SXSW: Al Gore Talks Surveillance Culture, Spider Goats

Nerval's Lobster writes "Former vice president Al Gore sat down with Wall Street Journal columnist Walt Mossberg at this year's SXSW conference to talk about the future — specifically, what Gore sees as the dangers and opportunities awaiting the planet for the next few years. Gore drilled down into what he referred to as the "stalker economy." The rise of apps such as SnapChat, which allows smartphone users to control how long friends can view messages, is emblematic of people reaching the "gag point" with pervasive recording and surveillance by government and business. "Our democracy has been hacked," Gore also told his audience, referring to the U.S. Constitution as "our operating system." While there's never been a "golden age" of American Democracy, he added, the perils emerging today are new. "If a Congressman or Senator has to spend five hours a day begging special interests or rich people for money," he said, they'll be more concerned about how what they're saying will appeal to those interests—rather than their constituents. In yet another tangent, Gore railed against genetic engineering, including Spider Goats, which are goats with spliced spider DNA that allows them to secrete spider silk along with their milk. The goats breed, extending that trait to future generations. Gore sees such things as a case of science run amok, alternately creepy and scary."

Comments

democracy hacked?

[roman_mir]

The flow of money into the U.S. political system, he argued, and the need by politicians to fundraise has led to special interests gaining undue power.

âoeOur democracy has been hacked,â Gore told his audience, referring to the U.S. Constitution as âoeour operating system.â While thereâ(TM)s never been a âoegolden ageâ of American Democracy, he added, the perils emerging today are new. âoeIf a Congressman or Senator has to spend five hours a day begging special interests or rich people for money,â he said, theyâ(TM)ll be more concerned about how what theyâ(TM)re saying will appeal to those interestsâ"rather than their constituents.

Special interests are inevitable in a system that allows politicians to set the rules for businesses and individuals in the first place. The politicians are the ones that hacked the Constitution, they hacked the Law. They figured out how to remove the chains that were placed upon the government to bind it, to provide it with only limited powers (article 1, section 8). Once the politicians found the way (it was easy once the Republic became wealthy enough due to all the business that thrived under the mostly free market system in the first 124 years of the Republic), just promise the people something for nothing and they will vote for you and will let you do whatever you want to the Law. The politicians turned the Republic into a democracy by promising a bunch of stuff to be given out as subsidies and it was popular, because the promise was to make only a minority of people to pay for it (discrimination against a minority based on different levels of income).

So the more power that the government stole from the people by promising them free stuff, the more lucrative it became for politicians to keep power and the more competitive the field of politics became because it brought with it much more power than it was ever designed to give to the politicians.

Politicians are today's Rock Stars, they live better than the rest of the public, they get all this respect for some reason, they get the best deals on everything (trust me, companies like large banks, credit card companies, even phone companies have lists of 'higher class' people to provide a much better service and not to bug in case they break the rules, and these lists include politicians and their various friends).

It's lucrative to be a politician, and so it is very competitive and it gives so much power that wasn't meant to be there, that's why there is all this money pouring in - those are bribes to leave people alone in many cases.

Re:democracy hacked?

[Tokolosh]

Bravo! All attempts to limit political contributions are doomed to fail, as the incentives to bypass such limits are too enormous. The only solution is to reduce the power of the government as a whole. This entirely opposite to the policies of both the Democrats and Republicans.

Al Gore himself is a fine example, having incentivized thousands of lobbyists around the world, while stomping around with the carbon footprint of a mastodon.

Re:democracy hacked?

[roman_mir]

Definitely, Al Gore benefited from his political connections many times. Current TV would not have become profitable for him in that sale if he wasn't Gore and didn't have all these political connections (you can't just start a media company and really expect all those networks and channels and carriers to give you access). His fortune became larger also as a result of the 529 Million USD loan (political connections) that gov't gave Fisker car company, and they moved production to Finland, manufacturing gas guzzling (climate change, ha?) luxury 90,000USD cars (man of the people).

Re:democracy hacked?

[phantomfive]

It's lucrative to be a politician, and so it is very competitive and it gives so much power that wasn't meant to be there

Yet another reason to keep as much power as possible as local as possible. If some small town or large city gets corrupt, it doesn't affect the rest of us. But if the federal government is corrupt, it affects all of us. And it's a lot harder to deal with federal government corruption than local government corruption.

Re:democracy hacked?

[roman_mir]

Correct, and as usual the intent was different from what is implemented now. The intent was for the federal gov't to increase competition between States, not to create monopolies. To do it, federal gov't was supposed to prevent individual States from setting rules that would for example require re-licensing of businesses and different professionals from one state to another. However that's exactly what is happening. They even have licenses for taxis and moving companies, never mind professionals like commodity traders or doctors or lawyers or engineers or builders, etc.

However that's what the point was - to prevent States from each requiring a different license for every type of situation. The power that Congress had was to regulate the act of interstate commerce but not to regulate a company itself!

Once the gov't got a way to tax and regulate companies and not the act of trade itself, that's it, it was over and the SCOTUS didn't stop it at all, it helped the power, didn't contain it.

AFAIC 'interpreting the Constitution' really means breaking the law, nothing else. (the reasons are in that JE)

SCOTUS has given up on its role, which is to stop the gov't from passing laws that are contrary to the Constitution. I touched on the ACA decision, showing how the law is bent to make it look 'Constitutional' and even how eventually the lower courts will take it further, by inevitably mis-understanding the ruling by SCOTUS and will ensure that eventually ACA will be enforced in a way that is not even deemed Constitutional by that ruling itself.

That's the same thing that happened for all other cases, including income tax (which doesn't even exist as a law for individuals, the amendment to the Constitution required that SCOTUS would eventually clarify how the law is supposed to be used and enforced and in the process SCOTUS clarified that 'income tax' is actually a 'profit tax' and as such it can only apply to corporations and not to individuals). But the lower courts have enforced the non-existing law based on the wrong reading of the SCOTUS decisions and I think it is done deliberately.

Congress passes an unconstitutional law, SCOTUS finds reasons to justify the law as marginally Constitutional for some special case scenario, the lower courts then themselves apply and interpret the ruling in a much broader, completely incorrect manner and that's it, now you have what they like to call 'precedent'.

The entire problem with precedent is that regardless of how it was established, now they say they must follow it! Amazing, isn't it? But that's a really clever hack of the political system.

Sad to see

[Tagged_84]

Sad to see his stance on genetic engineering is so negative. How does he expect us to recover so many extinct species and continue to advance if we don't master our biological side?

Those goats aren't being thrown out in the wild to breed, they're being used to create stronger materials that will likely be used to protect us from the dangers of climate change. Sure we have risks of contamination, but to be put off advancement because of what-ifs would mean we'd still be in caves fearing the wrath of fire.

Sing along:

[Hartree]

Spider Goat, Spider Goat,
makes the thread for your spider coat!
Spins cloth with eight legged speed,
Any color, any weave.
Take note,
Here comes the Spider Goat!

Re:Sing along:

[shadowofwind]

Mashing the two previous posts....

There was an old woman who swallowed a goat
For spiderweb rope, she swallowed a goat
She swallowed the goat to protect us from the dangers of climate change....

Dang, doesn't rhyme.

Doesn't make any sense either.

Re:manbearpig!

[ShanghaiBill]

Al Gore's views on GMO are idiotic. GMO goats are the least of our concern. They don't spread their DNA in windblown pollen like GMO crops, and they have none of the potential dangers of GMO microorganisms. So now we are going to regulate genetic engineering, not on legitimate risks, but on the unscientific "yuck factor"?