Re:Just say no to anti-trust
on
AOL Nation
·
· Score: 1
- Doing things better than others is fine; but that has not prevented the large uns from queezing out the smaller ones who may be just as good
- mergers will stop when enough people have been fired after mergers to create real pressure groups to stop the madness. Imagine a situation where twenty percent of the working population become jobless as a result of mergers and start calling their congressmen...
Great article.... but I think the issue IS wider than just about corporatism, although I'd agree that capitalism-with-no-holds-barred is one of the more visible manifestations.
The issue is globalisation - globalisation of commerce, globalisation of money, globalisation of culture, globalisation of environmental risks and threats, globalisation of control mechanisms (IMF, WTO, UN,...) and of course globalisation of trade and commerce.
And, the internet is a huge catalyst. But it cuts both ways: the internet provides huge opportunities for bottom-up activists and levels the playing fields in a way which previous generations could only dream about. But by the same token, the internet opens up magnificent opportunities for abuse -- I'm sure all the drug barons are well hooked up, as is the NSA (hi there!), the Australians govt, the Saudi central computer.... you name the baddies, they're benefitting from the net also.
Summary as regards the internet itself: it increases risk and opportunity. For any possible factor, for any possible user. For good and for bad.
As for me, I know on whose side I'd be in Seattle, having been through tear gas sessions in non-US "democracies" myself.
A recent article in the German magazine Der Spiegel detailed how the German NSA-equivalent agency intercepted data traffic originating from Liechtenstein banks, and how this data apparently reveals the big-time money laundering connections of this countrylet. Quite a coup, it seems.
There is no doubt that concern about the increasing invasion of privacy is appropriate, especially when it is unclear which information is intercepted by whom for what purpose. Credit ratings, AIDS, credit card nos. are just the tip of the iceberg.
To put this into perspective, though, remember that all the electronic sophistication of the NSA and all the president's CIA men failed miserably in predicting, for example, Saddam's invasion of Kuweit in 1990. Similar intelligence failures abound, e.g. the Nairobi/Daressalaam and the Atlanta bombings.
Most telling of all is the case of East Germany, where the Stasi had unlimited powers inside the country, had a spy in every house plus spys spying on spys, had innumerable sleepers and moles in various Western governments -- and yet the state collapsed in a miserable heap anyway, simply because no amount of spying on your own people saves a bad system in the long run.
So, I would not overrate the effectiveness even of a technologically advanced system. Technology is just one of many factors, including the overall state of the economy and the intelligence of the intelligence gatherers.
Slashdot Mirror
- Doing things better than others is fine; but that has not prevented the large uns from queezing out the smaller ones who may be just as good
- mergers will stop when enough people have been fired after mergers to create real pressure groups to stop the madness. Imagine a situation where twenty percent of the working population become jobless as a result of mergers and start calling their congressmen...
Great article.... but I think the issue IS wider than just about corporatism, although I'd agree that capitalism-with-no-holds-barred is one of the more visible manifestations.
...) and of course globalisation of trade and commerce.
.... you name the baddies, they're benefitting from the net also.
The issue is globalisation - globalisation of commerce, globalisation of money, globalisation of culture, globalisation of environmental risks and threats, globalisation of control mechanisms (IMF, WTO, UN,
And, the internet is a huge catalyst. But it cuts both ways: the internet provides huge opportunities for bottom-up activists and levels the playing fields in a way which previous generations could only dream about. But by the same token, the internet opens up magnificent opportunities for abuse -- I'm sure all the drug barons are well hooked up, as is the NSA (hi there!), the Australians govt, the Saudi central computer
Summary as regards the internet itself: it increases risk and opportunity. For any possible factor, for any possible user. For good and for bad.
As for me, I know on whose side I'd be in Seattle, having been through tear gas sessions in non-US "democracies" myself.
A recent article in the German magazine Der Spiegel detailed how the German NSA-equivalent agency intercepted data traffic originating from Liechtenstein banks, and how this data apparently reveals the big-time money laundering connections of this countrylet. Quite a coup, it seems.
There is no doubt that concern about the increasing invasion of privacy is appropriate, especially when it is unclear which information is intercepted by whom for what purpose. Credit ratings, AIDS, credit card nos. are just the tip of the iceberg.
To put this into perspective, though,
remember that all the electronic sophistication of the NSA and all the president's CIA men failed miserably in predicting, for example, Saddam's invasion of Kuweit in 1990. Similar intelligence failures abound, e.g. the Nairobi/Daressalaam and the Atlanta bombings.
Most telling of all is the case of East Germany, where the Stasi had unlimited powers inside the country, had a spy in every house plus spys spying on spys, had innumerable sleepers and moles in various Western governments -- and yet the state collapsed in a miserable heap anyway, simply because no amount of spying on your own people saves a bad system in the long run.
So, I would not overrate the effectiveness even of a technologically advanced system. Technology is just one of many factors, including the overall state of the economy and the intelligence of the intelligence gatherers.