Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EFF Names 2008 Pioneer Award Winners

Posted by kdawson on from the august-company dept.

bowser100 writes "The EFF has named their 2008 Pioneer Award winners, picking three people very familiar to this community — Mitchell Baker and the Mozilla Foundation, Canadian law professor Michael Geist, and AT&T whistleblower Mark Klein."

11 of 43 comments (clear)

  1. Aren't they forgetting... by Paul+Pierce · · Score: 2, Funny

    Al Gore?

  2. Re:CEO of Mozilla by Protonk · · Score: 3, Funny

    My wife said the exact same thing upon seeing her in a different news article. That was her only comment. Sort of odd, I guess.

  3. In before.... by Protonk · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...someone complains about NSA/EFF/ATT wiretapping business and turns this whole thread into a debate over who we hate the most, america or the terrorists.

  4. Re:CEO of Mozilla by anastasd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This might be because the usual vision of an open source developer is an teenager with unshaved beard and long hair OR a middle aged man that had the same outlook when he was younger.

  5. Re:CEO of Mozilla by Protonk · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's probably it. It's certainly my vision. When I think of web developers I can only think of this.

  6. Ads are Better than Awards by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Those awards are nice honors to their deserving recipients. But they don't help any activism except preaching to the choir: people who already tune in to EFF. The mass media (which is EFF's natural enemy most of the time) doesn't even notice these nerd/wonk awards.

    What the EFF should do to get itself press, more members, and actually push hard back for freedom would be making some ads to counter the telco propaganda that their award winners are persecuted by. I bet Mark Klein would be a good cameo in an ad, waving his EFF award or not.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Ads are Better than Awards by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The populace isn't "split" on NSA spying. Sure, a few percent of the populace says "whatever the president wants" when asked "is it OK for the president to listen to terrorists' phonecalls if it happens to innocently also overhear some other people's calls - who might just be terrorists we wouldn't otherwise notice, or drug dealers, or something?" But that's a fraction of Republicans, who are losing power left and right: they'll have something like 40 Senate seats in 2009, and perhaps something like 30-35 in 2011, and probably the House will be 60:40 in 2011, while their presidential candidate will probably get whipped something like 60:40. Already Republicans don't even show up to vote except maybe half that of Democrats, and that's while they still have a Clinton to fear.

      It's not like Democrats are even aware of this issue except when asked, and then only vaguely for the most part. And independents aren't much more on the ball. So there's maybe 20-30% of adults who even have NSA spying on their radar, except when asked or actually seeing it on TV. The other 70% is up for grabs.

      Which is why the Republicans and their telco masters are launching a TV ad. And why someone, if not the Democrats, should launch a counterad. On issues like this, the courts are sensitive to how the public reacts - if it reacts at all. Since Republicans are so under siege in general, this ad is a desperate ploy that would further distract them if it were met with the strong challenge that the truth actually offers: NSA spying should matter to everyone, because everyone's privacy - and therefore safety and liberty - is at risk. But if Republicans scare America again with this ad, and win telco amnesty, then that's momentum for them, and more telco bribes to keep them in line and in office.

      So I want to see the debate get the facts for a change. If the ad is good, it will change the debate. Americans are fired up for change right now, and will be through November when we elect the first Black president. Let's see the rising tide also carry our most basic liberty: the line where the government and other private interests end, and where our private life begins as sacrosanct.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    2. Re:Ads are Better than Awards by Protonk · · Score: 3, Informative

      They most certainly ARE split on the idea. If they weren't split George Bush would be in jail. It is that simple. What is likely is that the NSA had expaned illegal spying to a vast dragnet by 2004, when normally permissive officials from DoJ wanted to intervene. They may or may not have scaled back that surveilance as Ashcroft was replaced by someone much more loyal to the pres. The times breaks the story in 2005. 2006 comes around. The president has not only not ben impeached but LAWS HAVE BEEN FUCKING PASSED TO ENSHRINE THE SPYING. Ask people how they feel about the president breaking the law to help americans and the answer SHOULD be 99-1 against. It turns out to be something like 60/40.

      Those 40% are not going to be swayed by facts or arguments. They are the same 40% that think that iraq helped plan 9/11. They are the same 40% that are angry at democrats wanting some oversight ability. The disconnect is emotional, not factual.

      I hope that 2008 will bring real change. It might. But I would rather money go into attempting to find judicial recourse while legislative recourse remains supine.

    3. Re:Ads are Better than Awards by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No they're not split. As I said, they're ignorant, apathetic, and distracted by the war, the economy, and their personal lives.

      You are creating a false duality between "with or against NSA spying". The real duality is whether or not people notice. Since people mostly don't notice, and then are beaten back with distractions and end-runs, the corporate deals with the politicians who prey on the people go through.

      Bush most certainly should be in jail, or worse, but he's not. He's also cruising down below 20% approval, which is like only the grade F students thinking you're the right quarterback for the football team. That shows that Americans are disconnected from the system that's supposed to protect us, including the media that should be ringing air raid sirens every day over these crimes. But they're not.

      That's why ads are important. I never said that EFF should run ads instead of suing. I said that I think their running ads is more important than giving awards. I didn't even say EFF shouldn't give awards. In fact, I said that a good ad would feature Klein with his award, which would show Americans that there are real people out there putting their lives on the line to protect us all from these real tyrannies that they don't otherwise see exposed on their TV.

      That's why the Republicans are running ads. If they didn't matter, they wouldn't waste their money, while they don't have enough to campaign to hold the seats they're using to put through these abuses. It's all important. But that also means that ads to convince Americans it's important, especially in the face of ads convincing them that it's not, are important. Because those people are going to the polls every few weeks already, warming up for November. At which time, if NSA spying is an issue fixed in the public imagination (not just Slashdotters'), it will mean votes. If not in the Senate, which has small turnover and other issues despite the centrality of the Senate in allowing the spying, then at least in the House, which has to stand for election every 2 years. The ads are the way to drive home the "emotional" images that drive people to demand protection. Either the Republican way of fake protection, that we'll see in those ads, or a different way, an EFF way preferably, of protecting ourselves from the telcos as well as the few "terrorists" who have to reach a lot further than the telcos to hurt us.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  7. Re:2 out of 3 by graveyhead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What does the retirement or previous political affiliation have to do with anything?

    In case you didn't notice, what the government and AT&T are doing together is plain wrong. This should be obvious to any Democrat, Republican or NeoCon. Democrats seem to care, but only if they think their constituents do. Republicans are too busy being in denial about a significant chunk of their party becoming completely backwards to actually notice what is happening. The NeoCons actively ignore constitutional protections in the name of "security".

    One guy has the balls to stand up and say "what I've seen is wrong". Maybe he came to the conclusion a bit late. Maybe he was CYA'ing. Any way you look at it, the public has a right to know this information and make informed decisions on whether it is right. He is a good man for bringing us this information.

    --
    std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
  8. Privacy inspiration by Benjamin_Wright · · Score: 2, Informative

    Michael Geist's excellent newsletter on Internet law inspired ideas for using contract law to protect privacy on social networking sites.

    --
    Benjamin Wright, Dallas, Texas, benjaminwright.us