupt but we shouldn't let that stop us from looking at them and seeing what we can take from their ideas.
a chicken in every pot
hot grits down every pants
vote maybe on Prop. 18
GUI: Government-User Interface?
Not quite Janitors...
More like sharecroppers.
Both of these require that the effected people be interested in the problem, and willing to take some action, no matter how small, to try to effect change.
IANAL. Most of the lawsuits and half-witted laws result from the fact that the the legal status of "source code" is not established. The Supreme Court has not ruled whether or not it has the same First Ammendment protections as any written communications. If it did, suing someone for writting/publishing "source code" would become a much harder task. The most obvious solutions is to form a foundation (or sponsor an existing foundation such as EFF) to take one of the existing cases to Supreme Court to rule on the status of "source code". Suing someone for creating constitutionally protected speech would be a much harder task in both the legal court and the court of public opinion. These corporations would not be able to claim that they are "protecting their property" anymore. They would have to start to DEFEND their filing of a law suit to suppress free speech -- something they simply do not have to address at this point.
You're not funny. Don't post again.
Nerds are getting $$. With $$ comes power and clout. Come out of the nerd closet and get active.
Read the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Read the Declaration of Independence. If in the UK, read the Magna Carta. Around the world, read, and try to understand that PEOPLE ARE POWER!
However, corporations seem to be gaining power in the US with UCITA and DMCA. We have lost many rights with things like RICO and the drug laws. Due process is in shambles. The IRS can take your property without due process (of course, they are a Puerto Rican corporation).
Smile, you are on Echelon: Cherokee, Waco, Constitution, Ruby Ridge, NSA, FBI, CIA, Mosaid, KKK, Bill of Rights, SlashDot, Linux, Bill Gates Sucks, Blow Me, Hardcore, 69!
Look at me (metaphorically, for I'm posting as AC). I care about many technical issues: Java being a go-anywhere success (I think it can...I think it can...); Linux being a real contender for mindshare and OSshare, etc. I also care about surviving Red Chinese H-Bombs and having money when I get old and less able to support myself. Most of all I care about my children and the environment they are raised in and will live in.
I believe that my concern for a safe environment for raising families, opportunities for pleasant work, and less outright government control is shared by the overwhelming number of techies. And the real community is geography based, Internet or no Internet.
Face it--geeks are real, flesh-and-blood people and not mere electrons. Computing is what we do, not what we are. Someday my body will be six feet under, and it won't be any different to that ground if I were a geek or a President or a machinist.
So having a "geek" representative is about as silly as having an eBay rep. or a football rep. A "geek" lobbyist? That's more like it.
Remember, May 1st is International Open Source Day, where you can rejoice in the solidarity of your fellow com^H^H^H geeks and feel the power of the Open Source Revolution!
So contact your local cell lead^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H user group chairman to find out what activities you have planned in your neighborhood.
I'm going to have a bonfire of MS docs, hand out free copies of Win 2K, and have a free love party after with all the females geeks I can find.
Che!
Come, join the International Open Source Knowledge Worker's Party comrades!
We have nothing to lose but our chains.
Che!
The nitwit VP who invented the internet seems to have reinvented the misuse of IRS files to punish his political enemies, and not a word from this brain dead, morally comatose bunch of clueless college kids.
With a little "logical filtering", whatever THAT is, you would see that a two party system can not possibly be MONOlithic.
That's American Federation of Trolls. What local are you in?
Anyone but Ralph Nader. I think you really, really, really need to listen to him more. I want to say he's one of the stupidest people I've ever heard in my life, but that would probably be marked as flamebait.
Suffice to say that there is a reason that Ralph Nader is way out on the fringes. PLEASE don't support someone just because he isn't a Democrat or Republican, and don't reject someone just because they belong to a major party.
Yes, you are wasting your vote if you don't vote for one of the major parties. If Third Party candidates had any guts or any ability, they would try and change the major parties from within rather than run a race they know they won't win. They usually use the excuse that they are too "principled" to run as a Democrat or Republican, but this usually means that they are losers who couldn't get anywhere, and thus need to squeek from a 2nd or 3rd tier party.
We can't win their "politics game". But... They can't win the "Drug War". They can't win the "Geek War". Screw 'em.
He can be his own MIB, too!
For 'geeks' to have a political voice I think we would need a couple of things that I don't think we have (and no, I don't have any ideas on how we get them)... 1. An agreement of what the issues are: Is Microsoft's monopoly powers what we are worried about? Is it DMCA? What about bit length limitations on exported encryption technology? Personal information privacy rights? Are we for or against UCITA? For every 'tech head' that hates Microsoft I know another that thinks the current anti-trust litigation is an abuse of government power. We can't even agree on the merits of various programming languages much less governmental legislation. 2. A public image that allows non-technical professionals to sympathize with our causes and inhibits 'marginalization' (where others dismiss us as radical or extremist). The 'geek' community is responsible for creating the term 'flame war'. We even have a word for intentionally pissing people off ('trolling'). Our public image is an amalgamation of Bill Gates and the teenage kids from the movie "Hacker" - though Robert Redford helped a little by playing a geek in 'Sneakers' : ). I think it would take a lot of work for people to give the same credence to a 'geek' group that they would to, for example, the American Dental Society or the American Medical Association. 3. To propose our causes (assuming we can agree on what they are) in a form that non-technical individuals can easily digest. As the joke goes - Do your parents understand what you do for a living? Your parents and a whole bunch of people like them are the ones who vote. How would we explain to them the importance of acting on issues such as Amazon's 'One-Click' patent and the need for patent law reform? Do your Senators understand what you do for a living? 4. The presence of a well supported organization to coordinate our efforts. In my humble and very biased opinion (because I am a member) the EFF does good work with what resources they have, but how many 'geeks' are members of the EFF or any other organization?
Not that one can define 'geeks' as a group 'geeks' actually being from all areas of our society and having only the technological interests to bind them... It is the very fact that many of us (not me) are 'well paid' that keeps them from having any political influence much less interest. Those that are best paid tend to be the most content and least likely to rock the boat especially those for whom self interest is defined as pride in one ability/knoledge etc. If you are on salary you are labor... It is a new world. Just because you are not baid an hourly wage does not neam that you are not labor. In the modern business model much of middle and all of lower management ( Sys Admins etc.) are viewed as labor... Being on salary only means a bit of prestiege and no O.T. pay. Most technologists(geeks) will never have any political access/influence unless they organize, which is unlikely as they 1) are generally independant types who do not like to think of themselves as laborors and 2) are paid well enough as to make this seem uneccessary execept in the most extreme of cases (Microsoft ant the contractors et al.) Those that own the businesses, some of which began life as 'geeks' themselves, are primarily business men and, unless you are oblivious to your environment, should have noticed by now that they are not 'geek' of mind or action but are bottom line/power/influnce/I win oriented and will do what is neccessary to further their business goals. Political influnce comes only from USD*Mucho both to influnce directly and through the electorate. Geeks don't got it bubba...
jello biafra rules :) i can remember if it was he or Henry Rollins that got in a huge debate w/ Tipper Gore a while back...i heard it on some college radio station a while ago
"There is no spoon"-Neo, The Matrix
"SPOOOOOOOOON!"-The Tick, The Tick
Yep, ever since I was a kid, I fooled around with amateur janitoring. When I was ten years olf, my mom dropped a jar of grape jelly on the kitchen floor, and it shattered. She sighed with resignation, and went off to look for the mop. But when she got back, I had already cleaned it up. I always got comments from the other kids in my neighborhood, like 'Gee, your bathroom is so clean! How do you get the toilet bowl to shine like that? That is so cool!' But I would just smile proudly (maybe with a little self-conscious blush), and say, 'Well, your toilet can look good too, if you really work at it.' Sometimes I would teach them how to correctly hold the brush, but it just didn't come as naturally to them as it did for me.
I would even stay late at school to clean up sometimes, not because I was in trouble, but because sometimes I would see some trash carelessly discarded, and I just had to do something about it. It's not that I had a special pride in my school's appearance, it's just that I saw that piece of trash as a challenge, and I was sure I could clean it up. Somehow, without even realizing it, I had found my calling in life: to become a janitor.
I'll have to admit, when I turned pro, there were a few surprises. I had always been the bigshot janitor at home and in school, but in the real world, things were different. I ran into master janitors who could empty a whole trash can in the time it took me to unfold a trash bag. I guess I was a little inexperience at first. Fortunately, I tried to keep a good attitude and didn't act arrogant. When one of the old hands did something better than I did, I just tried to learn. It was humbling experience when I had been spending a whole morning scrubbing this one crusty mess, and then Old Jack said, "Just squirt some 409 on that and let it soak." After an hour of soaking, it hardly took any elbow grease at all. Old Jack and all those other janitor giants really knew their stuff, and I did my best to follow in their footsteps and live up to their example.
Now I'm one of them. I live and breath the janitor's life every day. Some people think it could get boring after a few years, but they're so wrong. Just last week, a new cleansing solvent came out, and I have been doing exciting things with it!
Here, let me show you all my different mops for different occasions. Here's my old faithful -- a mop that'll never let me down. And this one I had specially imported from Germany...
"Perhaps because politics are unordered and messy and we that geek want our complex systems to follow clean rules? "
No, it's like everyone else. We're so disillusioned by the fact that politicians say one thing and do another while being bankrolled by special interests, we just give up. That's why when people like John McCain come in, promising change, voter turnout increases by a large percentage (on both sides).
Besides elections, we also realize that it takes a lot of effort to initiate change in government legislation. So we then look at the status quo, and think it aint so bad. That's why when our rights get slowly taken away, we don't think too much of it (deadly poison in small doses - except each generation grows up into the new status quo and takes it for american freedom with all the nationalist rhetoric).
---
The WTO isn't free trade, therefore it must die.
The most important issue for geeks in this election should be the support of nearly all the canidates for the fast tracking of visas for foreign knowledge workers. Yes, the tech boom has made many tech workers wealthy, but it has filled the pockets of corporations who are interested in continuing this trend. There is not a significant lack of talented IT professionals in this country. There is however a severe lack of people who will work for 2/3 the going rate. Skilled programmers who feel they are currently underpaid should brace themselves for a further depression of their salaries should the floodgates be opened.
...Silicon Valley, CA, and Dallas (Richardson), TX.
Let me guess--you've never been out of Dallas, but have read about Silicon Valley in books.
Geeks are in a lot more places than you seem to realize: Seattle & environs; San Francisco (which is *not* SiliValley); RTP, NC; Austin; pretty much the entire greater Boston area; and many many more.
You also make the mistake of assuming that political power is based in part on the popular vote; that, however, is a much more commonly held (and therefore forgivable) misconception.
However, politically... those of us who actually work in the industry rather than own it (realizing that some folks do both), have very little influence. Politically, we are all over the map with a general spirit of libertarian ethics with a distrust of the megacorporation ingrained into our psyche by personal expierence and cyberpunk literature we have been gobbling for the last two decades.
And, if we formed our own party in the single member-district system of the U.S (sorry, I know the rest of the world is more democratic with parlimentary systems) such would be a third party which would never gain any influence outside of local elections in California and the Pacific North West. We also, as workers, don't have the money to buy...er...lobby politicans. Easy example... if you and AOL/Time-Warner lobby congress about MP3s, who do you think is going to win?
No, fellow workers... we get paid so much because we have power. Power, untapped and unrealized. Middle-management was gutted through downsizing and our network connections have given rise to more "just-in-time" capitalism. Our skills , if you believe the Software Labor Shortage Myth are in such short supply that we can not train and import workers fast enough. Imagine if we can collectively come to agreements in which we decide what things we will work for and will not. Not only can we have influence over technology, but a host of other things that need geeks to be accomplished.
Our power is in action, not the ballot box. We can vote with our feet. We can strike (here is the source. We can slack and slow down. We can sick-in. We can boycott. We can Direct Action. We can be as Electornically Civilly Disobedient, and we can be... it works like we did with Low Power FM through an organized political campaign of radio piracy, we were able to sieze part of the spectrum from corporate monoplization for community interests. We can break mass media blackouts of information, by making our own media, like we did in Seattle, and like we'll do again in DC.
Are you tired of 60-hour work weeks? Of corporations making deals with politicans to undermine over-time pay and encourage permatemping? We don't have to be slaves.
Are you tired of technology developing that penalizes both the worker and the consumer, to the benfit of a handful of the rich and power... anybody remember the Java Class War? Where was our class in that? Complaining about how the standards needed to be independent of propietary control, and largely doing nothing about it! We need to take control of training and make it clear that it is those of us work in the industry that can figure out who knows what, rather than some profiteering third party or a way for leading software companies to gouge folks for certification!
We need non-profit employment services (or hiring halls) so we can dump our contracting companies (ie. pimps, job sharks, etc... ) once and for all.
We need to organize, and organize in a way that maintains our autonomy and democratic values. We don't need any union bosses, telling us what we can and can't do... but we do need to be in solidarity with our fellow workers so we can support each other in struggle. Who among you wouldn't strike to help the workers in hardware manufacture to get a better shake? Some more pay, a safer environment, etc... Who among you wouldn't refuse to work, if you knew by refusing for a short time you could bring in ecological sound practices. We can bring on the Viridian revolution, but innovation won't be enough... we have to force the issue and force companies to clean up their mess.
We have to become responsible, or we have noone to blame for how bad work is but ourselves.
Solid,
Flint
Baltimore IWW Telecommunications and Computer Workers IU560
(San Francisco, Toronto)
Also check out: Syndicat de l'Industrie Informatique, Washington Technical Workers Alliance, FACE Intel, Alliance@IBM, BITE Division of NWU (Business - Instructional - Techincal - Electronic).
We Can Win! No Nerds, No Birds!
Imagine Bush or Gore winning this election, whichever one you dislike more. Now imagine the other one winning. Do you notice a change in your disposition? Do you really think it matters if tweedle dee or tweedle dum is sitting in the chair? Not at all. While voting for Nader might not have any immediate effects, it will be so noted in the log that x% of the vote went to a non-republicrat party. That will cause people in both parties to take a long hard look at the numbers and ask themselves if maybe they should change.
Five percent of the vote. That's all it will take to get the attention of the party leaders.
n other words I'm kind of equating saying "Geeks need a special political lobby" with saying "rich white people need a special political lobby". Geeks are not being oppressed or left out. What need have "we" of a special political lobby
Rich white people have SEVERAL lobbies now weather they actually need them or not. Neuther Women nor African Americans were heard because they deserved to be (though both did and do). They were heard because their voice grew too loud to ignore.
By no means do I equate the current Geek issues with the discrimination and basic unfairness faced by Women and African Americans. I would point out that both groups are more likely to be helped by a 'Geek Agenda' than by the 'Rich white Men agenda'.
We sure do have a political voice! Jello for President!
------------
a funny comment: 1 karma
an insightful comment: 1 karma
a good old-fashioned flame: priceless
this sig limit is too small to put anything good h
Actually, I've been interested in this issue for a while now. As a longtime observer of political movements, it's been very interesting to me to see the geek community working its way through the very early stages of political awareness.
RMS will never play a central role in any tech-savvy political movement, though he'll be important as an agitator on the fringes, shifting the center of debate in the direction of his views, and allowing those advocating less-extreme positions to appear rational by comparison.
If current events continue to evolve as they have been, I predict we'll see a Tim O'Reilly/ Eric Raymond presidential ticket within the next 20 years. You heard it here first!
It was probably Zappa.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
affiliations is the assumption (especially when considering US geekdom)
that geeks are more politically homogenous than they are (namely, that
they are generally libertarian).
I'm deeply suspicious of ANYONE who says that people generally think
the same way about important issues.
I think a lot of this community's struggles in the online frontier would be easier with more clueful people in government. Maybe we'll have to wait a few years before the youngest legislators (at state and federal levels) are likely to be in tune with the Internet world, but it will happen.
As it stands now, I can't think of many places outside the Valley and other high-tech corridors where you might actually have a critical mass of (motivated) voters who sympathize with online ideals.
Maybe if the whole 'Net could "elect" members of a Congressional advisory committee we could acquire a voice. If there was such a thing, it might be really cool because it would have less to do with partisan politics and be able to make important policy contributions.
We should take this bull by the horns instead of waiting for a Congressman to become versed in all the areas that we care about--privacy, patent law, copyright law, corporate bullying, antitrust, etc.
Of course! Think of people like ESR and those at rtmark.com (the etoy.com lawsuit)... I myself write at least one letter a week to a political or business leader expressing my political opinion...
pronoblem
For a related story CLICK HERE
pronoblem
I know this I done work them. I was given a voter file for a county and ask to find the people who vote the most out of particular elections such as 2 of 4. Guess what; The people who vote the most are older people so if you really wnat a voice you need to show the politicians you vote
http://theotherside.com/dvd/
Just because I don't say what I'm doing doesn't mean I'm not doing it. Slashdotters aren't interested in fighting, or should I say, very few are. I *am* out there. But I have other commitments too, and I can only go so far.
And if you'll excuse some additional cynicism, information does not necessarily equate to power. You must USE the information. Simply aquiring money does not make you powerful.. USING it does. Same equation either way. I will reaffirm that unless we get our collective asses together and start /using/ the information we have access to, we will get nowhere.
-- Politically Correct Version of "Geek Lobbying"
(2) is moderately problematic, because if you get rid of all restrictions on fair use, then copying and redistributing an entire copyrighted work would be fair use. Perhaps this is not precisely what you meant.
Well, that's nice, dear. Very nice. So we like freedom. That's great. But that's been said already. The constitution was written over 200 years ago, and it said that freedom thing pretty well. I really wish geeks would branch out some and start talking about the REST of what they believe.
If we value freedom to market, do we value the rights of corporations over governments? If we value freedom of information and curiosity, how do we feel about schools? Are they doing what they need to to make sure everyone gets the information they need? (My own answer: Hell no. Poor and working-class kids, even the brightest ones, are automatically tracked into vocational training programs, while their more privileged counterparts are destined to gain the kinds of information we value so much. This seems to me to be an exceedingly important problem.) How do we feel about military spending and social service programs?
Could we get to talking about how these things play out, in concrete terms?
Pre-immigrants on H-1B visas with no political
rights. Approaching two million at last count.
"Geeks" are not a singular group like "African Americans" or "women".
I strongly disagree with you on this point. Consider the case of women. There are groups such as N.O.W. which claim to stand for all women, and yet a certain percentage of the females in this country do not agree with what this organization stands for. This is always going to be the case with any organization that stands for a group of people. But the important thing to remember is that often times, these organizations stand for some portion of society who's views are not being addressed. Does this sound at all like the geek contingent?
I will admit that geeks as a group do not all believe in the same things, but my question is this: What do we as a group feel is not having our needs addressed by our respective governments? Is there one or several common issues that we need to present to those in power to protect our rights and our ideals?
If there are things that a large contingent of geeks feel are not being addressed, then let's figure out how to get them addressed.
This really isn't an excuse not to vote. Get an absentee ballot; then all you have to do is mail it in.
I voted in the last election even though I was 350 miles away from the polling place on election day. Try it next time. (Not that anything I voted for won... Oh well. Maybe if I keep convincing my friends to vote, it'll make a difference.)
I did not mean that politics *truly* means less than computing, it's just that most geeks don't really think/care about them.
_JDL
Plenty of geeks have issues... I'm one of them, proud to have issues (insanity type)... anyhow...
The term used as "The Real Work" meant (as I read it) that we would rather do *our* work than 'waste' our time with politics. Sorry to say it, but, to most tech-heads, polotics mean no more than sports.
Those who don't do politics, get done by politics
-Master Switch, one more element in the machine
I don't think this would be such a big issue if the other two were resolved. Geeks often have money, and they certainly have opinions. Anyone who can afford an AIBO can afford a membership to the EFF, and us relatively poor students can show up and wave signs if there's ever anything for us to show up to.
Yay Nader! If you're interested in getting involved, go to a meeting of your local Green Party. It's fun, it's productive, it'll help make a difference. Or just click the link and learn more -- knowledge never killed anyone. (This being /., I just know someone is going to come up with a counterexample. Grr.)
Ah, but I think there are better was to spend money than sending humans to mars, and I'm not sure that exemptions on sales tax for net-made purchases are actually sound policy. So, even in your list of "everyone will agree issues," I agree only 67%. If we wanted a real political party, as you suggest, we'd need to come up with some kind of shared opinion on all issues. This is why I believe that we should join the EFF, possibly the ACLU, and other groups that do what you want (as pointed out, many geeks have enough money. You can afford a couple $50 memberships a year, and even poor students like myself can pay for a few $20 student memberships.) Support the causes you support.
A much better expansion of "lobby" is "political force to make the world as we would like it to be.
Well put, it's sort of like the language shift that has happened with "Special Interest Groups" in which there has been a conflation of corporate lobbying with citizen's groups. Although I agree with some of what the original poster was saying (namely that there are probably very disparate interests among the group known as geeks) I do nevertheless think that we are aware of an issue that the population at large isn't and it would be a service to all if we were to raise awareness about it.
Geeks or any other group that is not part of the ruling-class (sorry about that but I can't think of any other name for people that own the companies, corporations, factories and politicians) only get change by appealing to the common interests and empathy of the broad majority of society. As it stands we are highly paid compared to the majority of people but collectively we are worth peanuts compared to our bosses and hence we have little power by following the purchase politicians methodology. Far better is to publicly proselytize the dangers to everyone in society.
Off-topic - goliard? isn't that like a jark?!
--Crush
No, you miss my point. I'm saying that although we're probably better off financially it wasn't money that made those movements a success. There's two tracks:
1. money
2. democratic politics
The only people that can afford to play 1. are the corporations and their owners. But, we have the option of 2., and as you point out, it worked.
--Crush
Absent such identification, pre-existing economic entities have predominant roles -- think corporations and unions
Ah, but that misses the point entirely: there was a time in history when unions didn't exist, and someone had to fight to create them. I think the originator of this thread is essentially calling for the organization of something which would have the same influence, in favor of tech industry workers, that the unions did in their heyday.
The problem with this is that it's unlikely to happen --- we (read: tech industry workers) won't have the drive to be politically motivated on that kind of scale unless something makes us angry, and we're sadly deficient in anger right now.
Geeks are clumped together in two superdense regions: Silicon Valley, CA, and Dallas (Richardson), TX.
Huh?
How about:
* Seattle, Washington
* Austin, Texas
* Maryland and northern Virginia
* Boston, Massachusetts
The geek concentration has always been over-rated and is getting more so every day.
San Francisco (which is *not* SiliValley)
Close enough. Totally different cultures, sure, but within 80 miles of each other in a city which is continuous between them.
Hell, I live in *Santa Cruz*, which is seperated from both by a mountain, and when travelling in foreign countries I normally say i'm from San Francisco.
I think freedom (with respect to software and otherwise) is a big thing for Ralph Nader (he pushed for punishment of MS for anticompetitive practices). He also seems to have a proven track record of supporting the little guy as well as being a good speaker and an informed, intelligent individual. I am sure he would be in my corner more than he would be in some lobbyists' pocket.
Check it out:
http://www.votenader.com/
Also if he gets >5%, then the Green Party becomes an officially organized party and gets federal funding.
Some examples; public access broadband deployment, tele-commuting, tax issues (breaks for private investment in HW, books etc for personal education), tech-imigration-legislation, technical research funding etc.etc
The geek community definitely has more issues than just cypher ;-) (EFF) and open-source (RMS & ESR) to fight/lobby for.
Or? Are we just as self absorbed as everybody around us says we are ?
As it stands we are highly paid compared to the majority of people but collectively we are worth peanuts compared to our bosses
...and I suppose women, gays, african-americans and others were so much more financially in line with their political opponents at the time that their voices started showing up in Congress?
Check out his Consumer Project on Technology. Includes his opinions on tons of geek issues: patents, privacy, linux, antitrust, etc, and letters and editorials he's written demonstrating them.
While i think it might be interesting to see a geek in power like that, there are a few problems.
how many geeks are actually capabable (have the know how) to be able to fill that kind of position? or would want to?
also, while it's great to be able to say, "yeah, i'm a geek, and i'm running for _____," you have to deal with a lot more issues than those relating to geekdom. and those are things that will divide people who are geeks.
i think the best way would probably be to get someone in power to look at the issues the way we do. or to get someone who is running to address some of these issues. find a way to force them to address them. (maybe a slashdot interview with some of the canidates?)
i say leave politics to the politicians and the computers to the geeks. but make sure the geeks let the politicians know what they consider to be important and who they will vote for because of that.
----------------
"All the things I really like to do are either immoral, illegal, or fattening."
"All the things I really like to do are either immoral, illegal, or fattening."
- Alexandar Woolcot
We should use fuel to actually physically move?
Amateur Radio is presently the largest technical politically-active group. Special laws, special license plates, privileges in emergency situations...
Nah, then Clinton would get out the guns and threaten to throw our asses in jail, just like Reagan did to the striking air traffic controllers. The media would portray us as terrorists bent on destroying the national economy. Any credibility we have with the general population would be gone.
The reason "workers" don't take risks and build companies is that most of them don't have the spare capital to do so. Normal people have debt to pay off and have kids to put through college and have a retirement to plan for.
And if you had failed, you would be totally fucked. And you would have ended up owing money to people who very likely were born into wealth, who are not as smart as you nor as motivated.
What is your company? What kind of cut do the VCs get?
geeks don't organize.
We don't rally, we don`t boycott, we don't protest (execpt with pissant little emails), and we dont unionize (though we dont have to, currently).
Oh sure, we talk about the EFF a lot, but for the most part the EFF are seen as wacky radicals. Even 2600's innocuous banners shouting 'Free Kevin' have embarrassed geeks. And the even the un-politically motivated Geek Pride Festival in two weeks will probably not be well attended.
Geeks don't think they need a political voice, because they've always been under the impression that money is all the power they need. Changing one's own life is all most of us want. Most geeks are getting real decadent.
(Change the world you say? What about Linux? they say.)
Besides, most geeks don't worry a drop about the laws that are supposed to affect the things they do. Warez, mp3, and all manner of trading are the staple of the geek's life. Geeks (in this case hackers, mostly) are all about circumventing those silly sorts of limitations. Why lobby for when you can just get away with?
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
Politicians pander to the crowd whose vote comes cheapest, and a politician's campaign promise is about as cheap as it gets. My personal opinion is that if geeks want to influence society they'll have to do it directly through technology.
I absolutely agree that numbers matter. You don't ignore 30% of your base without paying for it. I would point out that although a significant number of Virginia's GOP voters counted themselves among the 'religous right', the numbers are considerably lower in a lot of other states, particularly the battleground states for national elections. My point is that high-tech workers could provide a significant factor in many battleground states and certainly affect multiple key congressional races. Control of the house this year will probably be decided by fewer than 50 races. That sounds like a lot but there are 435 total, so 11% of voters can affect change in the nation. If we organized, identified our issues, compared candidates and put forth suggested voting information which affected say 1% of voters in those districts, I can guarentee we would be considered in subsequent elections. One percent of 11% is fewer than 150,000 voters. If that many people said they considered 'geek' issues (and we need a better name) then solid consideration is certain. Is this beyond geek organization skills???????
So long and thanks for all the fish . . . !!!
What about the possibilitity of forming a high-tech workers special interest group. Both parties are heavily laden with them. Everyone from Gay Republicans to Black Moslem Democrats have well-organized groups, which actually do coordinate putting delegate rosters together, raising money and tend to act as voting blocks both nationally and at conventions and the like. This has one huge advantage over going libertarian or anarchist: it actually puts together a group that gets listened to by the big boys. If it works for the religous right, why not for tech?
So long and thanks for all the fish . . . !!!
Seriously, I'd run if you said you'd vote for me. If not me, then let's pick someone willing to do it who also understands technology and doesn't claim to have invented the internet. I'm only 30 though so we'll have to wait 4 more years 'till I can be Pres. There is such a thing as a write in vote!
.00001% of the population that can't figure out how to not look at it under their own convictions.
My Agenda:
*Outlaw Spam in the various asundry forms. Federal offense if your boss harrasses you with chain e-mail.
*Protect free and anonymous speech. People that abuse it (ie death threats, stalkers) will still run the risk of being investigated. However, no special powers to law enforcement to track someone. Make them get proper court orders to tap lines just as they have to for phone calls. But websites should not be shut down just because someone writes something offensive to
*Work to keep vague and poorly written laws from being passed. No more CDA, UCITA, etc. getting through.
*Promote the use of Open Source and Free Software projects within the government. Think of all the taxpayer dollars that have gone to support computer systems for the government. There would be a huge savings on software alone, not to mention all the older hardware that would still be useable.
*Change the rules within congress to ALLOW laptops in the voting chamber. These people need to get with the times.
Anything else YOU the constituents would want?
Do really dense people warp space more than others?
Both Zappa and Jello had it out with Tipper (a big reason I won't consider voting for Al), and he comes across as being quite intelligent. However, as a libertarian, I'm troubled by a number of planks in his platform. From http://www.angelfire.com/punk/jello2000/release.ht ml:
- Enactment of a maximum wage
- Payback through free healthcare, education and public transportation
- Withdrawal of the US from NAFTA and the World Trade Organization, ideally forcing their dissolution
- A moratorium (or at least mandatory labeling) of irradiated and genetically engineered "frankenfood"
- Abolish the military and CIA, and destroy all nuclear weapons
- Citizen election of police officers
- Legalize squatting in abandoned buildings
- Eradicate all SUV's!!!!!!!!
As much as I hate SUVs, I prefer for their owners to go bankrupt through rising gas prices...
I'm Peggy.
Patent reform:
A way to invalidate patents within the patent system rather than in the legal system. A new class of software patents with 4-7 year enforcement length seems fairly practical.
I know there will be disagreements. There always are. That doesn't stop change from occuring.
Larger Education Budgets:
needs to be directed in the correct way. I think about making teaching an attractive profession rather than the silly fodder spat out by education colleges right now. There are some great teachers being produced but they are few and far between.
I think more science should be available on a widespread basis. I think more music and theatre programs should exist too. I think *lots* of people need more math. Sit in on a 100level college science lab where people are trying to cope with the complexities of the sin of angle and try to not mutter "why haven't you had more math".
More money isn't the only solution, but without it I Don't think you can attract people to teach. Do you think people that spend more time with your kids than you do should make ( probably ) 1/2 your salary?
Space: I think most Earth Orbit missions should be controlled by private corporations but real exploration should be encouraged rather than the piddling being done now. Until ore becomes valuable enough to finance space mining, I don't think theres enough to keep bussiness interested.
Aside from telecommunications, what company would conduct business in space? Space Planes?
Decency Acts:
I think filters in libraries is appropriate as long as the filter is placed by community standards and not a national law. Libraries do quite well managing their content on their own.
Watching porn on a library's 24" monitor isn't what I'm trying to protect. But I'd rather see the library have a policy against it rather than a law.
Net Taxes: For now, implementing a tax is too impractical. For such a thing to be practical, it has to take the shape of a national VAT tax and then a 50-50 split between the 2 states in which the transaction takes place in.
The 50 split to the host state can be recouped in local revenue taxes on the business. Then it could just be a national sales tax that is split amongst the by population once buying things online becomes near enough to the standard that states are losing money from it. I'm not fluent enough in economic theory to guess as to where that point would be.
Things lots of geeks could agree on
- patent system reform
shorter software patent life span
establishment of a more public approval process
- larger education budgets
reignite sciece / tech studying in school
more math
- funding NASA for _real_ missions ( read: making mars a viable goal )
- completely unrestricted crypto
- anti-decency acts
- 0 net taxes
The trouble is on issues that get brought up to be the major things in political debates, we are all fragemented.
We all view abortion ( though I'd guess more are pro choice ), social security, health care, etc. differently.
Unified on some issues but not enough to say "hey thats the Technocratic party, they stand for what I'm for, I'm voting for them."
> What central theme can unite us as geeks?
The same things that unite us now. Technological progressivism. Freedom of information. Transparency of public process. And so on. Many, many groups have gotten together despite facing these same obstacles. We can do it, too.
As for your questions about whether to vote for a candidate who agrees with you on important non-geek-centric issues but disagrees with you on geek-centric ones, my answer is that it's up to the individual. There's no reason we should adopt a single-issue mentality.
Let's have a go at creating an international Geek Party. We have little to lose, and much to gain!
If you know (or even suspect) that you'll be too busy to actually go and vote, get an absentee ballot! All the power of a regular vote, but less of the hassle.
-t
The stereotype of the geek is that of a disinterested loner. Not exactly rich fodder for political activism, methinks. When was the last time that you saw two (sober) geeks agree on anything? Wanna see an example? BSD/Linux/Win-Nt. There: I've started another catfight.
Another problem I see is that geeks are, by and large, pretty honest people. I might not trust a 256MB Dram laying unprotected in a room full of geeks but at least my view camera is safe (Oh, I'd get the camera back, eventually.) When was the last time anyone knew of an honest politician? I think this would be another example of, 'the meek shall inherit the earth -- in four by six plots.' In case you hadn't noticed, the existing power establishment doesn't exactly play fair or nice.
I'll be interested to see if anything comes of this but, frankly, the first new kernel or Quake patch will probably doom the movement to dissipation.
Hmm. On re-reading that I sound like a really sarcastic bastard. Hah! For once I agree with my wife! Apologies in advance: I wish something would happen to shake the old-boy network down to its spit-shined Oxfords: they disgust me beyond belief. But I'm dubious about our chances.
Mike
It may be hard to get geeks out to vote, but this is why online voting is so importent to the
geek community! I would say the one big issue geeks should try to unite behind is online
voting.. as it would increase our political power.
I couldn't disagree more. When you tell me you're to busy to get your butt to the polls (which is
essentially what you're saying when you support online voting) you're telling me you don't care
enough to make the effort.
The other big problem which your quote dose not make clear is: who tells us how to vote?
Why do you need to be told "how to vote"? Are you a real citizen or just a tax generator? Nobody
can defend your interests better than you, because nobody knows better than you what those interests
are. Figure out what you want, set your priorities and go look at the candidates. You may be
surprised at what you find.
The riligious right has an orginisation to figure out what state and local officials they
want.
Wrong. By your definition, I would qualify as a member of the Religious Right since I'm a
conservative Catholic, but that doesn't mean that Jerry Falwell and I agree on much politically.
There are scads of "religious right" lobbies and organizations out there, and a lot of them have a
particular purpose/cause they're interested in above everything else. Like everything else,
in politics you need to read carefully and make up your own mind.
Geeks may never have a simillar level of organisation, but we can help to communicate the
findings of other orginisations (EFF, ACLU, etc.) to people. These orginisations are pretty bad
about not checking out local politicians, but they might put more effort into it when people donate
the necissary website work to the state chapters.
Maybe Minnesota's an exception, but I don't have to expend much effort to find out where my state
legislators and their prospective opponents stand on issues important to me, and it isn't hard to
figure out their position on issue x from what they say on issues a,b,c and d. I'll bet if you
spent an hour a week keeping an eye on those thieves you could figure it out too.
power? How much power do you think the NRA has right this moment after the debacle with Clinton
in the media? Who's about to take money from the Chinese and their associated lobbies?
Actually, according to the Washington Times (and other sources) the NRA is experiencing a surge
in membership because of Lapierre's accusations. More members =more money + more energized voters
willing to back candidates seen as pro-NRA.
As for the Chinese, considering that the main beneficiaries of the PRC money have gotten off
without so much as a $5 fine from the FEC...(insert your own conclusion here)
Well, that's nice, dear. Very nice. So we like freedom. That's great. But that's been said already.
And it should be said again. And again. And again, until humans in general really understand what freedom is. Even us "enlightened" Westerners don't understand what freedom really is; hell, I don't even profess to know it. People who escape from oppressive regimes can really appreciate freedom. We take relative openness and choice for granted. As revolutionaries on a new front - the ethereal, digital front - we'd better figure out what we want and what freedom is really fast, before bigger, stronger people impose limits that benefit themselves on the information world.
I really wish geeks would branch out some and start talking about the REST of what they believe.
Geeks are a pretty wide group; freedom of information could very well be the only thing we agree on. There's something of an agreement to disagree on everything else, but since information exchange and media make up greater parts of our lives than most people, I think we're pretty hard-core about keeping knowledge of any kind open and available. Everything else is debatable, and should be.
If we value freedom to market, do we value the rights of corporations over governments?
Don't individuals and mom-and-pop operations figure into capitalism? I would think we would value the rights of Joe User and Jane Programmer over both corporations and governments - without individuals, neither type of power structure can exist, much less thrive.
Could we get to talking about how these things play out, in concrete terms?
Sure. We need a common base to start from, though. Remember that we're spread across borders, subject to different laws, regulations, and environments. If there's one thing we can agree on, then we start developing ideas about how we can improve things from there.
Do we have a political voice? Not yet. Should we have one? Absolutely. How do we do it? Aren't we doing it now, in a million different ways?
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
If someone had said "We're going to organize a group of voulenteres (spelling?) to write our own unix clone to compete with MS" he'd have been laughed off the face of the planet!
Somehow, this "Herculean" job was accomplished. So, excuse me if I say so, but you far under-estimate our abilities to accomplish the tasks we find deeply important to us.
We may not agree on how something should be done, but at least we agree that something needs to be done. As it stands today, _Nothing_ is being done.
Josh
Plenty of projects, not enough developers...
The best/easiest way is to encourage all of your coworkers/friends to vote with you. The way that any group gets political clout is when they start bringing votes with what their stance is. You can complain all you want but congresspeople do listen to their constituents. Its important to show them that more than just 1 or 2 people share your same view.
Another thing that could be done to help is get organized. It's tough to find out what some politicians believe/vote on technical issues. I haven't run into a website that collates this data yet and it could be a very good resource if done correctly.
I'm not sure that the geeks are very well paid as a group. It's the managers that get all the cash, while the workers do all the work. I've never really understood why that is; it's usually the skilled programmers who are more valuable to the company, yet they get paid the least and have the smallest voice. I think that's changing, however - look at Carmack's influence. Admittedly, mainly in the geek community but I'm often surprised how many normal people know about him.
Right. Change the rules if you want to inject geek ROI in politics. Caucuses are high reward ratio - many times, just showing up you become a delegate, and can pass motions for your precinct (which you printed out ahead of time and gave copies to other precincts near you). I rode both the None Of The Above and All Of The Above resolutions to the state level myself, although I had a conflict with going to the state convention.
....
My precinct this year had 3 delegates and 3 people showed up. Just on a whim, when people were confused about what might be a good resolution, I said "You know, like moving that the 60% majority requirement for school bonds be lowered to a simple majority of 50% + 1". This was then altered to all bonds (long story, involving stadiums that geeks and locals hate which passed with 50% votes). And the resolution was passed by probably 40 precincts in both the 36th and 43rd Districts, so now it moves on two Legislative District Caucuses. It was that easy.
Also, do the math - show up at primary endorsements and ask people running for office questions about support of privacy laws and stuff like that. If they answer wrong, write a check for the one who answered right and was believable. Point out how much geek money there is for privacy. And how anti-privacy means no geek money. That scares 'em
Will in Seattle
You said males. My neighbor, a cute 32 yo microsoftie, might object to this.
I know I do. For example, at the latest Tacoma LUG, Scott__ was telling me that 4 out of 20 attendees were young female geeks. They sure didn't look male to him.
Will in Seattle
Not just a /. effect - if you act like you're mainstream, and privacy rights sure as heck is mainstream (something like 70+ % of the population agree with geeks on this), then you are treated as if you are mainstream.
If you organize in ways old-style politicos can measure and react to, they inoculate themselves to your effect. If you go outside the paradigm, and Think Geek, then they can't figure out how you succeed at it.
Will in Seattle
First, you cite a figure of "over 2.2 million members" for the NEA. That works out to a whopping 84 cents per member, hardly the mark of inordinate political influence.
Second, for comparion, the telephone utilities have made $2,787,569 in contributions so far during the 2000 election cycle. the NEA so has made only $271,667 and the AFT $510,700 (according to opensecrets.org, thanks for the pointer).
I challenge you to explain why, if they have such clout, teachers remain underpaid and undersupported.Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
so why don't we do something?
the numbers are definately there...
what we need is a voice. something to rally behind....
elect tux president!
or maybe, start the "tech" party, a worldwide political organization of propellerheads like ourselves.
if there was a tech party, i'd at least exercise my right to vote, which i don't currently.
From a motherboard manual, error beep codes: S-L-L-L-SS: Speaker Error
Slashdot party anyone?
Chris Hagar
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." - Thomas Jefferson
Deside stuff by a slashdot poll? Um....hello? I don't mean this as a flame, but do you look at the results of the slashdot polls? The non-sensical answers generally get 15% or more of the vote. I don't think that is a very viable option for making important desicions.
Besides, I'm know most people who didn't vote for that winning answer wouldn't be very apt to fight for it. I know I would. Why fight for something you dont' believe strongly in. What if somehow I get lots of people to vote for puting telescreens in every building in America, so we can be watched and cataloged by the government. Would slashdot fight for that? According to your system they should.
I remember in my policital science class, the one thing the founding fathers wanted to avoid as much as a monarchy was a pure democracy. Mob rule is bad.
Ok... this is starting to ramble...
Since we're talking about the US Congress, the question is who among us is going to step up and *buy* us a Congressman? For the non-US Slashdotters, here in the US, Congressman vote based on the concerns of their largest campaign contributors.
I want to state up front that I've nothing against Jeff Bezos, I'm just going to use him here as an example...
The problem is more that once you make it big, like Jeff Bezos did, suddenly you find that your interests are in line with those that want to take away our rights. Bezos thus has chosen to become part of the patent problem, rather than part of the solution. Likewise, if he contributes to political campaigns, I doubt he's supporting *our* positions, he's supporting the positions that appear to benefit Amazon.com.
If we want our "own" Congressman, we need to organize, and contribute to them. That's the way it works. It may be wrong, but it simply is.
Due to the Electorial College:
YOUR VOTE FOR PRESIDENT DOES NOT COUNT
it's a sig, wtf?
We need to focus our energies as a community instead of acting out as individuals. Right now, we control the internet. But we have no place where we can gather as a community to discuss our role in the world. We have no place where we can engage in intelligent, respectful serious dialogue about the ethical and political issues that are only just beginning to effect our day-to-day lives.
Once we engage in serious discussion, we can then focus our collective energy toward the issues that are most important to us. Right now, the internet community is so fractious, that there is never enough us involved in any one struggle to make a difference.
The EFF has made a good effort to provide us with this already, but their efforts have fallen short since they have focused so heavily on political matters alone. We need a place where politics and industry ethics can be discussed together.
Maybe our first issue should be a massive IDP of the major newspapers websites until they agree to stop using the term 'hacker' to refer to 'crackers' and let 'hacker' replace 'geek' (the way it used to be). If we want to be taken seriously by the rest of the world, we have to stop letting them define us. We have to tell them who we are, and what we want. I hate the term 'geek' because it takes this power away from us a community. We let people outside our community tell us who and what we are by accepting this term.
Unfortunately this situtation is simmiliar to that discussed by Amateur Radio Operators a few years back. While lobbying is good, actually being actively part of the 'system' is much better. If even .1% of those in the active /. community were to get involved at even a local level op politics think of the voice we would have.
And maybe some of us would actually like it.
---
I look in the mirror and all I see
Is a young old man with only a dream
I've often heard people remark on how prevalent libertarian politics are among the geeking class. I admit to subscribing to a chunk of this ideology myself. I don't think we feel powerless as much as unconnected. I don't like the idea of politics swamping my life and I have a fairly narrow view of the proper role of government.
Nonetheless... it's exactly these attitudes that hamstring us. We are loathe to get involved in issues that affect us directly. Why?
Is it because we just want politics to "go away" like the paperwork and gantt chart beauracracy that absorbs our precious coding time?
Perhaps because politics are unordered and messy and we that geek want our complex systems to follow clean rules?
Perhaps because the barriers to enter such a discussion require a frustrating anmount of explication? I know despite my best efforts I lose patience when explaining technical concepts again and again. Perhaps we're too tired for such things?
Explanations are irrelevant, though interesting. My chief complaint about myself, my friends and slashdotters in general is that we take special pride in our technical solutions and masturbatory converstaions but put so little back into the real world. Is there anyway we could us this very forum, slashdot, as a translation tool for political power? A technical pac for a technical group, perhaps where members can vote on positions in the same way we currently rail against the Patent Office and the Clinton Administration's export policies? Can't we do something besides talk?
Can't we do something besides talking about how we just talk????
My cat can eat a whole watermelon
I was in a union, non-software, before I had enough experience to get a tech-type job. It sucked. I had to pay $100 to join it, had to join it to work this stupid summer job, got paid next to minimum wage anyway, and didn't hear another thing from them except how great they were, and oh yeah could I vote for this one guy they liked? If that's what a union is like, it's not what tech workers need, because it blew, it seemed to have forgotten that it was supposed to work for its members, and not the other way around. A PAC or something maybe, but if tech places start unionizing and "closing shops", I'll just consult, because I don't need that kind of shit.
Communication is only possible between equals
I have long felt powerless to fight things like software copyrights and things. Unfortunately, like most geeks my age (late twenties), I am unwilling to petition people or actually become a political activist because I positively loathe politics.
Tom
---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
If you can ever mobilize 49% of the people in the right states, you've won, since there's almost no chance that *everybody* shows up. Well, at least in the US, where voting isn't mandatory and turnouts are fairly low. 'sides, you don't need a majority here, just a plurality in the Electoral College.
Guinier's position WAS racially-motivated, IIRC. Her proposal to give each voter multiple votes that they could distribute at will was based on the theory that self-perceived[*] minority voters would unite behind minority candidates, and vice versa... which is a remarkably ODD theory, because it supposes that qualifications and even party affiliation matter far less than race for most voters.
Italy? Oh my. Please, no. I LIKE not having the government collapsing and changing hands with alarming frequency, and considering that the US is huge, some stability is actually a good thing...
[*] Including areas where people normally considered minorities are actually the majority.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
Tenure.
They're not the only ones who can easily be involved in the alleged motivation of tenure, namely the threat of being removed due to controversy, but there are VERY few occupations where a position can be as safe as teaching, and where pay can be based on seniority alone. Merit-based pay is practically an unknown in the vocation, as well.
The American Federation of Teachers had 694,402 members in '97, according to my almanac. That's almost the size of the United Auto Workers (766,032), and more than the Communications Workers of America (503,558). Similarly with the NEA, with over 2.2 million members in 1995. Both unions send LARGE groups of delegates to the Democratic National Convention, accompanied by donations; in the 97-98 election cycle, the (smaller of the two) AFT PAC donated $1,415,400 to federal candidates, 98% of them Democratic.
*They have clout*. When you see the AFT spending its money opposing vouchers and merit-based pay instead of complaining about school supplies, that should tell you what their priorities are. This is NOT a weak union.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
Oh, more numbers. The NEA contributed $1,853,390 during that same cycle, 95% of it to Democrats. That's the PAC itself to Federal candidates, and doesn't count individual members donating on their own. That's almost UAW-scale of $1,915,460 for the same cycle (98% to Democrats). The aforementioned numbers all come from opensecrets.org, a VERY slow site...
In 1996, 40% of the delegates to the Democratic National Convention came from the NEA, as reported in an Investor's Business Daily article.
Please don't claim that teachers do not have clout -- not if you want anybody to take you seriously.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
The mainstream, according to the polls I've seen, is quite conservative, so Buchanan's probably closer to most than Nader.
Buchanan's been involved w/ the media before (as a _Crossfire_ member), and as a Presidential speechwriter and candidate before, so he's a darn public figure. I'm not surprised that journalists would take an interest in him, if only because they can conveniently demonize him at will for a story and almost everybody will know who they're talking about.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
Yes. Techie issues... tend to be techie. I'd hate to marginalize myself by being in a party which concerns itself with only a few issues, as litmus tests and such annoy me to no end.
However, on those other issues, folks will be scattered all 'round. That's fine by me. As long as there's rational debate (heh! right...) and folks don't act juvenile 'coz they didn't get everything they asked for (um... on this planet?), disagreement is good.
I *hate* it when quotes surface like that of somebody saying, "I'm going to vote for Al Gore because I'm a good Democrat" (A real quote, from a primary voter.). Um... Bradley's a Democrat too. It's OK to consider disagreeing, and to actually bother to think about the issues. Since many of us have different value systems, we're going to disagree a LOT. That's fine by me.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
Check out http://www.msnbc.com/news/380065.asp?0m=N1DQ for info about a group that plans to enact these planned organized denial of service attacks. I'd like to see them offer a forum for registering causes and attacks and such - id rather protest something other than GMOs.
... Geeks are clumped together in two superdense regions: Silicon Valley, CA, and Dallas (Richardson), TX. This is the opposite of what happens with most groups, wherein the group has lighter concentrations over a much larger area. A perfect example of the latter would be Southern baptists, who are spread out all over the Southern states, but in heavy enough concentrations to make political change. Plus, as a whole, geeks make up a very small percentage of the population.
And perhaps this is how it should be. While it would be a fairly simple task to get an official into public office at the local or state level, but even in California and Texas, the majority of the state is not geeky, and could really care less about our issues.
Now to apply what we've learned to the national level... In Dallas, we're extremely concerned about copyright and patent restrictions, IPR and the like. But do you think that the potato farmers in Idaho or the Cattle ranches in Wisconsin give a damn about DVD Decryption? And why should they? It has absolutely no bearing on their lives. This would be the same as if a representative from Wisconsin were trying to pass a national bill to allow Dairy farmers the right to hold IPOs. Geeks wouldn't give a damn either.
The problem with the situation as is derives from the fact that public policy as far as Copyright and Patent infringement is developed at the highest echelon of government, where 1) The littlest information is actually known about these issues, and 2) It is only necessary for slimy corporations and Industry groups to grease the palms of a few key political figures.
I'm not actually suggesting that these policies should be determined at the state level, but what if they were? Then in order for the MPAA to stand any ground, they would require passage of their key laws in 50 states (Why 50? If not all 50, then one would only need to base operations frowned upon in the particular state to which the law did not apply). This means they would have to grease quite a few more palms, and the outrage from the communities in SuperDense Geek areas would quickly cause the ellected official to fall from office.
Basically, this all boils down to three points:
1) Geeks do not have anywhere near the population count to deserve the kind of Political Representation necessary to enforce the kind of change your speaking of, and
2) People only get officials elected. Then it is essentially the PAC that tells the official what to do while in office, and
3) The problem here is that corporations and Industry groups are able to consolidate their voice into one yell, as opposed to the chatter heard from Geeks across the US.
--
"A mind is a horrible thing to waste. But a mime...
It feels wonderful wasting those fsckers."
I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
Maybe its time that we actually do something. First, check out who is running for what, and do some screening to see if any candidates are actually willing to promote our concerns. Then, we can set up web sites and mailing lists to get ourselves organized to support said candidate.
If there isn't anyone worth supporting, then find someone to run, perhaps as a writein, and organize online to get them elected.
It's not exactly c programming, but it is alot of hard work, but worth it.
--
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
The Libertarian Party has been continually in favor of electronic rights, a free internet, crypto rights, etc. They've been working to get rid of a lot of the penalties that the gov't now uses in the Drug War: assets forfeiture, paid informants, conspiracy charges that put you away forever. All of these things are now moving into the new realm of "Internet Terrorism". It won't be long before the Kevin Mitnick thing is outdone. They're just building the hysteria right now so that the public will happily believe that the gov't is saving them from the terrible hackers.
Just reading the LP platform is time well spent. First time I read it, I kept waiting for the hypocrisy, but it just isn't there.
Libertarian Party
I think the problem here in New Zealand stems from the fact that there are so few technical people in Parliament - something like 3 or 4 out of 120. Most of our MPs are lawyers, and things like that, and just don't feel comfortable with technical subjects.
Geeks are never going to get decent representation as long as there aren't any people in power who can communicate with geeks on their (technical) level.
"Oh, I got me a helmet - I got a beauty!"
"Oh, I got me a helmet - I got a beauty!"
Jack Nicholson, Easy Rider
I've always wondered when we'd start seeing geek unionization. The recent engineers strike at Boeing shows that knowledge-workers are not immune to labor disputes.
It seems to me that there hasn't been much demand for unionization in the computer field because of some combination of high wages, high demand for workers, the promise of exorbitant benefits, and the youth of the workforce. I always figured we'd see organizing when people realise stock options aren't the best way to be paid.
But I had overlooked the lobbying potential of unions, and I can very well see the political front being the catalyst for an organized labor force. So, without necessarily demanding labor contracts from employees, perhaps it is nearing the time to create an IT union to carry out lobbying.
PS. Labor unions can be a controversial topic, so flame gently. And before someone tries calling me a commie pinko, I live in a free-to-work state and would probably be hesitant to join any union.
Any sufficiently advanced civilization is indistinguishable from Gods.
Slashdot is well-positioned to be the arbiter of influence. All that is needed is the grassroots *need* on the readers part and legislator's willingness to get bonafide feedback from this community.
/. readers could eclipse the AARP/NRA in being the largest informed block of voters in the US. Instead of $$$ the power comes from grassroots initiative to *vote* legislator's out of office .vs. buy them into office.
Legislation written is done with the facts provided by lobbyists. Without presenting the facts Slashdot readers intimately know them their voice is effectively silenced.
Discussion threads developed into issues (ala DMCA) then voted up or down bring consensus. Most important is to establish a feedback mechanism which boils the information down into legislator understandable format. Give legislator/aides access onto the site and their own *view* on the facts without having to comb through the verbage.
At some point in this process
1 million votes determines the California governorship. When the CA Homeowners Assoc. (~4mil) started to organize with online grassroots voting systems. California passed legislation outlawing voting over the Internet. The politicians are weary of any influence which can organize outside the channels of well paid American lobbyists.
Geeks whatever their color have an influence just a website away from the levers of Democracy.
-r
Geography aside, most geeks I know, no matter how much techncial acumen they may have, have an infantile view of politics. This is because we live in a society where politics, real politics (not DeCSS, which is an almost meaningless side show) and knowledge thereof is de-emphasized. How many people who read Slashdot know what the GATT treaty is all about? I would say less than 1%. Yet GATT will affect each person visiting this website PROFOUNDLY over the next 10 years. ;)
<p>
Basically, the threads on this issue I'm reading are sounding like Winston (in the Orwell Book, 1984) saying "If there is any hope, it is in the Proles...", ie, pointing to some bland hope of a grassroots correction. well, I got news for you all. If you don't understand where REAL power lies in your own community, how are you going to affect it? How do you think you are going to influence even your local state representatives if he doesn't even know YOUR NAME.
<p>
Dream on. But don't forget that even now, it's just dreaming and you're not changing anything unless you are sustained in your involvment and committment to understanding.
It's time to start building businesses at home over DSL. Start changing the landscape. As long as we're thought of as MP3 pirating misfits, we're going nowhere.
Once we have local businesses over the net. We will succeed in getting attention. As long as we're mere consumers we're fucked.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Teachers, steel workers, and so on have unions because they're not involved in the future of that business they're simply holding it up a la wooden wheelless chariots.
Programmers working for corporations should have unions. Hackers building, improving, and selling the stuff corpses use need an attitude adjustment not unions. You can't keep sweeping it under the rug.
And what the hell does DeCSS have to do with geeks. We can't let the idea that it's only for geeks continue to screw users who may not be geeks just somewhat savvy.
DeCSS needs to be seen as a practical tool not as the fairy tale evil wizard threatening to destroy the MPAA it's been made out to be.
And what's with the communism crap? The GPL is no more restrictive than the US constitution.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
I'm thinking distributions have got to speak up. They're the perfect substitute for unions. They're users who built something they needed and somehow others needed it too. They're the perfect representatives. So far GNU + OSI have done their share. Linus has fought the trademuggers. We need to have businesses that clearly show what's at stake.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Most Congressmen will claim to be tech-friendly these days.
Two who are PhD physicists certainly are:
Vernon Ehlers (R-MI)
Rush Holt (D-NJ)
If many geeks had as much confidence in their social abilities as they hade in their open source programming, then things would be different. Yes, a bit of a stereotype.
My point is that you have to get crazy out there and make it known what you want. You have to control your life. It's OK sometimes to consider yourself the center of the universe. Your happiness should come first. If you have to fight for that happiness, DO IT!
If you don't like your job, quit. Find something that makes you happy and do it. Don't let it own you, you have the skills to do better. It's the confidence and guts that needs to be stepped-up. If you don't like what your Congressman is doing, let him know. Not just a sleazy E-Mail, but LET HIM KNOW. There are things that could be done, and you're not going to get your way if you're 'slaving' 60 hours a week. Control your life and go for the gold, happiness is key! If someone or something is hurting your pursuit of happiness, do something. There's alwyas people behind you, and I'll be the first to say that I am.
Mike Roberto
- roberto@soul.apk.net
-- AOL IM: MicroBerto
Berto
But if you wanted to have political influence, it could happen. First of all get some organization like EFF to generate voting guides. This is the first critical step. It would focus on a small number of issues that we can agree on instead of all the issues. (Do you really think all of geekhood would agree on things like defense spending?)
In the infancy stages you will just get campaign workers answering questions. But after a few elections, if you can show that a large number of people read the guides, you will get more and more direct access to politicians.
A key, and overlooked, area will be getting responses from prospective judges. They have surprising control over what goes on, and they are rarely scrutinized by the press in areas "we" care the most about.
The next step is to collect money. Money that will go directly to supporting or harming politicians that are for or against your causes. When you start pulling in millions that serve to help candidates who espouse and vote for your platform, you will get candidates altering their views to get the money.
The real power comes when (surprise) a candidate is or is not elected because of how they respond to the questions and the group's interest.
Then you have what you wanted. Why don't we have it now? It requires lots and lots of hard, unpaid work... that is far less rewarding than most open source development.
W
I work in politics.. i am very involved in a lot of local campaigns. Our work is just as meaningful as anyone else's. the president's job is stressful, he has to make deadlines. we all have a place, its just that geeks get to play with the big price tag toys. no more no less --jay
1. Slashdot (no I'm not trying to suck up)
2. They Cyber Party (this could cause some problems with the morally corrects)
3. insert your suggestion here.
If a couple of people with money, some techs with brains, and a bunch of ornery geeks all band together, we will have the most powerful organization in the United States.
If you want my respect, give it first...
If you don't want my respect, expect mine before you give it.
I can see it now: Party Platform by Poll
A visit to the party website (and there would have to be one) could show current party opinions on a variety of issues (Gun Control: x% for, y% against). But being geek culture, there's no such thing as just 'for' or 'against'. There are degrees between requiring registration of automatic weapons with a contracted third party holding firm for the info, and outlawing handguns.
Brings a tear to my eye, it does...
-- Chapman's Observation #1: Nothing is ever simple
At first it seems a daunting task: to find someone with geeky tendencies to willingly rub elbows with the people in Congress or Parliment. I, however, am one to advocate a different approach.
What I am saying is this: Screw the system and form a new one. That's right, a coup d'etat! Lets all of us geeks, nerds, and just plain weirdos form an alliance and create new world order. Then, and only then, shall the ideals that we hold dear be safe from the preying minds in D.C.
I call this movement the World Domination Initiative. Join me today!
Ciao
nahtanoj
Geeks aren't interested in politics because government doesn't double its efficiency and speed once every 18 months.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Gandhi
The US political system groups people by location, assuming that people who share geography share political interests as well. That was fine when farming was the main occupation. It is less fine when the Internet homogenizes a country so that geeks form an even distributed 49% (or so) of the population.
Some of the European systems (Italy, I think, and Israel*) do a better job of providing minority representation. Trouble is, Italy and Israel also have some hellacious parliamentary deadlocks and chaotic swings. I'm not sure if this is related to the voting system.
Lani Guinier, a Harvard professor who was barred from a government post for supposedly advocating racial quotas, has some ideas on making the process a bit fairer. That is, ensuring that a 49% minority wins *some* of the battles rather than losing them all.
*Yes, I know where Israel is. But culturally, it draws a lot from Europe.
(2) There is a little more to it than that, including your idea of what should be "fair use" in the first place. This is certainly an area where there is no "geek" consensus at all. (3) Well, organizations like the ACLU and EFF already take up these causes, although I'd be surprised to hear if they'd defended any child pornographers legally. There are all kinds of complications to this, and there are a million opinions about them. (4) Problems, problems.
The platform would consist of the following: Whatever comes out of Her pineal gland.
The only solution is an Erisian Revolution!
The above comment is CopyWrong (K) Erisian Entertainment. All Rights Reversed. Ewige Blumenkraft!
No offense, but did you mean to respond to my comment, or someone else's? It looks like you are responding to the same comment I responed to, not mine. If you are indeed responding to me, I am thoroughly baffled. Please enlighten me.
B. Elgin
B. Elgin
"Read at your own risk; feel free to ignore."
This is the crux of the matter. The audience just here on
I prefer to focus my political energy on issues which have a moral and constitutional component, something I can compare against my belief system. I suspect many others are in the same situation.
There may never be a 'Geek Lobby'. But there may develop a coalition of 'Geek Lobbies', which work together when common goals arise, and part company on the partcular issues which they feel strongest about. I might support increased vigilance over internet taxation measures, have no opinion about MPAA IP issues, and vehemently oppose some other geeks on library or school system censoring.
My suggestion: We actively seek out the geeks who are already aligned with our own political ideals, and create a subnet, bringing the geek perspective when required, and informing our fellow geeks in a more intelligent manner.
We don't all have similar viewpoints. Some of us are students, some have been professional programmers for many years. Some of us are conservative Christians, some are liberal athiests, some are conservative Jews, others are liberal Wiccans. Some are Democrats, some are Republicans, and there are a lot who are not US citizens, and I appologize for not know the names and affiliations of many foriegn political organizations. The key is to be the technology expert in the groups you are a part of. Join up with each other when you agree, and disagree vehemently when you don't. (most around here are very good at that!)
Make it a million-node Beowulf cluster!
Not a bad idea. pick up a distributed.net client and crack the current project in under an hour right in front of their noses, yes, something like THAT would really get them stirred up.
---- Sig? What sig? Who needs one, anyway?
We need a lobby that can throw $ at the cashvacuums in DC and the state legislatures so they'll listen. (And similar organizations, where applicable, in other countries.) The problem is: how to organize, how to pick who's in charge, etc.
Actually, this shouldn't even be just a "geek" lobby, but trying to market it as "The non-morons lobby for common-sense tech-related legislation" may offend the populace at large.
"What? The nerds think I'm stupid? I know how to turn on my microsoft and copy my internet!"
And of course the media will find a way to spin it.
"Tonight at nine: Find out why the geeks are trying to make it easy for your kids to look at pornographic material and steal the hard-earned money from the peace-loving WalTimeWarnerMicroFordMattelMega Corporation! In fact, many of these same geeks have much in common with the COLUMBINE KILLERS! Do you want your children growing up in this environment? Think of the Children!"
Maybe we can just throw support behind the ACLU. Hmm. Has the ACLU shown any support towards electronic freedom, other than the typical free-speech issues?
Besides, only inferior geeks would want to join a collective system of compensation. The best minds can always do better independently.
That's not to say we can't form a PAC, though.
mine came up david mcrenolds... guess I'm a commie
On the other side of the coin, you've got Microsoft taking a heavy, heavy interest in politics right now. While it's easy to dismiss their actions - lobbying for a cut in the DOJ's budget, holding big-ticket fundraisers, openly supporting political candidates who disfavor antitrust laws - as being purely motivated by immediate self-interest, you know and I know that they've got an eye out for the long view here.
So where does that leave your average geek? We've got clueless politicos to the left of us, Microsoft to the right, now here we are (stuck in the middle...). The problem here is that both of those ends have to meet at some point. Politicians can be counted on to always do what's best for their wallets and chances for reelection. Microsoft can be counted on to do what's best for its plans for world domination. There is a definite common ground here, and the end result will be the freezing-out of geeks from the political landscape.
And the hell of it is, there may not be a solution. After all, our gift is communication, and the enabling of it. We can talk all we want, but we can't shout down the siren call of the almighty dollar. I mean, sure, we can put up websites all we like, but without money, who can we count on to pay attention to us? Who's going to listen to what we want and what we need?
Maybe the answer is nothing more complex than some good old-fashioned civil disobedience. Here's a few ideas:
Shut down websites: I'm not talking about hacking/DoS'ing sites; I'm talking about turning off those servers that we control. Dry up the information flow for a while. If the web suddenly becomes nothing much more than a morass of lookalike e-commerce and pr0n sites, I think that people just *might* start noticing.
Walk off the job: Don't quit. That's suicide. But take your vacation time. Call in sick. Without the people to run it, the information machinery of the world grinds to a halt - it becomes static.
Threaten to Unionize: Employers, in general, dislike unions because it takes the power out of their hands. Politicians, on the other hand, may not like unions either, but they're more than willing to work with them, because they represent a large, powerful, and tangible bloc of people, power, and money. Individuals crying out in the wilderness for rights don't get listened to. We all learned that in the 1950's. But large, organized, effective groups *do* get listened to.
Maybe not all of these ideas are workable, but that's not really the point here. The point is that as we are, doing what we're doing, we have no voice - we are taken for granted and we are forgotten when it comes time for those senators to vote. Something must be done to the very way we interact with the political landscape if we expect to ever be able to influence the way the business of running a country - any country - gets done.
Chris Tembreull
Web Developer, NEC Systems, Inc.
My opinions are my own, and nobody else's.
Chris Tembreull
"My karma just ran over your dogma."
"Because most of you are a bunch of fucking communists who haven't any real ideas about the way the world works..."
Hardly democratic that viewpoint. Your attack on communism in this way shows that you know nothing about it, only what the US Government spoon feeds you. If you want to know a little more about what you flame then maybe you should get a copy of the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels (available free online). You may not agree with what they say but you may find that you actually learn something about how countries work, society and how the so called democratic society everyone is bantering on about has never been acheived anywhere in the world. If you look at the details you shall see that the US, the governing power of democracy, is only a capitalistic society. Guess what happens when you attain a pure capitalistic society? That's right, you have a dictatorship (not to be confused with communism and especially marxism). Think about it.
Now you've thought about it I shall explain. The power is not in the hands of the government anymore. If you look at recent history you will find that the power lies in International Organizations. Not only do they have a law in their own right (they are answerable to their founding countries laws and International law) but they also buy politicians, I quote from your mail:
"Microsoft donated millions of dollars to the Democrats over the years - and what did it get them? An anti-trust suit."
Why do you think Microsoft wanted the Democrats in power? Do you really believe that it is because they believe in Democracy? If you do then you are naive. I think you will find that it has more to do with the fact that the Democratic party either turned a blind eye to the business practice of MS (remember it wasn't the government which started the anti-trust case, it was a number of states which lobbied for it) or that MS benefited in another way. Bill Gates does not do anything for nothing, we have seen that, we can prove that. His donations to charity only occur when he's in trouble with the government. Coincidence? I think not.
In this day and age there are more and more people thinking that life would be better if we worked for each other than for ourselves. I have seen people earning extremely high salaries and be extremely unhappy, and seen volunteer help workers with a roof over their head and enough food in their stomach that are extremely happy. Don't fool yourself into believing that money (or so-called democracy) is good. It isn't. The open-source movement is a goal that I hope will be achieved as I believe it is a step in the right direction, where information is free, something else the US and UK government are trying to stop.
Yes you heard right. Why do you think that the US doesn't allow more than 128bit encryption out of the US (only recently happened)? If I choose to write some information (freedom of speech and everything) than shouldn't I be able to present it in any form I like, even encrypted? The NSA listen in on most of the US telephone calls, the Information Bill in the UK gives police the right to request encryption keys without a warrant, on failure you get a 2 year sentence, even if you have legitemely forgotten your keys. When will people wake up and realize that Government in the western world are taking away your freedom not giving it. So much for your constitution.
c0rard
When I read your original post, I thought it was some sort of a joke/parody and so said nothing. But now it looks like you're being serious, so let me explain something to you.
First of all, I completely agree with you that we are the working class - in fact, when my college friends ask me how I like my work I usually tell them that it's pretty much like working at a big factory, except that I use a mouse and a keyboard instead of a hammer or whatever. But there is nothing wrong with it!!!
If tomorrow, all the managers, CEO's and stockholders dropped off the face of the planet, the world would function just fine.
Do you really believe this? What about low-level managers (like an owner of a small restaurant who employs 4 people)? What is the dividing line? If I work here for 2-3 years I'll become a manager myself - does it mean that I will immediately jump from one class to another. And hey, by the way, a manager two levels above me also writes codes himself sometimes - which class does he belong to? (he also spends a lot of time checking/sending e-mail, flying to various companies and living at expensive hotels)
In fact, as Open Source/Free Software has shown, it arguably would function much better than ever before. Not because there would be a lack of organization, far from it. But because there wouldn't be any coercive organization.
Dude, it is stupid to talk about coercion in software development, at least among the more able developers - if I were "coerced" to do something I would quit my job tomorrow and find another one one day after that.
Don't give me this Ayn Rand ridiculousness about the ruling class holding the world together. Revolutionary Spain, Open Source, worker cooperatives, all these things show that coercive organization is destructive, and surely not worthy of a reward, especially the kind of obscene awards that CEO's give themselves.
If what you're saying is true, why don't we see the enthusiastic workers happily building cars and buring the evil GM - after all, according to you they would build better cars.
Is the skill to coercively organize people so wonderful that it is worth 419x more than the skill to produce something?
Yes!!!! It is _easy_ to write code, but I don't think I would be able (not yet, anyway - maybe in a few years) to manage 25 arrogant pricks (read "software developers") and at the same time find out what my customers want, and that's why I am not getting paid that much.
And to all those workers out there who actually think this guy makes sense, take a look at this section of his website: I am a former Vice President of Alpha Base Systems, Inc, former Vice President of Air-Shields Information Systems (now Hill-Rom Netlynx), and former Chief Technology Officer of EduPoint.com. I am currently President of a small consulting company called Silicon Engine, Inc. Of course he's going to defend the right of the ruling class to rule, because he's trying so desperately to enter into it.
You're funny. Have you EVER worked for a REAL software company?
Think about how electoral politics works: a candidate wants to get elected. To get elected they have to get a lot of votes. How do they get a lot of votes? By appealing to the majority of voters. Do the majority of voters have the technical savvy to even understand our issues? No, of course not. The majority of voters don't write code. They push paper or drive tractors or type letters in the word processor or ask if you want fries with that. (This isn't a negative coment about anyone, it's merely an observation of the reality of what the majority of any random modern population does.)
So our budding politician does what most politicians generally do, which is to try to appeal with issues that are more related to the ordinary life of the average person, such as to tell the voters their taxes will be lowered or that jobs will be created or government investment in the area will be increased, or preferably all three. Alternatively, the politician may try to appeal with vague social issues, such as to scare voters (and whip up bigotry) by claiming that an unpopular minority group is going to take over if they're not stopped, or by claiming that the politician's agenda will "protect the children". The latter seems to be the catch-all for all that is evil and loathsome in politics these days. (I personally have reached the point that anytime anyone claims anything is necessary for the good of "the children", I already suspect them of being liars and cheats.)
So we geeks turn out at the polls and vote against the idiot politician... but who are we voting for? Another politician, who knows nothing more about our issues than the first.
There are not enough of us in the world to sway the vote by direct votes yet. If we want to make a change now, other than by getting sued regularly (as a group) and going to court over and over to fight for issue after issue, we're going to have to embark on a massive education campaign to make the average voter *actually* understand these issues and *how* they effect the voter's life and *why* they should care enough to ensure that they only vote for politicians who will tow *our* party line on tech issues.
Anybody got a few million dollars to put up billboards all over the country that say "You could have had a free DVD player now but the movie industry won't let us make one for you"?
We are not so oppressed, it's also economical, but our first goal is to "protect" our culture. Just look at the C-20 new law on the 'clarté référendaire', I don't know what it is in english, someting like facism! ;)
:)
:)
:)
Do you think, don't think with your opinion here, that it's democratic to put a law to control what's an organisation (Quebec here) ask to it people? I cannot explain what I think correctly, but it's NON-democratic!
In montreal, the percentage of people that speak french as there first language is decreasing, it's now at 55%, what will it be in 10 years? 40%? Since 1760, we were almost assimilated, but we survive, our culture survive. If it continu like this, Quebec gonna be a billingual province, and I don't want this to happen!
Economicly, only 1 governement, less taxes, less income taxes... Sure, this won't make big diff because we will need to raise our taxes to be able to pay federal government's tasks, but it will be a little lower.
Also, Ottawa always want to do what the province are doing, Ottawa isn't supposed to do these thing as said ih the confederation! If Quebec province didn't blame Ottawa in the past for these acts, it was the same thing when it was the PLQ (parti libéral de Québec) of Bourassa, Ottawa would has encroach the province power, so it's not only because we are so oppresed by the whole Canada that we complain so much.
History is important, it represent a long battle that we don't want to loose. Here, patriots of 1837-8 are heroes for some of us. They failed, but they are examples for us...
There's 4 different political power in all the Canada at the West: Reform Party and United something on the next election, South (Ontario): Liberal Party, Québec: Bloc Québécois and at the East it's "Conservateurs" (I don't know how they are called in english). Don't you think that there's a problem here? Do you think that the Liberal Party really represent the whole Canada? Almost the 2/3 of them come from Ontario, problem here Houston! As a democratique country, Canada is unstable politicaly!
For the pool, you're right, Quebecers are too lazy with politic, I made a philosopy essay on this for my course. They say no because they think it won't change anything or there life gonna be the same, so they, somehow, have no opinion. When the referendum gonna be schedulate, things might change because people gonna have to make a real decision...
To those you say that have no valid arguments for the separation, yes, there's people like this, there's federalists like this too.
Well' I may not have all the answer, but I have my good reason!
Vive le Québec libre!
Cédric Charest
PS: Sorry for my english that might have some incorrect use!
- Québec: Quebec has several reasons to become a country, we wust seperate ourself from Canada, the next referendum gonna be the winning one.
- Religion(s): I'm an atheist. There's NO supposed god everywhere, religion slow the evolution, slow the technology, have no right to have power on a country and why those f*cking hollywood movies must always be somehow connected to god...?
- Capitalism
- : I'm happy with capitalism, but it's not the ideal society, communism is a step to reach the ideal society, which look likes anarchy, but I'm gonna be dead since a very long time when this will become true!
Well, I didn't write any details, but that's my political opinion! The progress is the solution, not the conservative way of thinking.http://www.ifpte.org
Unions are typically OK at organizing things.
(The Roads Must Roll :)
How about we define 'geeks' as the set of people that wouldn't bat an eye at the phrases 'trivially obvious' or 'there exists'?
I believe there are two factors the prevent geeks form speaking out about politics. The first is a belief that political intuitions are irrelevant to computer culture. As an example, for as long as I can remember there have been threats and laws against copying software, music, and movies but yet somehow we all have always been able to find a pirated copy of games and music. Growing up in this environment has lead us to believe that no matter what laws are passed there will always be someone out there one steep ahead of the law who will provide us with our contraband. This environment, which produced the "geeks will always win" mentality, might not last into the next generation. I am sure many of our parents' believed that the mentality of the 60s would survive in us but to a large degree it has not. We were also raised in a world where is it was relatively easy and safe to reverse engineer a piece of code; where the basics of programming and operating systems were all there was for us to learn. However, in the future fundamental access may be beyond many young future geeks, which would reduce their power and destroy the "geeks will always win" mentality - there might be no more geeks, as we know them.
However, computers are political beyond the scope of pirated entrainment. Why haven't we gotten really mad and loud about all the freedom of speech and privacy issues? Because wealth and power breed compliancy and as geeks become richer and more powerful, wealth and power simply become recursive. The "geeks" we may become may need to destroy much of what was created in terms of freedom on the net in order to maintain their positions of power and their possessions of wealth.
Well I will get off my soap box now. I recommend you all read Lessig's Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace and ask yourselves - What I am going to do with my newly found IPO millions and what kind of computing environment do I want my kids to have
Not middle class (which doesn't really exist outside of tax forms), not ruling class, not even managerial class, but working class.
How genuine. How moving. What brilliant neo-Marxist rhetoric. What a wank.
Pretty much everyone in the western world with a place to live is middle class. This is particularly true in the welfare and semi-welfare states, but even in the US anyone above the minimum wage is middle-class. The relevant credentials are education and wealth. Because most everyone in the first world is wealthier than ever before in the history of the world in real terms, when you include such things as access to clean air and water.
What the first world has done is effectively export the working class to the developing world. Anyone with a university degree claiming to be working class is making a sick joke.
it's sorta like the guy before said. If EFF is gonna be a geek lobby for stuff, then EFF needs the power to get geeks to say, "Ok, Wednesday, no geeks go to work... Watch the stock market plummet. Watch politicians fumble over each other as they try to lick our boots." When the EFF gets that sort of power, we'll have a political voice.
--
Peace,
Lord Omlette
AOL IM: jeanlucpikachu
[o]_O
The issues are already there. Anna Eshoo (D-CA 14th) has a lot of net.savvy - but then she represents Silicon Valley.
T
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Broadly defined, people who support the open-source movement are traditionally one of the least organized politically motivated groups, but are also the best positioned to use the internet as a revolutionary tool for change. I think this dichotomy will come to a head sooner rather than later, particularly with the constant assaults on the movement vis a vis DMCA, DeCSS, etc.
So come check out our website, if you want. Or don't. But, we've already send various on-line petitions with thousands or hundreds of thousands of electronic signatures to representatives and congressmen. Maybe it will make a difference.
I can't vote in America because I'm here on a visa, it will be many years before I can become a citizen, assuming I wish do to so.
The country of which I am a citizen is thousands of miles away and although physical distance is less important today, I still feel isolated from what's going on their politically.
There was an article on CNN (I think) the other day describing the large number of technical people working in California who are on H1B visas from India, but it didn't say what proportion of the geek population are non-citizens.
Can anyone make a good guess?
--
--
We have fought the AC's, and they have won.
Because most of you are a bunch of fucking communists who haven't any real ideas about the way the world works other than "I hate Microsoft!" and "Information should be free!". You want to be paid for -your- efforts, but if someone else wishes to be paid for -his-, you cry foul and decry him for his slavishness to the supposedly evil profit motive.
Microsoft donated millions of dollars to the Democrats over the years - and what did it get them? An anti-trust suit.
If you believe in freedom to code as you choose, to run what operating system(s) you choose, etc., you'd best take a cold, hard look at the Left end of the political spectrum and its overall thrust. The Moral Majority isn't your problem - it's the Clinton Administration.
Do you really think a man (i.e., Al Gore) who professes to believe that the invention of the internal combustion engine is the most awful event in human history is a real booster of high-tech?
Let's look at the several aspects of this, in a nutshell:
1. Us geeks don't agree on everything. We can't even get along on our hot-button issues, or we hold really contridicting beliefs (like me, for example...pro-open source....pro-copyrights).
2. This makes it impossible for us to organize one lobby group so we can have one voice.
3. So what do we do? Nothing? Well, that's apperntly not working. Organize into several small lobbies? That will probably be ineffective. Organize into one big lobby? Well, reason 1 tells why that won't work....it'd eventually break into the aforementioned several, ineffective groups.
Geeks of the world, unite! (somehow)
In 3010, the potatoes triumphed
It's true that Geek culture is hardly homogeneous, but should this be a problem? Other groups experience infighting as well. Some of the recent disagreements within the two mainstream US political parties are enough to demonstrate this. I believe that we as individuals disagree with our peers no more often than individuals within other groups.
Well, let before I go to far, let me qualify that.
Very often large political organizations, whether they be political parties, lobbies, or unions (yes, I know unions aren't strictly political, but for the purposes of this discussion, let's accept them as at least quasi-political) are built to serve some "grand design," and many people join without knowing why. I don't expect most geeks are like that. Geeks as a whole are very independent individuals, who prefer to do things in their own way, in their own time. This tendency (which is a good thing!) is likely to make any geek political organization more fractional. However, I think its still possible to build what the politicians call "consensus" (Some of us call it "caving in").
Political groups are built upon the similarities of a given group. This does not mean that the individuals in the group don't disagree on some issues. There may even be several factions within the group. Groups like the Republican and Democratic parties have held together because their leaders have the ability to find the subjects that almost everyone in the group can agree upon. There are a couple of important points here.
As a community used to communicating across long distances and actually getting things done, it shouldn't be hard for some sufficiently interested group to put an agenda together. Remember: we're used to contributing day in and day out to various open collaborative projects. There's no reason why those same skills can't be applied to the subject of political activism.
Slashdot and other community sites are a perfect example. Some of the best (and worst) writing can be seen here. It's not all specifically on technologic issues either. Some very controversial topics get discussed, and clear, lucent rhetoric to rival that of any government official is the result.
The world noticed the Open Source movement because it worked. Maybe it's time for Open Politics.
--
The suggestion that geeks can make themselves noticed by coming down with a variation of "blue flu" is an interesting concept, but there are some difficulties to be overcome.
The largest issue is that the type of activism being proposed is probably more than anyone in a similar situation could get away with. For example, turning off the routers is similar to taking away the heavy equipment (that is company owned, by the way!), while a normal "flu" or strike is simply a work stoppage. What has got management's attention in the past has been the work stoppage. Any attempt to actually sabotage equipment is generally met with a more hostile reaction.
The problem that technical people face in a work stoppage is that technical wizards have worked for years to make computers do what they do best: automatically deal with various events. Granted, this isn't perfect--things still break--but it does make the overall issue much more difficult.
So, how do do you do a work stoppage when you stopping work for a day doesn't necessarily mean that work stops?
--
It's not just geeks, it's the entire white collar/middle management/professional layer in our socioeconomic strata. Money doesn't necessarily mean power; you also need organization...
First off what I would love to see is a law firm that specializes in high-tech cases, and I dont just mean some losers who act like touch shit. I want lawyers who are coders in their spare time. If this is too impossible a thought then im going to law school. What I dont think we need is dumbass running for office with the fake persona of a tech wizard turned peoples hero, as in "In the 80's I was a computer scientist for apple computers, elect me." Screw that.
There is a gap for people in the political reign who understand this technology, as it is now no one seems to with any rank. Thank god this is america and politicians dont really mean jack, they are just puppets to the corporations that make the technology . w00T!
ms
A very important point to this subject is you must understand its not really politicians who rule this school (usa) but the corporations who pull their strings. So to say that techonologists dont have a say in things is partly true but not in the ways most people say it. The companies you work for have tons of say in matters. People who work for intel or microsoft for example work for companies who control things more than most senators. But the problem is who runs these companies, its not the technologists, its the marketers and business types (suits). So its basiclly the same personality type who runs for office who runs your company. No win situation. Whats the solution? who know... ms
I think that because people in the tech industry have enjoyed the benefits of being in a small labor pool that this equates to having money and power. Unfortunately, what this really equates to is that techies are paid to protect the real wealth and power of a dominant paradigm. Those who have been able to make the power grabs have actually shown themselves to be the staunchest supporters of the dominant paradigm which fears the changes that free and unrestricted flows of information, knowledge, and technology can bring. Consider Steve Case- his company bought several interesting small fish, including winamp. Winamp puts out gnutella, and anyone reading slashdot knows where that went.
So maybe the techies should legislate and lobby! Um, yeah...techies make up less than 1% of the population in the US, meaning the likelihood of defeating any well-funded (i.e., 10's of millions of dollars) opposition lies with owning the tyranny of the majority- and 1% ain't that.
Of course, there is the direct action of doing the one thing that nobody can get around- making use of small numbers. This means not working for people who try and subvert an open culture of sharing knowledge and data. This means going on strike, and blacklisting certain very large corporations...and considering the posts I have read about that idea, it won't happen anytime soon. People love their money too much- probably more than their creative freedom.
The other option is possibly to think in the long term. Find countries that you can vacate to as a "last out", where you won't be harrassed (I've heard Ireland and Canada were both good choices- but not enough to really know). Squirrel your cash into places that are hard to touch. Work with projects that try and deliberately subvert the paradigms that think your freedom to work as you see fit is a threat- freenet, guerrilla.net, and other private societies come to mind.
But whatever you do, don't fool yourselves into believing that you have money and power if you don't have Congressmen beating down your door for some cash and a pat on the head.
'Hail Eris, baby, hail Eris...pfffffffttt.' *cough* 'Yeah.'
Look at the leaders on issues like patents, spam and censorship, and you'll find among them many of our future geek politicians. They're not people who really wanted to get into politics - they're people who, like any good geek, will be saying "this needs to be done, so I'm damned well going to do it."
We need a million geek march on washington... although with all the technology most of us would bring, it would probably turn into a lan party. It would be fun nonetheless.
;-)
  And what, pray tell, would be wrong with a milion node lan party on the Washington mall?
Make it a million-node Beowulf cluster!   Right there on the mall!   YES!   That oughta get their attention...   By the way, there have been "Geek Pride" marches (or at least "Fests") I believe...
-- Win2k: "It's not so much that it's only 65,000 bugs, it's just that they stopped at 65,535 to prevent an overflow."
Reread this very carefully
throw out any classist preconceptions you have; which would you rather associate yourself with, a construction worker who's more than willing to get their hands dirty and get some work done, or some manager in an expensive suit that reads email all day and pays for luxury trips on the company credit card?
I can't believe he got a 3 for this
Get loud. Folks showing up @ the courtroom for the deCss hearings was great. We've just got to get a lot louder, and not deal with any of the crap thats coming down the pipe. There's enough folks to do it, just not enough folks with the right type of motivation. I think it's a shame that "we" haven't done more already. It's definately within our grasp.
Actually, a clarification is needed: Our VP is the internet pioneer! He did it all by his lonesome. Had to do something while Tipper was out trying to censor 2Live Crew.
I have been wondering about this for a while. We have the tools, and the skills, but we just don't use them.
We have the power to fill our representives email and snailmail boxes, but we are not organized enough to do it. I have come to the conclusion that geekdom needs more politically minded individuals to lead the charges. People who are articulate, and knowledgable in the was of governments. Our own little lobby or PAC.
Eventually, we may even get some people in office who are at least smart enough to know they don't know enough to make decisions and will turn to the people who do... Us.
Perhaps /. should start a political forum. As for a PAC we could have the Open Political System Org.
Of course, this is just my opinion, I could be wrong. .sig! Those Bastards!
Oh My God.. they Killed my
Seriously, watching all the draconian measures coming down the pike, I sometimes feel myself drifitng into malaise and despair, until I recall: The corporate drones are dinosaurs, and the doomsday asteroid has already hit. Sure they might straggle on for a while, and they can still make life uncomfortable for the fleet-footed fuzzies underfoot, but in the end they are doomed.
All we need is the strength and courage to continue to press for the better world we know is available ... it's where the system wants to head, anyway, even if those In Charge don't quite grasp that yet.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
political party! We could call it...
The Slashdot Party!
Seriously, we all have very similar viewpoints, we could get tons of funds from IPO rich geeks and from bank crackers, we know how to use the new media to get our message out, and we could have
HEMOS FOR PREZ!!!!!!!
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
I'm surprised no one's really raised the issue of money yet. If there's any one thing that puts a wedge into the left/right dynamic of geek politics, it's the way all this money that's being plowed into the Internet economy has put a lot of us in awkward positions.
Speaking as a geek working in Silicon Valley, I must confess that I'm quite a hypocrite, since if anyone asks, I'll profess to have liberal ideals. I certainly want to see Gays/Lesbians (the GLBT community, to be PC) get stronger protection under the law. And I also want to see the poor get more of a leg up, like it was back in the 60's under Lyndon Johnson.
But on the other hand I sure as hell don't want to see any *genuine* economic restructuring that would endanger my ability to cash in my stock options and use that money to finally afford a decent, well-located house in the Bay Area.
I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that I respect and admire RMS for what he stands for, but at the same time I'd never want his ideals to come to fruition because it might get in the way of my financial plans. Once you've gotten used to being a highly-paid software professional, and you have a wife, kids, mortgage, etc., all of the sudden things start looking a lot different.
Sorry if I sound like yuppie scum from hell, but I think this aspect of the question is at least as valid as the others that have been discussed here.
Above and beyond our own introversion working against us (this is where I'm spending my day off instead of writing my congressman) there is also a rampant ignorance working against us. People in general do not understand the scope of the machines they've installed in their homes. If they did, some of the issues involving patent law and copyrights, well, wouldn't be issues. To be honest, there's a fear of computers that is prevelant even in homes with computers. Too many books, movies, whathaveyou with machines destroying people's lives. This kind of paranoia is not going to help the cause of those that understand these weird little boxes
Then there is the problem of communicating "our" point of view. As it stands now it's difficult to find anyone able to bridge the gap between "geek" and "non-geek" for lack of better terms. Many folks around here speak computer very well, but how many speak politics? To make matters more difficult, the more well known geek figures around (for example, Bill Gates) have enough non-charisma to make the average candidate reflexively recoil. Anybody notice Bush or Gore having lunch with Mr. Microsoft on the campaign trail? Not like he's lacking money. Even if we could find a more centralized voice, until we found a way to explain it with enough clarity for the nontechie and enough charisma for the press to latch on - sound bites are everything - "our" voice is going to be misrepresented.
Build the mountain. Then climb it if you're bored.
Do we have to put up with dipshits like Al Gore saying they 'built' the Internet (whatever!) or are we going to start forcing the same kind of critical thinking that gets us our jobs done every day onto the political landscape?
I think with a little logic filtering, our current two-party system would be washed away entirely to be replaced by a rather less monolithic party system (let's face it, they're all the same guys). People who so clearly can't think for themselves do not belong in these positions of power. The public seems to stir and almost wake up to this every couple of years (Ross Perot, as reprehensible as he was, was a good example, and Jesse Ventura's continuing popularity despite the fact that he breaks all political rules of ass-kissing is another). One day, if we're lucky, our society will wake from its doze just long enough to get a really good splash in the face. It all depends on the ability of individuals (that's youse guys) to speak up.
I'm not sure an attempt to shut down .com would work. We geeks are just too individualistic. In many cases, we define ourselves by our contempt for authority, even our own. How many would follow union bosses?
We don't need union bosses, we could dispense with them entirely and run the whole show as an internet based direct democracy.
This is key: People are paid based on the rarity of their talent, not on the importance of the work. Sewage workers are incredibly important to society, but they are paid based on the large number of people that can do that work.
People are not paid on the rarity of their talent, they are paid whatever they can get on the marketplace and the two are quite different things. A talented flute player make only make $20K/year, while a mediocore programmer may make several times that. Bill Gates made billions more in the 90 than he did in the 80s, his talent wasn't any more rare, he was just making money on rising stock prices. He certainly wasn't any more talented or working any harder.
Let's face what the market pays people for is total bullshit. A hockey player makes millions while an over-worked nurse struggles to get by? I don't know why you feel the need to justify such a grossly flawed system?
That's a good point. It makes me think
of that book by Cecil Rhodes about the Manhattan project, since in a lot of ways, the problems
the project scientists faced are very similar to what many in our generation will have to contend with in the future. I'm talking about
moral decisions, and not just political (although they overlap in many ways).
If the human creatures will not understand Relativity, very well....Ursula K LeGuin
Just like the Writer's Guild, programmers should a Coders Guild which will protect, promote, and defend coders of the world. It can do this (just as the Writer's Guild does) by not allowing coders to continue working for companies that do anything to harm coders or their principles. If a majority of coders join the guild, then companies cannot hire coders unless they conform (which is the case with the Writer's Guild--Hollywood cannot afford to be blacklisted, otherwise, their TV shows and movies will just stop). One of the things the Guild should do is come up with Stamps of Approval, such as "Approved by the Coders Guild" and to get approval, the product must conform to certain principles, like, DVD products must be all-region capable, for example. So if consumers know that a product is Coders Guild Approved, they know that DVD product works better than one not approved.
We could also bring along Linus and ESR and Alan Cox and all our geeky leaders!And we will march on the capitol and not leave until our demands are met....hehehe....we could hold Capitol Mall hostage!...oops...echelon may of heard that...delete...delete!
The Hymn of the Penguin's Republic of Linux
Unbreakable Source Code created by Linus,
Great Internet has brought us together to code
Created in strugle against the "cathedral"
United and mighty, long may GNU stand!
Sing to Mighty Linux, home of the free!
Bulwark of hackers by the GPL made strong!
O Party of Linus, the strength of the penguins,
To GNUism's triumph lead us on!
Through tempests the sunrays of IPO's have cheered us
Along the new path where great Linus did lead.
To a righteous cause against Closed Source he drove us,
Inspired us to stay up nights and patch the code again!
Sing to Mighty Linux, home of the free!
Bulwark of hackers by the GPL made strong!
O Party of Linus, the strength of the penguins,
To GNUism's triumph lead us on!
In the vict'ry of GNUism's deathless ideals,
We rally round Slashdot,our beacon so clear!
And to Linus's penguin banner we cheer:
Long live free software,free speach,and free beer!
And if the politicrats don't give in at first,we could sing the Hymn to the Penguin's Rep. of Linux over and over and over...off key mind you...until they go mad.
Count me in.
And the Comrade asks you:Why do YOU think it's called Windows CE???
Figure it out.
------------------------
Thus Spake ComradePenguin
---Asbestos Suit ON--- Absolutely correct.Post-1977 version,when they took out all the refernces to Stalin.It's called "The Hymn to the Soviet Socialist Republics" or something.I hope nobody flames me about the connection between the two.
And the Comrade asks you:Why do YOU think it's called Windows CE???
Figure it out.
------------------------
Thus Spake ComradePenguin
Why Slashdot would not start such movement? I mean a political/lobby group with Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda as the leader followed with hundreds of thousands of slashdotters, the Free Software Foundation preachers, all the Linux advocates, Perl scripters and DeCSS hosters.
We all can help fund such organization to polically defend our point of view and maybe see one day Linus become President and Rob his Vice-President.
You have to start this.
--- Bouh !!! ---
It's interesting that people instantly equate "lobby" with political power. Hasn't the past week or two proved that lobbies can actually be the anti-thesis of political power? How much power do you think the NRA has right this moment after the debacle with Clinton in the media? Who's about to take money from the Chinese and their associated lobbies? /. has already achieved in the sense of building a community. I read posts on here regularly, and while I don't agree with them, or even approve of the viewpoints being posted, all the time, I still read them. I would willingly lay down my life to defend anyone's right to say what they wish, and I readily expect every American to be willing to do the same, but I don't ask for anything more than the protection entitled to me as a citizen under the Constitution, and I hardly think my civil liberties are being infringed upon at this moment.
"Geeks" aren't a special interest, "we" certainly don't need legal protection any more than Joe Sixpack from the steel mill does. If anything "geeks" have it easier in the work force than any other demographic group. Salaries and benefits for technical jobs are at an all time high, unemployment figures for skilled labor in those positions is remarkably low, so where's the need for protection?
Political power can certainly be achieved by grass roots organization, something
As to a different post which suggested revoking the ".com" TLD as a means of making "our" voice heard, if that's what being a geek means, count me out. I'll give all my silicon back and live in a hole in the ground before I'll resort to cyber-terrorism to express my PoV.
As any worker in his society, geeks can only have strength in numbers; united, under a common voice, and when needed, a common programme of action. Geeks cannot win their political rights without this. The IT industry is already organised, to not organise ourselves is to be powerless into their hands. The only serious way to cause political change, is through unity, and there exists no better way of establishing unity between us, than forming into a union that specifically represents ourselves in the issues and problems we face every day.
1.) I think right now there are huge cultural differences between geeks and politics. The ``geek" world is rapidly changing today's hot issue might well be forgotten tomorrow. Where political issue last for decades. You can't pass a law overnight. Second many geeky views are seen as political incorrect and threatening towards industries (mp3, napster, decss not to mention obscure hacks) 2.) Geeks don't have time to be in politics, being a politician takes 60+ hours a week, if you are doing a good job. Same goes for working in the computer industry. 3.) Geeks have strong opinions, politics is about negotiating and reaching compromises to benefit the most of your electors. Most geeks can't reach an agreement on which distributions they should use. 4. and last in this too long post) What would the benefit be of a geek party ruling in a country? Sure it would advise strongly on a good electronic infrastructure. It would attack current laws of patents and copyrights. But what about the large companies in that industry which by making a lot of profit (and therefor pay a lot of taxes at least in my country) will be threatened. just my 4 cents 69.ihatenetscape.com
Have to disagree with this one. In the US, lobbyists/PACs are just about the only remaining way that the average person can make their viewpoint matter. The politicians' greatest fear is the GROWTH of lobbying organizations, particularly well organized ones that can rally their members' money and votes. Look around sometime. Chances are that no matter how esoteric your viewpoint is, there's a group out there that you can join to promote it. PACs are unions for free thinkers. That is, they're single issue entities, so you don't have to buy into all of the excess baggage that comes with a union. If you can't find one you like, start one. Care about the issue enough? Quit your job. Go to DC. Become a lobbyist. If enough people care about the same thing, maybe you can collect enough money to avoid starvation AND make a difference. If you're in favor of "campaign finance reform", consider this: do you really think these laws will stop large coporations from helping their political allies? Really? And what's the difference between a union and a PAC under the new laws? Maybe the pols could get rid of the pesky unions AND the PACs at the same time... Wouldn't it be wonderful to make all your voting decisions based solely on candidates TV ads as financed by major corporations... And I'd be willing to bet that your web site would end up being classified as political advertising... -Robert
Absent such identification, pre-existing economic entities have predominant roles -- think corporations and unions. Tech has not traditionally been unionized -- and it ain't gonna happen going forward. That leaves us with corporations, who, more often than not, are on the opposite side of political questions from the Slashdot-stereotype liberaterian techie. Let's look at a few examples (note: I am comparing stereotypes here):
Intellectual Property: Indiv: Supports freedom of information (open source, opposes patents for trivial software "inventions"). Corp: Favors strong intellectual property rights (software patents).
Freedom of Speech: Indiv: Favors strongly. Corp: Wishes to limit (see DeCSS, CyberPatrol, etc.)
Immigration/Visa: Indiv: May oppose as reducing opportunities/salaries for U.S. citizens. Corp: Favors, for access to cheaper and/or better employees.
Privacy: Indiv: Favors. Corp: Opposes to the extent it interferes with marketing products (see Doubleclick).
Protectionism: Indiv: Opposes as preventing competition. Corp: Favors when it keeps out foreign competition (see semiconductor industry of a decade or so ago).
Communications: Indiv: Favors open access. Corp: Favors whatever is best for it economically (See AOL flip/flop).
Taxes: Indiv: Favors lower taxes generally. Corp: Favors special breaks (for instance, sales tax exemption).
The bottom line, it will be difficult to organize politically a diverse and unpersected group, and any tech political power is likely to be organized around the larger tech companies, who will be representing their corporate interests and not those of their employees.
Thus, be careful what you wish for -- do we really want MS, AOL, Amazon, Doubleclick, Mattel, etc. to have a bigger voice?
If you want a political voice, you need money. Pool some money annd buy yourself a senator.
There are problems with the way we are organized as a community. This is an inherent problem with a group that is so widely distributed, but sites like Slashdot help to alleviate that problem. Of course, there are plenty of people who used to read Slashdot, before all the First Posters and other weenies showed up, so I fear there is still a great lack of communication (heck, even Linus Torvalds doesn't read Slashdot ;-)
I am firmly convinced that we have a voice, but the voice is not focused in any particular direction. Only on a few issues (such as Section 1201 of the DMCA or the DVD/DeCSS cases), have we been able to focus in any significant manner. Even in situations like the above, we do not have the experience as a political group to get any attention.
In early February, I stood out on a streetcorner in front of a movie theater, protesting the actions the MPAA and DVD CCA were taking against DeCSS distributors. It was a cold Minnesota evening, and I wasn't sure at all what I was doing.
When I first arrived, I was looking for some of the people I was expecting to meet. I fairly quickly found one person who was holding a sign with one hand, and with his other was trying to hand out flyers from a pile that was in great danger of blowing away in the wind. Mere seconds after I arrived, a very angry-looking manager told us to move off of the property of the theater and the mall in which it was located. We walked across the street, only to find that the mall owned that property as well. We finally ended up in a spot on the corner of a very busy intersection -- one so busy as to make distribution of our leaflets nearly impossible. We were also by this point quite a distance away from the theater, so no one really knew what we were protesting.
I learned many things that night and from reading post-protest coverage on 2600 sites and the like. If I had known these things earlier, I and the people with me would have been able to bring our point to a much greater number of people. I understand there are ways to get permits to be on `private' property (I use the quotes since it was a mall, a place of business usually open to anyone). Also, if our group had been slightly more forward-thinking and found a location before the protest, we probably would have made a much larger influence. Lastly, there were some very tight time constraints put on us. It is very difficult to organize something like what 2600 hoped to accomplish in just a week -- especially when the night of action in question was a Friday
Because of all of this, I propose creating a site (or two or three, if they become necessary) where geeks can learn about the political events that have the most influence on us. Also, the site could carry information about the best ways to get your message across to the public and the people in power. Basically, host HOWTOs for protesting, contacting representatives, and other things.
Of course, I might just be off my rocker...
(what would be a good name for such a site? geekpolitics.org? any other ideas?)
--
Ski-U-Mah!
Stop the MPAA
And we're not organized.
The swing voters always hold more power than the multi-issue block voters. There are 40-45% of the people who will vote for canidate A- and nothing canidate B can do or say to change that. Likewise, 40-45% are going to vote for B no matter what A does. The election will be decided by the 10-20% swing voters, whom both A and B are wooing like crazy.
Being a multi-issue voter pretty quickly consigns you to the 80-90% block that gets ignored. You're too hard to woo.
Organization is also important. This is something Geeks are terrible at- we have too much of an anarchist/libertarian streak. Consider: if someone were to organize a "GeekPAC", how successfull would it be? Would you join? Would you contribute money? Would you vote the way the PAC wanted you to vote? Or would you go your own way, and make your own decisions?
If you're a Democrat, what would it take to get you to vote for Bush? If you're a Republican, what would it take to get you to vote for Gore? If you are anarchist/libertarian/socialist/other, what would it take to get you to vote for either?
Although, there is another way to get your beliefs enacted in the political system: control the information to shape the views of the 90%. See Noam Chomsky. The internet/web is not yet a replacement for the classic print/film/radio/TV media, but it's getting there.
How many would follow union bosses?
For better or worse, I agree. The cost of failure there (if an attempt were made at all) would be huge, especially for those who did follow through. Lesser measures would be better. More liklihood of followthrough, less serious consequences for those who do follow through in the event that solidarity breaks down.
Every effective union has held solidarity to be KEY to having any clout. The question is, how to achieve geek solidarity for the REALLY important issues?
What I meant to say was that, like "women" or "African Americans", "geeks" are not a singular yadda yadda...
Then you prove the point. of the three, can you pick the one that has no lobby and doesn't even get an occasional kiss on the ass from congress?
Much like the mythical "geek" group, as well as, as you observe, "Christians."
The big problem (as opposed to other, "small" problems), is that cats aren't herding creatures. And while I may not be "cat people," it's fair to say that "geek people" are similarly resistant to "herding."
The EDS commercial makes the mistake of suggesting that it is vaguely sensible to try to herd cats. The problem is that it's not even faintly sensible. Neither cats nor geeks "herd" well. Trying to do so is going to lead to managerial disaster.
And fielding a "geek candidate" is not going to be good for other than the small subset of "geeks" that go along with the particular geek's position.
And some ( David McCusker, of OpenDoc/Bento/IronDoc "fame" comes particularly to mind...) seem so independently-minded that the "lobbies" are not likely to represent them at all.
And actually, the commonly-recognized minorities of women and whatever is the politically-correct way today of referencing people that are definitely not melatonin-deficient that likely have roots in Africa, but which may not have any connection to America are not perfectly uniform in their needs and attitudes either...
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
What the newfound social status of geekdom brings with it is the ability to educate - and thus influence - the public. With the Internet (and computing in general) rapidly growing toward media dominance, geeks who author and administer a good portion of Web content have more power than ever to make political statements. Getting admins everywhere to turn the sites they run pink to cry out against spam (and providing the appropriate informational links) has done more to raise public awareness that spam need not be just accepted than any other campaign.
We have the power. Let's use it to make real progress, not waste it on KDE v. GNOME, Linux v. BSD, etc. flamewars.
--
: remove whitespace to e-mail me
We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
No, this is the shocking truth... it's much, much harder and more valuable to society to be an organizer, than a worker. The organizers of society are what create wealth. These are the people who take risks to build companies and hire people. Workers very rarely take risks.
If tomorrow, all the managers, CEO's and stockholders dropped off the face of the planet, the world would function just fine. In fact, as Open Source/Free Software has shown, it arguably would function much better than ever before. Not because there would be a lack of organization, far from it. But because there wouldn't be any coercive organization.
Don't give me this Ayn Rand ridiculousness about the ruling class holding the world together. Revolutionary Spain, Open Source, worker cooperatives, all these things show that coercive organization is destructive, and surely not worthy of a reward, especially the kind of obscene awards that CEO's give themselves. Is the skill to coercively organize people so wonderful that it is worth 419x more than the skill to produce something?
And to all those workers out there who actually think this guy makes sense, take a look at this section of his website:
I am a former Vice President of Alpha Base Systems, Inc, former Vice President of Air-Shields Information Systems (now Hill-Rom Netlynx), and former Chief Technology Officer of EduPoint.com. I am currently President of a small consulting company called Silicon Engine, Inc.
Of course he's going to defend the right of the ruling class to rule, because he's trying so desperately to enter into it.
Michael Chisari
mchisari@usa.net
Also, I think that highly-paid technical workers are a relative minority in the world, and even in the United States. Since when do we need political advocacy? Maybe we will in the future at some point, but certainly not now.
That statement does not make sense. "We," define it how you may, are a minority. Therefore we need political advocacy. If "we" were a majority, then we would not need political advocacy - our conscience would be that of the people, and "we" would get the laws "we" wanted to see passed. Claiming that a group does not need a voice in politics because it is a new minority is ludicrous! The whole reason advocacy exists is for the minorities - hence the NAACP, NOW, hell even the KKK represents an outspoken minority of white supremacists. On the whole, I don't see too many comfortable majorities with action committees, etc. Have you ever heard of the National Organization of White People? The Concerned Anglo-Saxon Protestants of America?
Nope.
I just don't see that thought/logic in that idea. We need advocacy because we are a minority, not in spite of it.
So there is a basis for having some sort of voice in politics. I agree that geek is a vague and cliche word (My best friend is a sci-fi 'geek', and personally he doesn't give a shit about patent reform), but there is a great need for people involved in the information industry to speak their minds in politics. A lot of these people are geeks, some aren't; I think the person who asked the question got caught up in the Slashdot vernacular. Perhaps 'information professionals' is a better term - whatever. But the point is that there is a need to voice our views, and you shouldn't be dissuading that by saying we are too much of a minority to have representation. It is this sort of laissez-faire attitude that allowed CDA I and II, UCITA, the One-Click fiasco et al. to come about. We (IT professionals) are sorely lacking representation in politics, and it's biting us in the ass. I mean, come on - the Vice-fscking-President claimed he invented the Internet and that tale had to leave Washington before someone finally called him on it. The people making the laws in this country are comparative Luddites to the people actually driving the "information-based economy" which those same politicians love to wax ecstatical about. This is wrong. We do need our voice to be heard, and we should never give up because we are the outspoken minority. History has taught us that much.
--
I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
The geeks (or whatever you call them) are not lobbying for special treatment. If you oppose something like the DMCA, you oppose it because of what it does to everybody, geek or otherwise.
People with technical knowledge will always be able to download things like DeCSS, work out how to make MP3s of their CD collection, and so on. But what about the ordinary citizens, who don't even know what the DMCA is? They are affected by it just as much, more even if they just take what they are offered by the record / movie industry.
Or take software patents; okay, they're a bad thing for individual programmers, but *everyone* loses out from monopolies and lack of choice. A large proportion of households own a PC, and they will suffer more if small software vendors get bullied by large patentholders. For an ordinary small business that is trying to launch an e-commerce site, software patents are also a major obstacle. It just happens that only 'geeks' are the ones worrying about this, because arcane intellectual property matters don't usually get coverage on TV news.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Your priorities, not mine. I don't care about money. What I do care about is working in a job where my peers and employer respects my opinions and stands behind them. I care about working a standard 40 hour work week with paid vacation and a lunch hour included in my 8 hour day. I care about the quality of the environment I work in.
Those are my standards, and my priorities. I don't think so little of myself to say I don't deserve these things. I do. And if this economy is what it's cracked up to be, employers will still want to hire me even /with/ those demands.
Don't short-change yourself. You're worth every penny. Demand it.
It's only within the last four years that the traditional technology community (hardware manufacturers, networking companies, mega-ISPs, and proprietary software companies) have achieved political influence. The best indication of this is the Microsoft Anti-Trust Case. This was only brought to a head by years and millions of dollars spent on lobbying in Washington.
Real political influence (in the United States) comes from corporations spending money to promote their issues. This is how the DMCA and UCITA became law. If you want to have that kind of influence, here's what to do:
- Start a political action committee.
- Get the Linux-oriented companies that have gone public to join and contribute millions to the effort.
- Start lobbying for repeal of the laws you don't like and/or lawsuits which would result in these laws being declared unconstitutional.
If you don't like this, because it concentrates power in the hands of capitalists, that's tough. The only alternative is to build a grassroots organization like the AARP, the NRA, or the National Federation of Independent Businesses. I bet when you read about what these organizations do, a lot of you will be equally opposed to turning ourselves into an organization like them.I'm only saying this because a lot of people think we are close to achieving political influence through the EFF, or through some sort of effort that brings a bunch of individuals together around a single issue. In my opinion, we aren't close to having real political influence, at least in the United States.
--
Dave Aiello
-- Dave Aiello
Conversely, groups whose members tend to go their own way wind up without much influence-- witness the Auto Workers, where the leadership stayed with the Democrats while the rank and file turned out for Reagan.
If geeks can show that they are both coherent and effective as a political force, politicians will come begging to be the voice of the geeks.
Interesting side note: yesterday's Washington Post carried this column by their pollster about a study of the way the White House and Congress use public opinion research in forming policy. Long story short: they don't. Only lobbyists and activists matter when it comes to making policy; the polls are just used to decide how to market the policies.
There are a few problems with making this happen:
I think what it will really take is some top people in the community to create some sort of global, formal organization to create a political voice, where there is membership, with associated dues, and all other associated items like voting, etc. However, due to the splintering issues I mention above, I see this as unlikely.
I'd love to hear what ESR and RMS, two top candidates for forming something like this, would have to say...
----------
In a real emergency, we would have all fled in terror, and you would not have been notified.
The central theme that unites us is the desire and ability to use technology to make the world a better place.
Reality has a liberal bias
If most geeks are humanists (I have no idea if they are) then we could borrow a bit from the humanist manifesto, and if there are alot of socialist geeks (again... no idea) we might borrow a word or two from Mr. Marx (Karl, not Groucho)
What do you think?
Reality has a liberal bias
The most powerful Christian meme (politically speaking) is the one that says "Eveybody will go to hell unless you save them." That is what makes the so-called "Religious Right" so powerful - they can use this meme to mobilize their group members. Where is the comparable geek meme? I don't think there is one.
I think it's a damn good idea.
How about Halloween Weekend (in honor of the Documents)? that's far enough away from now to give everyone time to plan, and close enough to the Elections so that they won't forget. You can get cheap tix to Dulles or BWI in the fall, and if we're lucky it won't rain.
Alert the media! Geeks march on D.C.! Film at 11...
--
Somebody, somewhere, is going to rate this Funny. He'd be wrong....
Bottom line, geeks don't fit the traditional union model.
Actually, I'm going to debate that last line there. The working class and the employing class do have things in common, particularly in a white-collar environment. Good engineers make good managers. Good tradesmen make good foremen. These individuals often go out and start their own businesses and succeed, thus becoming members of the employing class. I personally know people both white and blue collar who have done this; I've even had the pleasure of working for a few of these individuals. And I do mean pleasure. Having been there and done that, they know the score, and they understand that they need to make your job easier... and do. But I digress.
I can correct that statement. The unenlightened working class and the unenlightened employing class have nothing in common. Except that they're both induhviduals. Those who think about it know that to oppose each other, to create conflict between the classes, is counterproductive, and just plain stupid. The Japanese, on the other hand, understand the concept of team management, and are currently kicking our asses. Without unions. American auto workers who are exposed to this concept burn their union cards and run anyone who keeps his out of town.
I guess the moral of the story isn't that we need to kick ass, so much as we need to simply co-opt the leadership. Suborn it. 0wN it.
In other words, as has been said around here before, hack The System. And that, boys and girls, will be the Greatest Hack of All. Bigger than emacs, bigger than Linux itself.
And I have the sneaking suspicion that's exactly what Linus meant when he said World Domination.
-- ;-)"
"See, you not only have to be a good coder to create a system like Linux, you have to be a sneaky bastard too
--Linus
Old people would still win. I didn't vote in November because I was at my desk from 7am to 9pm that day. The sad thing is that I could have voted at the school across the street from my house.
-B
Now that's a technical innovation. And one techie without much influence in a political situation. Various news sources have been noticing the story at various levels this week.
You're wrong sig. Totally. While janitors might work have something in common with us, they don't work with the same stuff we do. Information. We are all information workers, right?
And what's the most powerful political force?
What's the most powerful cultural force?
What's the most powerful military force?
Info, baby, and we're swimming in it. So cut the cynicism, or at least temper it with action. Then we'll be talking in 20 years of the hard-fought victories, instead of the opressive regimes.
--
+&x
Exactly. We are definitely on the same side, but it was a reply to one of *my* extremely cynical posts that motivated me to do this. So I was just trying to keep the fire burning...
BTW, I need a quick DeCSS link, I've finally got my site back up. Anyone?
--
+&x
I'm not sure an attempt to shut down .com would work. We geeks are just too individualistic. In many cases, we define ourselves by our contempt for authority, even our own. How many would follow union bosses?
--The basis of all love is respect
> "Geeks" are not a singular group like "African Americans" or "women". Part of the problem with questions like this is that it assumes that there
> even EXISTS some easily defined, discrete group of people called "geeks" who all believe the same things and want the same things.
So, you're saying that all African Americans all believe the same things, and all want the same things? And you're also saying that women, something like 51% of the world's population, all believe and want the same things.
Yeah, right.
There is diversity in ALL groups, no matter how large or small. Every group has to deal with the fact that not all of its members sees the world the same way. That sometimes makes it harder for the group to accomplish things, but the diversity of opinion can also make the group more robust and powerful.
So, to turn your own phrase around, the "geek" is no more mythical than the "Christian" group, or the "African American" group, or the "Union Local 523" group. Each group is comprised of diverse people, but each of the members is joined together by commonalities.
If you don't have any commonalities with the rest of the group, then of course you shouldn't be a part of it. But I don't think that's what you were trying to say, was it?
Thats all you need to be elected president...
Actually, its lower than that.
Why so low? Only half of the citizens that are eligible to vote are registerred. SO we're down to 50%. And less than half of those registerred vote. So we're at 25% now.
Winning a two-way race now makes it so the winner needs only 12.5% to win the election. ANd the real scary thing here, is that the 50% voter turnout is TOO HIGH of an estimate.
so there are enough "of us" to make a difference. How many people do you think that we can motivate to go and vote based on certain issues.
Enough to be noticed. And felt, and influence events.
we must stop being apathetic and start getting involved. It is possible for the system to work, we just need to take the controls. It wont even be that hard...
Its all a matter of education.
... hi bingo
Oh, sure, there are occasionally galvanizing issues such as specific privacy abuses or even DVD encryption, but on the whole, members of this community have 622 views on any subject. Even on those key issues, there are substantial differences on how to approach them.
A big "problem" of liberty-loving, independent-thinking people is that it's hell to organize them. Like-thinking in-step factory workers, sure...they'll unionize or fall behind the candidate they're told. In this industry, though, and with the level of independence demonstrated on this site alone, everyone has their hot buttons that will cause them to head in a different direction. As a result, politcally speaking, it would be a Herculean job to get a majority behind specific candidates.
If you have 2 Slashdotters, you'll get 3 opinions.
Apparently this is a new usage of the phrase "enormous clout" with which I was not previously familiar.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
However you define "geek" it is "geeks" in general who are in "the know" about things such as privacy, freedom of information, reverse engineering, etc. Consequently, if it is everybody else deciding on the laws and policies on these things, the people who use the technology everyday and are intimately familiar with it ("geeks") will be left out in the cold. That's why you see all this completely ludicrous legislation and bully by big corporations. Big corporations can win over the clueless very easily. Since "geeks" have the clues, our opinions should have some weight. Currently they have none. We will keep seeing fiascos over DeCSS, MP3, and stupid censorware unless we make our voice (and common sense) be heard.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Well, here it is as plain text.
All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
It may be hard to get geeks out to vote, but this is why online voting is so importent to the geek community! I would say the one big issue geeks should try to unite behind is online voting.. as it would increase our political power.
The other big problem which your quote dose not make clear is: who tells us how to vote? The riligious right has an orginisation to figure out what state and local officials they want. Geeks may never have a simillar level of orginisation, but we can help to communicate the findings of other orginisations (EFF, ACLU, etc.) to people. These orginisations are pretty bad about not checking out local politicians, but they might put more effort into it when people donate the necissary website work to the state chapters.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
This is not totally correct. There are consumer and freedom issues which geeks might get behind, but I think the two issues geeks really need to get behind is on-line voting and candidate information.
Online voting will do a lot to increase the power of the geek lobby.. even without any kind of organised geek lobby!
The thing that will help even more then online voting is increasing information about candidates, i.e. donating some time to yuor local EFF/ACLU/etc to help set up a web page about local elections.
The religious right controls local ellections because they are the only groups which pays attention to local ellections. This is why school boards are removing evolution from high school science classes. If we make it easy to vote and easy to figure out who stands for what then we will wipe out the riligious right, get funding for space, remove DAs and judges who oppose civil/techno rights, etc. It just a problem of making it easy for people.. and this is a problem geeks can solve without orginising.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
What!? Our VP is an internet pioneer!
That's what I love about them high-school girls. I get older, they stay the same age... yes they do.
--Wooderson 1976
-- jimmycarter
Finally somebody quit bitching and actually DID something.
Played with his nails, eh? He didn't even take notes?! That's not very encouraging, but unfortunately not very suprising either...
The Divine Creatrix in a Mortal Shell that stays Crunchy in Milk
The House Between - Original Sci-Fi Series
The GNU Manifesto declared the right of Richard Stallman and the people willing to work with him on it to share a body of what has become some of the most politically controversial software ever written. PGP attacked the idea that the masses should not have strong encryption by simply handing it to them as free software. Apache undermined proprietary web protocols.
If we want to be heard, there is an avenue for those willing to stand up and be counted. Write the code and put it out there. Embody the philosophy of freedom in working software. Use the copyleft and other free licenses to prevent anyone from locking up the code. And as a couple of people have been advocating, start patenting intellectual property embodied in free software and make plans to use those patents to enforce its freedom.
Okay, this doesn't answer the question of how to protect the designated victims from taking the heat at temperatures often comparable to conventional fusion. I don't have that answer.
We are trying new things and breaking new ground in terms of models of collaboration. Stallman was quick to point out that free software was free as in speech. But that statement is true in more ways than simply pointing out that it can be sold as well as given away. It is about freely communicating code. And it is part of a larger issue of maintaining our freedom to speak our minds. It is as deeply political as any issue today.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
We need a million geek march on washington... although with all the technology most of us would bring, it would probably turn into a lan party. It would be fun nonetheless.
(`._(`._( , , . JimmyPop[nL] . , , )_.)_.)
--
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
Think it won't happen? It has happened. The retiring Daniel Patrick Moynihan, for whose seat Hillary and Rudy are now vying, did it to a whole lot of geek businesses back in the 80's. It was incredibly slimy, though clever; if I have this correct, he wrote a change into the tax law such that programmers and engineers (listed by name) were specifically exempted from the "safe harbor" provisions of the tax code which apply to, say, attorneys. Such professionals could not qualify as independent contractors unless they met a laundry list of requirements that the "traditionally" independent professions were not required to meet. This put companies in the position of having to pay employment taxes for their contractors, unless they fired them and hired them back as employees. Lots of engineers lost their deductibility of lots of expenses when they had to become someone's employee.
The point is, Moynihan was able to get away with this because geeks didn't have a lobby to keep his clauses from getting out of committee. The people of the USA lost a lot of freedom in the bargain, because you just aren't as free when you are working for a Fortune 500 company as when you are working for yourself. On the other hand, the government probably finds it a lot easier to deal with (and control) a few big employers than a lot of little ones; look at drug testing for an example of that ugly fact. Anyway, when you come down to it, nothing is going to keep the government off our backs better than a strong lobby (a lobby backed up with energetic, grassroots votes is even better, but YOU GOTTA HAVE A LOBBY!).
--
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
Politics:
I personally am learning a lot simply from reading the articles and comments received from Slashdot's "Your Rights Online" area. This is a great first step--we're lucky to have such a great forum here on Slashdot to discuss such things. A lot of people on here have already started their own political activism in one way or another so I think we're already headed in the right direction. There's a long way to go though.
Subversion:
It's definately to our benefit that we understand the 'nuts and bolts' of the Internet, the information infrastructure of the world, better than those that are trying to control it. This gives us a lot of room to change things without anyone being able to effectively stop us (think gnutella; how easily did technology overcome the obstacles that were placed in the way of MP3 distribution?)
I always see people on here saying, "We can't just sit around and talk about it--we have to do something!" and they're absolutely right. At the same time, the discussions we're having here are probably the most important part of changing things.
numb
No matter how much or hard you try you can never ever make this martyr die. --Suicidal Tendencies, Give it Revolution
- Alpha males at the center of the habitat.
- Concubines and offspring sired by alpha males at the center of the habitat.
- Beta males at the periphery of the habitat.
Geeks are at the periphery of the habitat -- at the frontier. Being at the periphery they have to be good at changing unpopulated marginal environments into life-supporting environments. If they were good at taking control of the center habitat, they would be alpha males and be siring the offspring of the concubines.Politics is a lot like this generic terrestrial vertebrate sociosexual heirarchy. For example, you have an enormous number of fertile young women working in places like political centers like Washington, D.C., media centers like Los Angeles and financial centers like New York City. Not coincidentally, that's also where you find the males with the most clout.
That's why I say to geeks "Change the tools and you change the rules."
Seastead this.
On the other hand, Al does stop by here in the Valley to do fundraisers, as well as to let Tipper play drums with the Grateful Dead. There are various efforts to get Silicon Valley types involved in Washington, i.e. give money to Democrats and Republicans, and there's gradually increasing momentum for Valley-based lobbying on issues such as Immigration for high-tech workers, software piracy, crypto exports, and export policy in general. There's a major conflict in lobbying between the entertainment side of the industry and the software-development side of the industry on copyrights and patents, and so far the Big Mouse has been winning over the mouse users. Some of the local Congresscritters have figured out that we're their major constituents, and work hard on valley issues; Zoe Lofgren and Anna Eschoo in particular.
A few Silicon Valley moneymakers have been using their money for more traditional politics, beyond industry-related issues. Unfortunately, the prime examples have been Ron Unz (:-) and of course Larry Ellison's work on Airplane Rights.
Jim Warren has done a lot of good work on the State of California government, particularly on electronic open access to state government data and state legislative activities, and he's one of the main reasons we have the access that we do. Jim gave a talk to the Cypherpunks group a few years ago - one of his big points was that state legislators respond quite well to written letters, and it only takes a few dozen letters per legislative district to let them know there's public opinion that they need to follow.
Libertarianism - one of the difficulties with Silicon Valley lobbying is that most of us are libertarians - either the partisan types, or entrepreneurs and technologists who don't think bureaucrats can improve things by telling us what to do (given the evidence from experience with their incompetence and motives) (though lots of us were college students who were happy to have research grants :-), or civil libertarians who don't like the overall injustice and war that governments have delivered over the years, or at least Draft-Dodging Republicans Who Smoke Pot. That means that the most common response we have to "what can the government do to help us" is the same as it was with the French government 200 years ago - "laissez faire" - go away and leave us alone - which is at odds with government's desire to grow and expand its bureaucratic activities.
Also, doing real politics is a lot of work, and most of us are pretty busy doing other things.
Separate reply on EFF
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Hail Eris!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Yeah, I'd be the first Bastard President from Hell!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
This is simply because, we actually produce the products, we actually create the wealth.
No, this is the shocking truth... it's much, much harder and more valuable to society to be an organizer, than a worker. The organizers of society are what create wealth. These are the people who take risks to build companies and hire people. Workers very rarely take risks.
This is key: People are paid based on the rarity of their talent, not on the importance of the work. Sewage workers are incredibly important to society, but they are paid based on the large number of people that can do that work.
The people who have a lot of money, with some exceptions, earned their money and created thousands of jobs and created huge amounts of new wealth. New institutions are not created by the workers.
--
People are not paid on the rarity of their talent, they are paid whatever they can get on the marketplace and the two are quite different things.
Actually, what I should have said was that they are paid based on the rarity of the talent, and the demand for the talent.
Bill Gates made billions more in the 90 than he did in the 80s, his talent wasn't any more rare, he was just making money on rising stock prices. He certainly wasn't any more talented or working any harder.
Bill Gates is possibly the most talented CEO in the world. Say what you want about Gates, but it is not easy to not only put a company on top, but to keep it there. The graveyard is littered with the bodies of less successful CEOs who got fat and lazy with success (Wordperfect, anyone?) Example: The famous "internet" memo. How many CEOs would have just continued to ignore the Internet and hope the Windows paradigm would continue? But Gates restructured the entire company in an amazingly short period of time. It is not easy to change the direction of an behemoth like Microsoft.
Let's face what the market pays people for is total bullshit. A hockey player makes millions while an over-worked nurse struggles to get by? I don't know why you feel the need to justify such a grossly flawed system?
It's very simple. It's a lot rarer of a talent to be a hockey player than it is to be a nurse. Are nurses important? Of course. But there are 10s of thousands of nurses, and it only takes a few years to become one. The number of people who can play pro-level hockey is unbelievably small. The other side of that equation (that I left out the first time) is the demand. There is a huge demand for hockey players due to the television revenues, while only a relatively small demand for nurses.
To use my original example, sewage workers are incredibly important. Without sewage workers, the sewers would back up and we would have huge pestilence and death. So why don't we pay sewage workers 100s of thousands a year when their worth to society is so huge? Because almost anyone can do the job.
--
You're dreaming if you think most geeks agree on those issues.
Patent system reform? There are way too many ways it can be changed in order to get agreement. Just saying "it needs to be changed" is NOT an issue statement. If you put down some details, I guarantee you will have a substantial number of disagreements.
Larger education budgets? I am totally against that. The problem with education is not lack of money. More money == more adminstrators, not better schools. Education needs to be privatized.
reignite science / tech studying in school. more math... That's fine for you, but not everyone needs more math. I agree that it should be available, but again, that's a privatization issue. (Realize that Science or Art is dropped to pay for more administrators).
funding NASA for _real_ missions ( read: making mars a viable goal ) HELL NO!!! NASA needs to be disbanded or folded into the military. Take NASA's budget and apply it to tax cuts for private companies to do business in space. That is the only hope of seeing mankind in space on a consistent basis.
anti-decency acts... Depends on the act. Not everyone is against filters in libraries, despite what some of these silly YRO articles would seem to indicate.
0 net taxes... I sympathize with this, but it is highly impractical. Think about the disadvantage local retailers are operating under, and you will begin to see why 0 net taxes is not only unfair, but is not going to last forever.
--
The larger point is that all these issues are arguable, and that even these issues that you state "geeks could agree on" are not that easy to pin down.
I'll just take one of your points, however... Do you think people that spend more time with your kids than you do should make ( probably ) 1/2 your salary?
I'm all for quality teachers, but -- and I know I'm going to get whacked for this, but think it through -- I think teachers are a lot less important than a lot of people think. Bad teachers can make learning impossible, there is no question about it, but I think the difference between "competent" and "very good" is not that wide. I think what makes the biggest difference is the involvement of the parents, and the "atmosphere" of the school. If parents are very involved in making sure the kids take learning seriously, and the environment of the school has a very serious "you are here to learn" attitude, that is what makes the biggest difference.
After all, it's the students that actually do the work, not the teachers. Let's face it... if you have a very motivated students, all you have to do is hand out books, assignments, and grades. Answer a few questions if necessary. I think that modern schools have gotten into the trap that schools and teachers are supposed to be entertainers or something. Now, I think that it's great if a teacher can make learning "fun", but unfortunately, the vast majority of learning is difficult, particularly the subjects the student doesn't happen to be interested in.
--
If tomorrow, all the managers, CEO's and stockholders dropped off the face of the planet, the world would function just fine.
You must be insane. You think everyone is just going to show up for work everyday without any sort of management? That it will magically become some self-organized entity? Exactly who is going to make the decision for strategic direction of the company? Who is going to make the decision on what products to keep, and what products to kill? Some bookkeeper? Or perhaps a committee? I've got news for you... this has been tried. Companies run by committee go straight into the toilet.
Or take an army. Do you seriously think an army would be effective without a general? Just having a bunch of troups running around with any strategy?
Is the skill to coercively organize people so wonderful that it is worth 419x more than the skill to produce something?
"Coercively"? Exactly what coercision is taking place? As for "419x", damn right they are. The skill to produce something is 419 times less difficult than the skills to organize and lead people to produce things.
Of course he's going to defend the right of the ruling class to rule, because he's trying so desperately to enter into it.
I love it... "the ruling class". Yes, I've been on both sides of the fence. And when you have too, maybe you will understand exactly what it takes to run a company. Maybe you should also take an economics class. People are paid exactly what they are worth. If anyone could fulfill the CEO of IBM's job, believe me, the shareholders would put in the 20K/year bolt-turner.
But there are specialized skills involved in being a CEO, namely leadership. Just as you can't have an army with only soldiers, you need someone to give direction and vision to the company.
--
I must correct myself -- I didn't mean to imply that "women" or "African Americans" are a singular, easily definable group who all want the same things. What I meant to say was that, like "women" or "African Americans", "geeks" are not a singular yadda yadda...
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
In other words I'm kind of equating saying "Geeks need a special political lobby" with saying "rich white people need a special political lobby". Geeks are not being oppressed or left out. What need have "we" of a special political lobby?
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
A geek lobby? In the grand scheme of things, such a notion is absurd... What would it stand for.. the ability to reverse engineer, to emulate, to imitate? Wake up.
There are greater issues at hand. Fight for small battles such as the DVD encryption now, but there is no place for something that affects so few people.
And i think it is very arrogant to say that "geeks" do the real work, that is to say to put aside teachers, and social workers, and doctors do nothing with their time. Solving problems has its place, but also there are other professions who do very meaningful work.
We push forward the boundaries of computing, and this is important to society, but lets wake up, there is no issue here, IMO. Society has more important things to tackle first. Lets take a number...
---jay
"Geeks", almost by definition, would in any given political campaign only concern themselves with the technological issues at hand. We aren't so much a group that needs representing on the whole as a special-interest group that could perhaps involve itself with politics when technology is to be an issue.
Oh but there is just one problem: Some of these dinosaurs *do* get it. They put the net into their old little toolbox of "old media", comersials, lawsuits, lobbying and what other means of influence they have.
Who do you think is more powerful:
A bunch of geeks equipped with their techical skill and the net
OR
A bunch of global companies equipped with their political and legal skill, tons of money, political connections AND the net?
All opinions are my own - until criticized
I've pondered this one a little bit myself, and one thing I noticed is this: in the way politics works, realistically, you need a large group of people in a reasonably small area to influence the bigwigs. The diminishing power we have over our representatives is our vote (I say diminishing because of how much influence is bought and sold), and votes are geographical in nature. It is very hard to bring the voice from the internet - which clearly transcends geography, - to "old world" or "real world" (depending on where you fit. :-) ) politics.
In the good ol' dial-up BBS days, there was the benefit of knowing when people you were talking to were from your area (because area codes were usually displayed), and there was that chance of getting a bunch of people together. That sort of link between electronic and geographic proximity has been mostly lost, and the link is now between electronic and interest-related proximity - never before have as many geeks been in one "place" as there are here on Slashdot.
So, I guess I'm just rephrasing the question: How do we reforge a geographical link? A protest in front of an MP's (I'm Canadian) office that The Media(tm) picks up on is hundreds of times more influential than a bunch of form letters forwarded along by concerned citizens.
-Syvlester
-Rob Ewaschuk
For information about current legislation in front of Congress, you may visit Thomas, the US Congress Internet site. You may find additional information on the House and Senate at their respective sites.
For State and Local information, you may want to refer to the Yahoo Government Politics Directory here and find your particular state or locality.
As that sometimes disturbing, sometimes OK group the Christian Coalition noted: About 7% of the population determines the result of most votes in the U.S. Only about 60% of people are registered to vote. Less than half of them turn out for most elections except hotly contested Presidential elections. This sets the amount of voters at 30% usually. That ends up being less than 15% per major party. This means that 7% of the people nominating a candidate for one side can often be enough to get that person elected. If you vote in every single election in your locality, you wield tremendous power on the electoral system. A great commitment by geeks to the political process would have a disproportionate affect on politics as usual. Geek issues WOULD be addressed. (How do you think the Religious Right got so much influence in politics?)
B. Elgin
B. Elgin
"Read at your own risk; feel free to ignore."
This complete difference with strong agreement on certain issues is the weakness and strength of the geek movement (if it can really be said that there is one). We don't throw our weight behind a single political party, so we aren't stuck with the other political baggage that party already has. We can lobby in all of the parties and offer our strength and expertise in various areas in exchange for political representation. If the parties are arguing about how to implement the general goals of our subset of the population, it is a massive step forward from the total non-representation we have now. If geeks always turn out the votes for the parties they join, they can gather the same kind of disproportionate strength that other issues groups (like the labor unions or Christian right) hold in their parties.
B. Elgin
B. Elgin
"Read at your own risk; feel free to ignore."
"Think of it like buying a dog... "
And, if you want your politician to avoid scandal, you'll apparently need to have him neutered!
"You can't get something for nothing." - my grandfather, on the stock market and Reaganomics.
I think the apathy of geeks towards traditional politics (and the obligatory snubbing in return) is a matter of relevancy. Cyberspace lawlessness, or perhaps more accurately, self-regulation, can quickly make one unconcerned by the actions of lawmakers.
What has affected your life more: the internet, or a balanced budget? Which has spurred unwavering economic growth: information-age productivity, or Alan Greenspan? Which promises to bring peace, prosperity, and democracy to more of the world: the open exchange of information without borders or censors, or the WTO?
American (and probably EU) politics are just so damn boring these days, and it's very much like some employee focus group: "Thank you all very much for sharing your opinions. Management will now go do whatever the hell we feel like, and you will all try to ignore us to whatever extent possible while getting your jobs done."
As for wielding new-found power, how can the techies change things any more than in the last decade?
"You say you want a revolution? I started three of them before breakfast this morning."
"You can't get something for nothing." - my grandfather, on the stock market and Reaganomics.
Internet privacy (or the lack-therof) seems to strike fear into the hearts of many. The public is fed up with SPAM, annoying pop-up ads, junk mail, phone solicitations, and they're scared to death of "identity thefts." Any politician who can solve these problems will have a groundswell of support, and if we geeks get vocal on this issue, it could greatly increase our political clout. As for the other issues, it doesn't look too good:
UCITA: We're opposed by big companies like M$ and AOL, who have big money, powerful connections, and (this is the most important) they create jobs. Politicians love that. Our only allies are the companies that purchase lots of software, who are just starting to catch on to the dangers of UCITA. Unfortunately, they are much less organized than the proponents of UCITA, and they probably figure they won't get screwed because they are important customers for the software vendors.
Cryptography: Here, we are up against the most powerful agencies of government and most of mainstream society. Most people buy the "national security" or "law enforcement" arguments against strong cryptography for public use. The more we argue for the freedom to encrypt, the more we sound we're doing things that are illegal.
Censorship: We are opposed by the ultra-religious, as well as the liberal "child advocates", forming a pincer move against us. Luckily we have some of the press on our side, and 1st Amendment groups like the ACLU. There have been some victories here, like CDA, but still the common public sentiment is that there's too much smut on the internet and someone needs to do something about it.
DVD/DeCSS: Absolutely no one is with us on this one. The issue has been framed by the media as "movie stars" vs. "pirates". No one gives a damn if a few Linux users can't use their DVD's. They don't understand what free software means, and they'll buy into anything that Hollywood has to say on this. Most of all, they don't understand how pirates can copy DVDs without DeCSS because the media (a bit more techno-savvy than the public) doesn't even get it.
Free Software: One word: FUD. Oh, and most of the richest geeks are against us, and they're the ones that get interviewed by the media, not RMS and ESR. Let's just be glad that we don't need politicians to let us have Linux and free software.
Pols will expect payments every election cycle, and you should be able to step-up if they run for higher office. Buy one yourself or start a polical action committee (PAC) with a few like-minded people and pool your resources. Your payments buy you access to your politician when you want to discuss your issue, and your pol might even introduce the bill you write.
Of course, your pol will require attention. Don't buy a pol if you don't (a PAC helps reduce your commitment) have the time to monitor, lobby, feed, and disipline it. Think of it like buying a dog...
I have zero pity for you if you can't negotiate a salary to your advantage. There's a word for your kind - its not geek - its chump.
Don't blame society because you took the first number they put on the table.
It doesn't even sound like you enjoy programming. If this is the case - quit. When you're sitting on your deathbed, you're going to regret not taking charge of your life.
unding NASA for _real_ missions ( read: making mars a viable goal ) HELL NO!!! NASA needs to be disbanded or folded into the military. Take NASA's budget and apply it to tax cuts for private companies to do business in space. That is the only hope of seeing mankind in space on a consistent basis.
Funny that you mention this.   I read something from the AP this morning that said a bill was just signed into law to begin to "de-governmentize" the Intelsat (I believe - or one of the *sat) network - opening the way for privatization of satellites...
A move in the right direction, IMHO.
-- Win2k: "It's not so much that it's only 65,000 bugs, it's just that they stopped at 65,535 to prevent an overflow."
...make strange bedfellows.   Often revolutions begin one person at a time.   With the power of the web - and a voice not churned through the journalistic feeding frenzy market machine (it slices, it dices, it turns out FUD and muddies the water), there is a chance to educate (and fire up) the public - who inturn will (hopefully) vote for folks who are in a geek's interest.
/.ers nerds?   ;-)   Is there a difference?   Why am I here?
And granted, the apathy out there is pathetic, but if you put up a hot enough issue, you'd be surprised how the voting tides will turn for the geek...
But then again, aren't
-- Win2k: "It's not so much that it's only 65,000 bugs, it's just that they stopped at 65,535 to prevent an overflow."
Much kudos for actually getting out there and talking to the people who make the laws. Now I've been shamed into making a similar appointment here...
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
Unless someone offers a critic of existing organizations, with changes to be made - I'd argue we may have to many organizations and creating another would continue to fragment what influence there is to be had.
Or in other words, what "we" don't need is to defuse our resources by building up a new organization, but use those resources to strengthen or affect change within existing organizations.
There are a lot out there. I started with three:
The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
The Center for Democracy and Technology
From there I was able to also dig up links to:
The Internet Education Foundation
The Media Access Project (non-profit telecomm lawyers, interesting..)
The Global Internet Liberty Campaign
Digital Future Coalition
Let alone those that aren't "purely" technical - such as the ACLU or People for the American Way, that touch on things like 1st Amendment (yep, American biased I am) rights. I could keep going and going, but if I didn't bore you ten lines ago, you would be now.
The likelihood of having THE "geek organization" are slim. Finding issues we can individually devote our resources to and building coalitions where interests overlap is a more realistic goal.
Blame me. I am responsible.
I haven't been applying for any patents lately, voicing sympathy for the big corporations, but I have been investing a large portion of my salary into stocks. Like many other people, I kind of expect and demand my investments yield great returns. This, I fear, is where the pressure is put on large companies who have capitol raised from investors to bludgeon the competition with patents and lawsuits any chance they get. The more I invest for my future, the more power and extra cash these large companies have to secure thier share in the marketplace. My investments are encouraging world domination and loss of freedom as companies decommoditize as they secure the marketplace.
I have been enjoying fantastic returns and can retire very comfortably; however, I'd gladly trade my spectacular returns back for my personal freedoms when I explore technological challenges. If these unfair property rights laws were done away with, sure my stocks may plunge for the moment. I'd gladly buy freedom back if its not too late.
But consider what fairness in the business world will do for productivity in the long run. It might stop all these crazy mergers that attempt to settle lawsuits. They all want to merge into One Big Company that can't sue itself. Do we all want to work for One Big Company?
Finally, nerds have realised something. It's something that's not a very easy thing to come to terms with, but it'll change your outlook once you do.
No matter how many zeroes we may have on the end of our paychecks, we are still working class
Not middle class (which doesn't really exist outside of tax forms), not ruling class, not even managerial class, but working class. This is simply because, we actually produce the products, we actually create the wealth. And how does our society (more importantly, the people with the wealth) treat people who create the wealth?
They may wine and dine us if there aren't many of us. But they're always looking for ways to find people who'll work for less, take more shit, and be even more scared of being fired than you are. Whether that means farming out work to India, or hiring students right out of college, or via other means, they're doing it. But in the meantime, we have power, right? Wrong. One thing that people in power have never willingly granted the working class is power. Once we start challenging their power, they'll ask the restaurant bouncer to throw this bum out on the sidewalk, because they're through wining and dining.
So how do we fight these people (the "Ruling Class", if I may use a term popular in anarchist/socialist discussion) and their profit-driven concepts of intellectual "freedom" and "property", which are completely at odds with our definitions? We have money, that's true. But think about the truly idealistic and skillful hackers. The Tim Berners-Lee's, or the Linus's, or the Steve Wozniak's. Some have made a very decent chunk of change, but nothing compared to Jim Clark, Bill Gates, or Steve Jobs. And definitely nothing compared to the RIAA, the WTO, or the MPAA.
I don't have a complete solution, but a step in the right direction is greater collaboration with other working class people. Whether it's construction workers (throw out any classist preconceptions you have; which would you rather associate yourself with, a construction worker who's more than willing to get their hands dirty and get some work done, or some manager in an expensive suit that reads email all day and pays for luxury trips on the company credit card?), biotechnologists, telecommunications workers, or anyone else who actually accomplishes something in their nine-to-five. More importantly, anybody who is upset by how the corporation they work for is distorting their work and using it for unethical means (this could be everyone from GM to Amazon.com to Monsanto to Disney).
Think about it. Geeks aren't the only ones pissed off by the actions of the rich and powerful.
The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. - Preamble to the IWW constitution.
Michael Chisari
mchisari@usa.net
We're so fragmented in our beliefs we're in worse shape than either the Demoratic or Republican party.
- it-or-not crowd.
The democrats have the skeletons in the closet of the Eco-Whackos and the Tax payer funded abortion nuts and the republicans have to deal with the shove-the-bible-down-your-throat-whether-you-like
We've got to deal with Script Kiddies and "Hack the planet" losers who make us look like pimple faced sexually depraved twits.
We have nothing which unites us. Democrats have th "Help The Poor" and the Republicans have the "Lower Taxes" drums to beat and there is nothing that unites us.
Are we geeks first or last? Would you vote for politician X if s/he agreed with you on every computer/technology related issue but differed with you on abortion, gun control, or environmental policy?
How about if Politician Y agreed with you on all of those social issues, but disagreed with you on regulating the internet?
If it were me, I'd hold my nose and vote for Y.
What central theme can unite us as geeks?
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
We are people. We have different opinions, upbringings, ideas on how things work. Some have said that geeks can't have a voice, because we're such a diverse group.
I disagree. I can think of one thing all geeks value, and I'm sure that whatever else we disagree about, we can agree about this.
Freedom.
Freedom of information. Freedom of curiosity. Freedom of speech. Freedom to innovate. Freedom to distribute. Freedom to market. Freedom, freedom, freedom. It all comes down to freedom of knowledge.
Every web page we construct, every piece of code we write, every post we make to fora like Slashdot and the like, even every piece of software we mirror or link to is an expression of freedom on the new frontier.
We are grunts, as someone here said. But we are grunts with an unusual amount of power. We control the tools that the people in control rely on to get things done. We control the channels of communication at the lowest level. We work in the dark computer rooms, the back rooms, the IT departments of corporations, even among non-geeks in places like law firms, newsrooms, TV and radio stations, and anyplace else where information is transmitted and shared. We control the dials, buttons and keys that must be pushed to Get Information Out. If knowledge comes from information, and knowledge is power, then information is freedom.
As geeks, in the places we are, we have more control than we realize. We value freedom. We have control over one form of freedom (information). Thus, we have a duty to protect that freedom from all who would take it away for their own ends.
When we speak out against patents meant to take exclusive control over seemingly trivial processes, when we mirror a piece of software because a company is attacking the author, when we call out to expose lobbyists trying to shove through a law limiting everyone's rights over information but their own, we defend freedom.
And we don't just exist in one nation, but everywhere! Our major interests aren't just limited to one country - they are universal! Information is in every country; knowledge, available to anyone who wants it. As a group, we can make sure that is true into the future; we can take on those who would steal that right, anyplace they try. The socialists and communists of the past century tried to cobble together an International to represent workers' rights; meanwhile, an International of geeks preparing to defend freedom of knowledge is here, now, and we don't even realize it! If we wanted to, we could wipe out the Internet. Here. Now. A few people in the right places executing the right commands, and it's over. We have power; we have responsibility to those who use our systems, and responsibility to defend those systems from attack, physical and ideological.
We don't have to give ourselves a pretty name, or elect a governing body; indeed, that would go against everything we stand for. We can be individuals, acting as a group, to ensure that people can read source code, write opinions, even market software without being squashed by someone bigger and more powerful. We don't have to unite under a banner, or declare allegiance to someone. We just have to do what we're doing now, with the volume turned way up.
Write code. Read code. Mirror code when authority tries to hide it because they're scared of having something revealed. Send letters to newspapers. Call radio and TV stations. Ask embarrassing questions to politicians. Put up websites to offer software, information, or just to give your opinion. Do what you can to ensure information and truth flow freely.
We are geeks. We control the information. We value freedom of information. Thus, we have a duty to defend that freedom, anytime, anywhere, in any way deemed necessary. If we fail to defend the freedom to have an individual thought, or spread truth, then nothing is left.
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
I don't think the numbers explain it -- the teachers union has enormous clout, as do other groups smaller than geeks. With geeks busy with their positions of responsibility, pretty independent by their nature (therefore, not tending to join political groups), and leaning politically toward smaller government; that probably keeps them uninvolved with government and ignored by "big government" types -- the people who actually runs things.
I would love to see some numbers on the breakdown on the money spent on political lobbiests for the various industries and demographic groups.
Geeky modern art T-shirts
The problem is that the current political system is not geek-friendly. As someone who's done politics since I was 13, and been on various Democratic Exec Boards (KCDCC, 42nd, 36th, just moved to 43 (maybe next year)), the system rewards groups willing to put in the hours.
/. effect to overwhelm the political process. For example, to game the sytem with geek-friendly delegates by showing up for caucuses which are sparsely attended, with an SSH-enabled web status board to help one figure out how to get the most delegates (of any candidate, it doesn't matter) elected to the next stage.
A geek lobby that could work would be to use the
Or to overwhelm the Exec boards and meetings at which policy is set by having a co-located LUG meeting - then timeshare one or two people to watch the political process for opportunities while everyone else writes code. Let the politicos waste time with speeches and have the key geeks make motions right after ICMing all the geeks in the room to vote on the motion.
It's not that hard, really.
Will in Seattle
The sad truth is, that won't matter for now, but in time it will. There are countless 'causes' that ask you to write to your congress-critters and tell them how you feel about a specific piece of legislation. Believe it or not, that's a good idea. The politicians do occasionally listen to their constituants. It is a good idea to write to them and ask them the hard questions.
Here's a plan to follow right now while this is fresh on your mind.
1) Find out what legislation is currently being considered. Do this for both federal and state issues.
2) Write a letter to your representatives (all of them) as well as any members of special committees responsible for the legislation. Tell them your opinions on the issues. Tell them in plain English.
3) Write a separate letter to your elected officials. Tell them how you expect them to vote on something and tell them why. Ask them to notify you of how they finally decide to vote.
When the time comes for you to elect a new representative, make a note of how well they followed your directions throughout their past term and vote accordingly.
This ends the armchair guide to lobbying. More assertive tactics exist, but these are the things you can do rather easily without having to get involved with activist groups.
I really think that's a red herring. Do you really think that there's not some basic commonality or popular plurality of interest among the "geek" community? You've said that women and African-Americans are every inch as diverse politically as geeks are, and yet there always seem to be two or three key viewpoints about any topic that, because of their united voice, get the consideration, get the editorial and popular press and news airtime. The question of whether or not we "need" a collective voice is almost completely irrelevant. The fact that we don't all speak as one only underscores this point. There's many, many things we know and understand about the world and its new technological paradigm that *must* be aired and *must* be popularized.
Or else, we all lose.
Chris Tembreull
Web Developer, NEC Systems, Inc.
My opinions are my own, and nobody else's.
Chris Tembreull
"My karma just ran over your dogma."
Before you even talk about a ``geek lobby'', you need to decide what this lobby stands for. There are clearly some issues ( say, gun-control; republican-or-democrat-or-other ) where there'll never be agreement. Perhaps it's possible to create some kind of manifesto and/or policy platform, but drawing widespread support for it, even among geeks, could prove difficult.
And who's going to have to change that?
We are.
We have to form a consensus on the issues (maybe borrow Taco's polling engine), figure out which candidates support them or might be willing to, Slashdot the hell out of them (and not just with email, but with face time and with treeware), in short, we have to get it in gear, here and now.
Or we're going to get squashed.
I'm serious, folks, with DMCA and DeCSS and CyberPatrol in the courts, we stand a good chance of getting promoted to outlaw. The time to act is now.
Let's Do It.
--
This was the year everything changed.
-- Commander Ivanova, 2261
Ahh. There is the confusion. You have been expanding "lobby" into "political force for special protectionist privileges." I can see where you could come by that idea; certainly the press loves to paint lobbies in that color. However, "lobby" need not be just a racket for getting goodies or protections for a subset of the population.
A much better expansion of "lobby" is "political force to make the world as we would like it to be." Clearly for many groups, "as we would like it to be" is "more goodies for us". But that need not be the case.
Since many geeks feel similarly strongly about such issues as free speech, intellectual property law, etc., we could, theoretically, have a lobby to advance those causes.
Of course, practically it would be very difficult to do, because geeks are such a minority it would be hard to get them to rock a vote....
----------------------------------------------
-*- Any technology indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced -*-
While I an certainly not the sort of person who wants to see an org chart or any such crap, some sort of organization (like a union)is needed. For example, when the rank and file cops want to be heard, they come down with the blue flu (most all of them. Too many to simply replace the 'malcontents').
Imagine how quickly the economists and big money interests would pay attention if the message was: Unless this is cleared up, On Monday, 27 March, .com will will cease to exist. It will return (this time) on Tuesday 28 March.
Keep in mind that the announcement itself could drop the Dow 100 points. Actually doing it could easily cost 500-1000 and a good month to recover.
That action would be very extreme, and a last resort. Lesser actions could well have a positive effect. The problem is, if Monday 27 March came around, how many techs would actually shut the routers off? If it's not close to 100%, there will be a lot of lawsuits and fireings, everyone else will just laugh, and the geeks will have no political clout whatsoever.
I'm sorry, but while the above paragraph is unflattering, it's sadly true. We do control some of the best tools ever created to effect social change in this country, nay, the world at large. But the same personality attributes that allows us to spend 12 hours staring at a computer monitor making those tools are the same personality attributes that relegate us to relative obscurity in the public eye. The general public admires the earning potential of this line of work, but little else.
Geeks have no voice as it stands right now. When l0pht went to Congress to testify over security, they were ignored. We submitted proposals for using open source to make the government work cheaper and faster, those were rejected. We're not being taken seriously. Those of us who, in frustration, take to their keyboards and engage in hacktivism are labelled criminals and locked up for dozens of years. Our only recourse - civil disobedience, has already largely been headed off by draconian legislation like the DMCA, or the dozen other acts which make even looking at a computer menacingly a felony.
No, we don't have them - they have us. Our only tools right now are the internet and it's massively distributed architecture, designed to make sure that information that gets out there stays out there, and excercising our technical abilities to route around the damage caused by bad legislation, corrupt politicians, and massive corporations stripping away our rights for additional profit.
Yea, welcome to the 21st century.
Slashdot could work to change this... in a big way. If we unite as a force of change, it may be possible to introduce some diversity into the presidential race. Slashdot as a whole should endorse a candidate (decided by the slashdot poll), which everyone on Slashdot will work to get elected. Obviously we would become one of those special interest groups, but one which is composed of individuals who all have a say in the collective policies that we support.
Slashdot polls on all the major issues, and with our sheer numbers, we would be able to influence the campaign platform of our selected candidate. I put forward the name of Ralph Nader only because he happens to be the candidate that I support, but it could just as easily be David McReynolds, or anyone, other than Bush or Gore.
The best way to determine who your views are most in line with is at the Presidential Candidate Selector: http://www.selectsmart.com/PRESIDENT/
Ralph Nader is here, and David McReynolds is here
Reality has a liberal bias
I got there at 12:58 for a 1:00 appointment. He met me about 1:15. Khakis. blue shirt, tie.
/., as a sample site for a community meeting place (hehe).
;-) I would strongly urge you to try and do something similar. I have the rather useful advantage of working in the same building as my congressman, but you might be surprised how accessible some of them might be.
:(
I started off with a couple questions about privacy and the FBI. He was against most of their efforts to gain administrative wiretapping permission, instead saying there should still be a judge involved (although he mentioned there were both good and bad judges, IHHO)
Then I went on to some patent issues. This was where he was most responsive to some of my ideas. Having read up a bit on the history of the patent system, I was able (I think) to illustrate to him that it was not, at least in the realm of software, fuctioning as originally intended, and was now inhibiting the progress of an industry. I said that often the physical task of writing software was inexpensive (at least froma a starting point), and often it was prohibitively expensive to do a thorough enough check to make sure someone hadn't used the same obvious of even slightly trickly method you were planning on implementing. Thus creating prohibitive barriers of entry into a burgeoning industry. I mentioned Bezo's letter, and suggestions, but how he felt his hands were tied given the current system.
Then I went on into DMCA, IP, and copyright. I used the DVD case (which he had heard of) as an example on why you might need to circumvent copy protection as a means to fair use, and how that action was now a felony in the U.S. I mentioned how I download MP3s as a way to try new music, and how various industry groups have tried to fight new technology every step of the way. Instead of fighting in the marketplace, they have moved to fighting in the courts. Since he didn't recognize the DMCA by name, I think a lot of this went in one ear and out the other. He was playing with his pen and fingernails during this one.
Finally, I got to explain (in under two minutes) the Linux/Open Source phenomonem and how it differed from traditional product design and distribution,i.e. the differences between an M$ EULA and the GPL. I mentioned how I felt political websites (including his) were not being used as the community centers they might be, and directed him to
Finally, I ended with a quick bit about my fears as a current 'Net user that big (international conglomerate) money and government interference would erode and eventually destroy this wonderful medium and everything it makes possible.
I don't know how much he grokked, or even tried, but that was 10 minutes of time he wan't lobbied by the RIAA
There ya go. (oh, and thanks to 348 for the final push, no link, I post too much
--
+&x
I have an appointment (in about 15 min) to meet with one of my state's congressmen. After mentioning it to a couple people here (physical), I've gotten "good luck, he's a ___", none of which was good. I'll let you know how it goes. Basically I just want to see what the knows/thinks about the Net and some of its issues.
--
+&x
The religious right gets it. It's time for geeks to get it. The following is from a salon.com article on how The Christian Coalition does it:
----------------------------------------------
-*- Any technology indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced -*-
Digital Millenium Copyright Act comments due by March 31! EFF has information here.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Also, I think that highly-paid technical workers are a relative minority in the world, and even in the United States. Since when do we need political advocacy? Maybe we will in the future at some point, but certainly not now.
The causes that "we" (read: "I") are commonly perceived as supporting -- the free exchange of information, open source software development, keeping it legal to embarrass corporations who do stupid things -- are good causes for everyone (except big business, of course, and I don't think anyone will rationally argue that big business needs ANY MORE POWER than it already has). I can see lobbying for such causes, but not on behalf of a mythical "geek" group that is, in reality, about as well defined as "Christians".
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased