From this post and some of your earlier ones it would seem you are scared of the directions society is taking. And you think the trend has beeng going on for 200 years.
Sorry to disrupt your pessimism, but since the eden garden, it doesn't look like there have been many golden eras as there is now... Trash me saying the (cyber)world is bad and full of heresy (lol) and dirt and violence and obscenity, but there probably has never been a period with as many people and as long longevity (particularly in our part of the world, I know...)
Don't forget one of our greatest achievement: freedom (well, some at least). You can choose your lifestyle, disseminate your ideas all you want, but if you can't live with the compromises other individuals want from you, simply don't hang around them. Don't ask an exterior force to apply your "moral" to others, just live the way you want, and mayber try to convince others to do the same.
Not such a bad one, but they tend to stick too much to a crappy format: every episode is centered around bringing justice to innocent people, the larger tone is about constantly searching for long lost familly and avoiding paranoiac threats for overpowerfull "center" (well, playing cat and mouse really, because he is "so" smart:)
While bruner's hero is a genius lost in a constantly changing society without identity, he is actually without identity himself, just a poor soul really. He gets better when meeting this not very pretty girl with a strong personality (who is going to play that if the studios want to make it into a new bland movie?).
When getting to the end they actually move out of the big corporate world, into some sort of village made by refugees from a big catastroph (california's big one I think). Looks nice and very human, although its architecture seems much too organised to my taste (in the long term there is no such thing as chaos). I could do with one of their (genetically modified?) smart dogs nonetheless.
Read it a month ago, and loved it. [found it in a welsch library]
I still can't believe how the author managed to (seemingly easily) uncover layers after layers of superb techs, deep characters and paranoiac plots. For example Volyova, one of the spacefaring self modified and lonely "ultras" part of humanity, start as a cold bitch who doesn't mind manufacturing loyalty. No feeling, no remorse. While Khouri is stuff to make fantasies of. And yet they sort of end up on the same side of the fence, and you can actually feel the force of their characters when they rival sun stealer.
The pattern jugglers, an ocean able to record any information, and restitute it directly into your brain (when you go for a swim), is still something I have to sort out. I do wonder where the guy got his inspiration.
I love the formidable space suits, you couldn't believe what you can do with them, or what -it- can do with you. And I could do with an alpha record of me, or maybe just a beta, considering you are supposed to destroy your physical body when you undertake the former.
Well, it seems there is going to be two main outcomes:
-the government step in and assure its citizens their privacy is safe in its hand. Eventually abuses and scandals happen, public's interest is on, the law is changed to take away some of this power and to let the actors manage themselves.
-free market let the different actors decide for themselves. Abuses and scandals happen, public's interest is on, the companies or individuals involved get bad publicity, lose money and change their policies. If this happen a lot, laws are made to handle some of the recurrent problems.
From -my- libertarian POV, I go for the second solution (I generally prefer a contract than a law), it requires me to be critical about who I trust with my personal information, it gives me the freedom to not care or to be retentive.
But in both cases, there is going to be a swinging pendulum between laissez-faire and regulations, its energy coming from public's awareness.
I don't think I have lost any argument, certainly not against the "right to make a buck" guy (not saying this is you, just speaking about the thread). As for wondering about trolls, well, I was just wondering, no agenda on my part.
Patents and copyrights and trademarks are different, but still part of the same sort of control one can use on information. And at the end of the day, there's one thing I don't want to give up: the ability to share information I possess in my brain or my hard drive, the ability to share and swim in human culture. I believe ideas have never been priced before in history. By their very nature, memes try to survive and prosper alike genes.
You seem to only defend copyright (and maybe trademark), and I believe this stance is much more defendable.
But what are your main arguments? Incentive to create (produce?) more? Right to control what you have created? To me both arguments are deeply flawed and don't stand to scrutiny. Let's check demographics and weight freedom against monetary incentive. Let's consider if one person should be able to control or even remove "by law" something from human culture.
If shakespeare came back and desired to completely stop the diffusion and the use of his work, I would say sorry but no.
Who is making money on copyrights? Small bands? A few big artists? A few very big entreprises? Me, I say the guys with the lawiers:) Artists make their living through performances, through their fans, not by controling the flow of information.
Who are you in RL? What job do you have? What core beliefs do you hold? Isn't there something about progress? Why would you think scientists take such pride in the free flow of information? How do you think mr Watt managed to imagine his first motor if he didn't have a monetary incentive?
Sorry, but you don't actually "possess" information, no way. Intellectual Property is just a supposedly clever way to compensate information creators, and that's all there is about it.
Too bad IP laws actually favor much more the big copyrights or patents or trademarks holders of this world: the big corporations. I wonder if anybody has any sort of study about the demographics of IP "owners" (understand I'm using the term owner in a ironic tone). How many individuals do actually make a living out of them. How many work of arts are controlled by how many enterprises.
The basics: Freedom of one end where the freedom of others begin. And I don't see how the dispersion of ideas or memes can actually deprive or hurt someone (not considering the matter of secrets as far as this conversation go). The hilarious "Right to be compensated" doesn't look like directly hurting someone if not enforced (like if I steal your car or tivo), sorry. I don't buy the idea of Right to make a buck, or even more, the very notion that the government and international organisations must help you or me to make money.
Going by what you say, you wouldn't mind if georges lucas was changing his mind and saying "ok, I don't want star wars to exist anymore". If he is the "owner", like in the real world, then he can just come to you and ask you to erase from your mind the memories of the movies! That's quite a property notion you have there, giving part of your mind to content providers:-) Feeling lucky fair use exist? Or you think that it should be abolished and absolute control should be given to the owners???
I repeat, IP laws is a scheme to provide food to creators of this world, they are NOT the same as physical property, by far. And I consider they are so tortured and unfair that they shift any power away from creators who have no time and desire to fiddle with this. Do read courtney love's speech. Do consider why the offsprings are releasing their album online freely. And I thought you (the group of person defending IP laws) would very much defend liberty instead of enslavement: would defend free circulation instead of monopolies and artificial scarcity.
[Have I been ambushed by a band of trolls looking for fun (just wondering, don't want to sound rude)? I do find weird another post in that thread being moderated to 3 insightfull, could that be multiple accounts? Your account looking quite young too...]
I do wonder if the GPS feature of our future cell phones will be controlable by the user. I mean, will there be an off/on switch on the bloody thing? If yes, then go for it, I do like the idea of having a GPS to find my way, or when calling for rescue. If I can't control it, then I don't want it and I hope the market will not accept it either. Let's hope this feature is not required "by law" somehow...
Thinking about it, I believe the GPS feature turned on by obligation will not catch on, if only because so many just don't want their affairs to ever be known by their wife or husband. There was some big scandal in france about people being photographed while speeding with their car. The photo is then sent to their house where their conjoint then discover who was on the passenger seat:D
When you have the means to extend your power, you are morally required to do it!
It seems our governments are once again trying everything they can to protect us. Too bad they don't have the means to read our thoughts or to watch our every moves, it would be so much easier to track criminals, terrorists and pedophiles!
That's an interesting argument: "democratisation". Too bad there is a price tag attached. How do you assure everybody free access to culture? Libraries, schools are a good start.
What about third world countries? You apply special discounts. You add some more to their debts?
Compensation? Do you know that in france, only 3% of the total number of writers actually live by their writing. I expect an artist to create something because they want to communicate, not because they want money. Money is necessary, but it is not such a motivator in itself. Money is a common denominator in society, but not the goal of life in the universe.
Without democratic forms of compensation, you have highly centralized forms of compensation (Catholic church, communist governments, corporations, the wealthy elite). You really want to give them absolute control over what gets produced?
I most certainly don't, considering I'm very much leaning toward libertarian views. I go for no trademark, no copyright, no patent. No corporation owning and controling -for life- every bit of anime or book I've read when I was a kid. Thinking someone (possibly one CEO somewhere) has actually the power to take away asterix or matrix is real scary.
I think independant artists should be encouraged through -less protecting- show bizness. If shakespeare and homère (the greek one) made a living in such tough times, I'm not worried about stephen king or sharon stone. I go for decentralising content production, less power to the big studios and the multinational copyright holders!!!
Yes daddy, I'm probably stupid, if only answering you!
the right to be compensated, the right to come up with an idea, and make money on it. THAT IS WHAT CAPITALISUM IS ALL ABOUT. the other things you mentioned, market forces, contracts, exchanges etc. if you use your tiny little brain to think about it, with out the freedom (or right) to make money, those wouldn't exist, would they? yes, there may not be a social contract to sign etc. but that (to smart people) is implied by captialisum.
Ain't that a strong argument in favor of such a complex and centralised process.
Freedom of one ends where the freedom of other begin. And as far as I can see who do you hurt when infringing some "Intellectual Property"?
Or do you just think that not compensating hurts anybody? Particularly if you consider you might never encounter in any medium, or have any relation whatsoever to the "owner"? Or might not have "bought" (through choice or lack of money) the item.
And don't worry, I don't go around breaking laws (too bad ain't it?), but I appreciate talking about them, criticising them positively or negatively. And IP laws, although still in their infancy (only some 100 years old I believe), are real stupid ones!
And yes, "happy birtday to you" is "owned" by the familly of its author. They are hugely rich, which is fine for them, but what a good example of compensations being such a great motivator for the production of more of this great work (I'm being sarcastic, just want you to note it, considering how much more intelligent than me you are:-).
Right to be compensated... Is that in the universal declaration of human rights? In the bill of rights? In the US constitution? In a social contract we all have to sign when we come to life? oops, sorry, as of now and according to this WIPO treaty, babies will come in a shrink wrap license:-)
In what way is "right to be compensated" linked to capitalism? I thought capitalism was about market forces, contracts, exchanges, agreements. Not about a centralised system organising items and their values, artificially creating scarcity, which is exactly what the whole IP system is (just think how royalties are calculated).
As for my knowledge of laws, I'm not interested in what is 'currently' legal, but what is logical, or useful, or elegant. Because laws (eventually) evolve, and we can participate in the process.
Should I have to, not only pay someone, but actually ask if I'm allowed to, if I want to sing "happy birthday to you" to a baby???
What about a right to the free exchange of ideas, to the participation of everyone, even the poorest, to human's culture?
Exactly, and I'm going to do it using my memory improved brain, which relies heavily on digital hardware (/dev/hda).
You and me are already cyborgs. Computers, internet are more improvements which we will more and more qualify as parts of our selves.
You feel lessened without clothes or glasses (if you wear any)? So do I without computer/internet.
Somehow, the data in my hard drive is mine, just like the data in my organic memory. I may feel generous with some of it, and "share" it away:p
Funny thing is: if you (legally) hear a song, are you allowed to keep it stored into your brain?
Can you sing it again, maybe to your girlfriend?
Can you remember your experience, share it with anybody you like, consider it yours to spread or not?
Well, just imagine a hard drive is just an extension of your brain:-)
Once information is out, there is no way to put it back in. If you've read "the culture" books from banks, you might have encountered an interesting concept: the only form of private information is the information you keep to yourself:-D
Well, making software looks more like inventing the notion of "cabinet" (version 1.0) than producing one.
Software is a product of the mind, an artistic creation requiring ingenuity, just like imagining a cabinet, inventing the notion of wheel, discovering a geometric property (ex: pythagore theorem).
When was the last time you paid for your license of "Wheel 59.1.218(tm)"??? How much are the royalties on the bible? Who owns the copyright on "Ulysse's odissey"?.
VeniVidiVoti (Voting book)
on
Online Voting?
·
· Score: 1
I think this is relevant to the subject, although not directly. Here is a system proposing to democratically write any sort of text: VeniVidiVoti.
It's really not useable at the moment (but for the i18n part), but I'm working on it, and would gladly receive any feedback about the principles.
To resume them: they try to mix delegation and direct participation, thus would allow for a very lively sort of process. Although it would probably not apply to anything like laws, they could permit to democratically create any sort text for any sort of group.
Three chimps in a closed room. A banana is hanging from the ceiling. At first, they naturally try to reach and grab the banana, but at that very moment the floor is electrified, and kept that way until they stop. After a while, and a few more tries, they just don't think anymore about the banana. A chimp is taken out and a new introduced , he notices the banana and tries to reach for it. The two others jumps on him and teaches him the lesson the hard way. Another chimp is replaced, the new one enter and even before noticing the banana gets beaten up by the two more experienced chimps. The funny thing is that after a while no remaining chimp knows anymore about the electricity.
no idea if that's actually true, but I like the thought of it. (and sorry for my english)
Here is a new project attempting to provide a tool for groups to democratically write any sort of text: vvv.sourceforge.net. I believe it is related to this article.
I haven't thought deeply (yet) about authentification, anonymity and security, but as far as I can see, the bottom line rely on the administrator and how much you trust him... will he encrypt the database? Will he sell your data? Will he ensure his system is secure?
sorry for my url, altern is having legal trouble lately (douce france)
Slashdot Mirror
From this post and some of your earlier ones it would seem you are scared of the directions society is taking. And you think the trend has beeng going on for 200 years.
Sorry to disrupt your pessimism, but since the eden garden, it doesn't look like there have been many golden eras as there is now... Trash me saying the (cyber)world is bad and full of heresy (lol) and dirt and violence and obscenity, but there probably has never been a period with as many people and as long longevity (particularly in our part of the world, I know...)
Don't forget one of our greatest achievement: freedom (well, some at least). You can choose your lifestyle, disseminate your ideas all you want, but if you can't live with the compromises other individuals want from you, simply don't hang around them. Don't ask an exterior force to apply your "moral" to others, just live the way you want, and mayber try to convince others to do the same.
Not such a bad one, but they tend to stick too much to a crappy format: every episode is centered around bringing justice to innocent people, the larger tone is about constantly searching for long lost familly and avoiding paranoiac threats for overpowerfull "center" (well, playing cat and mouse really, because he is "so" smart :)
While bruner's hero is a genius lost in a constantly changing society without identity, he is actually without identity himself, just a poor soul really. He gets better when meeting this not very pretty girl with a strong personality (who is going to play that if the studios want to make it into a new bland movie?).
When getting to the end they actually move out of the big corporate world, into some sort of village made by refugees from a big catastroph (california's big one I think). Looks nice and very human, although its architecture seems much too organised to my taste (in the long term there is no such thing as chaos). I could do with one of their (genetically modified?) smart dogs nonetheless.
Read it a month ago, and loved it. [found it in a welsch library]
I still can't believe how the author managed to (seemingly easily) uncover layers after layers of superb techs, deep characters and paranoiac plots. For example Volyova, one of the spacefaring self modified and lonely "ultras" part of humanity, start as a cold bitch who doesn't mind manufacturing loyalty. No feeling, no remorse. While Khouri is stuff to make fantasies of. And yet they sort of end up on the same side of the fence, and you can actually feel the force of their characters when they rival sun stealer.
The pattern jugglers, an ocean able to record any information, and restitute it directly into your brain (when you go for a swim), is still something I have to sort out. I do wonder where the guy got his inspiration.
I love the formidable space suits, you couldn't believe what you can do with them, or what -it- can do with you. And I could do with an alpha record of me, or maybe just a beta, considering you are supposed to destroy your physical body when you undertake the former.
Nice review, nice novel.Well, it seems there is going to be two main outcomes:
-the government step in and assure its citizens their privacy is safe in its hand. Eventually abuses and scandals happen, public's interest is on, the law is changed to take away some of this power and to let the actors manage themselves.
-free market let the different actors decide for themselves. Abuses and scandals happen, public's interest is on, the companies or individuals involved get bad publicity, lose money and change their policies. If this happen a lot, laws are made to handle some of the recurrent problems.
From -my- libertarian POV, I go for the second solution (I generally prefer a contract than a law), it requires me to be critical about who I trust with my personal information, it gives me the freedom to not care or to be retentive.
But in both cases, there is going to be a swinging pendulum between laissez-faire and regulations, its energy coming from public's awareness.
I don't think I have lost any argument, certainly not against the "right to make a buck" guy (not saying this is you, just speaking about the thread). As for wondering about trolls, well, I was just wondering, no agenda on my part.
Patents and copyrights and trademarks are different, but still part of the same sort of control one can use on information. And at the end of the day, there's one thing I don't want to give up: the ability to share information I possess in my brain or my hard drive, the ability to share and swim in human culture. I believe ideas have never been priced before in history. By their very nature, memes try to survive and prosper alike genes.
You seem to only defend copyright (and maybe trademark), and I believe this stance is much more defendable.
But what are your main arguments? Incentive to create (produce?) more? Right to control what you have created? To me both arguments are deeply flawed and don't stand to scrutiny. Let's check demographics and weight freedom against monetary incentive. Let's consider if one person should be able to control or even remove "by law" something from human culture.
If shakespeare came back and desired to completely stop the diffusion and the use of his work, I would say sorry but no.
Who is making money on copyrights? Small bands? A few big artists? A few very big entreprises? Me, I say the guys with the lawiers :) Artists make their living through performances, through their fans, not by controling the flow of information.
Who are you in RL? What job do you have? What core beliefs do you hold? Isn't there something about progress? Why would you think scientists take such pride in the free flow of information? How do you think mr Watt managed to imagine his first motor if he didn't have a monetary incentive?
Sorry, but you don't actually "possess" information, no way. Intellectual Property is just a supposedly clever way to compensate information creators, and that's all there is about it.
Too bad IP laws actually favor much more the big copyrights or patents or trademarks holders of this world: the big corporations. I wonder if anybody has any sort of study about the demographics of IP "owners" (understand I'm using the term owner in a ironic tone). How many individuals do actually make a living out of them. How many work of arts are controlled by how many enterprises.
The basics: Freedom of one end where the freedom of others begin. And I don't see how the dispersion of ideas or memes can actually deprive or hurt someone (not considering the matter of secrets as far as this conversation go). The hilarious "Right to be compensated" doesn't look like directly hurting someone if not enforced (like if I steal your car or tivo), sorry. I don't buy the idea of Right to make a buck, or even more, the very notion that the government and international organisations must help you or me to make money.
Going by what you say, you wouldn't mind if georges lucas was changing his mind and saying "ok, I don't want star wars to exist anymore". If he is the "owner", like in the real world, then he can just come to you and ask you to erase from your mind the memories of the movies! That's quite a property notion you have there, giving part of your mind to content providers :-) Feeling lucky fair use exist? Or you think that it should be abolished and absolute control should be given to the owners???
I repeat, IP laws is a scheme to provide food to creators of this world, they are NOT the same as physical property, by far. And I consider they are so tortured and unfair that they shift any power away from creators who have no time and desire to fiddle with this. Do read courtney love's speech. Do consider why the offsprings are releasing their album online freely. And I thought you (the group of person defending IP laws) would very much defend liberty instead of enslavement: would defend free circulation instead of monopolies and artificial scarcity.
[Have I been ambushed by a band of trolls looking for fun (just wondering, don't want to sound rude)? I do find weird another post in that thread being moderated to 3 insightfull, could that be multiple accounts? Your account looking quite young too...]
Amen to you.
I do wonder if the GPS feature of our future cell phones will be controlable by the user. I mean, will there be an off/on switch on the bloody thing? If yes, then go for it, I do like the idea of having a GPS to find my way, or when calling for rescue. If I can't control it, then I don't want it and I hope the market will not accept it either. Let's hope this feature is not required "by law" somehow...
Thinking about it, I believe the GPS feature turned on by obligation will not catch on, if only because so many just don't want their affairs to ever be known by their wife or husband. There was some big scandal in france about people being photographed while speeding with their car. The photo is then sent to their house where their conjoint then discover who was on the passenger seat :D
When you have the means to extend your power, you are morally required to do it!
It seems our governments are once again trying everything they can to protect us. Too bad they don't have the means to read our thoughts or to watch our every moves, it would be so much easier to track criminals, terrorists and pedophiles!
(me being sarcastic)Compensation? Do you know that in france, only 3% of the total number of writers actually live by their writing. I expect an artist to create something because they want to communicate, not because they want money. Money is necessary, but it is not such a motivator in itself. Money is a common denominator in society, but not the goal of life in the universe.
I most certainly don't, considering I'm very much leaning toward libertarian views. I go for no trademark, no copyright, no patent. No corporation owning and controling -for life- every bit of anime or book I've read when I was a kid. Thinking someone (possibly one CEO somewhere) has actually the power to take away asterix or matrix is real scary.
I think independant artists should be encouraged through -less protecting- show bizness. If shakespeare and homère (the greek one) made a living in such tough times, I'm not worried about stephen king or sharon stone. I go for decentralising content production, less power to the big studios and the multinational copyright holders!!!
Ain't that a strong argument in favor of such a complex and centralised process.
Freedom of one ends where the freedom of other begin. And as far as I can see who do you hurt when infringing some "Intellectual Property"?
Or do you just think that not compensating hurts anybody? Particularly if you consider you might never encounter in any medium, or have any relation whatsoever to the "owner"? Or might not have "bought" (through choice or lack of money) the item.
And don't worry, I don't go around breaking laws (too bad ain't it?), but I appreciate talking about them, criticising them positively or negatively. And IP laws, although still in their infancy (only some 100 years old I believe), are real stupid ones!
And yes, "happy birtday to you" is "owned" by the familly of its author. They are hugely rich, which is fine for them, but what a good example of compensations being such a great motivator for the production of more of this great work (I'm being sarcastic, just want you to note it, considering how much more intelligent than me you are:-).
CU around. You're such an affable AC.
Right to be compensated... Is that in the universal declaration of human rights? In the bill of rights? In the US constitution? In a social contract we all have to sign when we come to life? oops, sorry, as of now and according to this WIPO treaty, babies will come in a shrink wrap license :-)
In what way is "right to be compensated" linked to capitalism? I thought capitalism was about market forces, contracts, exchanges, agreements. Not about a centralised system organising items and their values, artificially creating scarcity, which is exactly what the whole IP system is (just think how royalties are calculated).
As for my knowledge of laws, I'm not interested in what is 'currently' legal, but what is logical, or useful, or elegant. Because laws (eventually) evolve, and we can participate in the process.
Should I have to, not only pay someone, but actually ask if I'm allowed to, if I want to sing "happy birthday to you" to a baby???
What about a right to the free exchange of ideas, to the participation of everyone, even the poorest, to human's culture?
Exactly, and I'm going to do it using my memory improved brain, which relies heavily on digital hardware (/dev/hda). :p
You and me are already cyborgs. Computers, internet are more improvements which we will more and more qualify as parts of our selves.
You feel lessened without clothes or glasses (if you wear any)? So do I without computer/internet.
Somehow, the data in my hard drive is mine, just like the data in my organic memory. I may feel generous with some of it, and "share" it away
Funny thing is: if you (legally) hear a song, are you allowed to keep it stored into your brain? :-)
:-D
Can you sing it again, maybe to your girlfriend?
Can you remember your experience, share it with anybody you like, consider it yours to spread or not?
Well, just imagine a hard drive is just an extension of your brain
Once information is out, there is no way to put it back in. If you've read "the culture" books from banks, you might have encountered an interesting concept: the only form of private information is the information you keep to yourself
Well, making software looks more like inventing the notion of "cabinet" (version 1.0) than producing one.
Software is a product of the mind, an artistic creation requiring ingenuity, just like imagining a cabinet, inventing the notion of wheel, discovering a geometric property (ex: pythagore theorem).
When was the last time you paid for your license of "Wheel 59.1.218(tm)"??? How much are the royalties on the bible? Who owns the copyright on "Ulysse's odissey"?.
I think this is relevant to the subject, although not directly. Here is a system proposing to democratically write any sort of text: VeniVidiVoti.
It's really not useable at the moment (but for the i18n part), but I'm working on it, and would gladly receive any feedback about the principles.
To resume them: they try to mix delegation and direct participation, thus would allow for a very lively sort of process. Although it would probably not apply to anything like laws, they could permit to democratically create any sort text for any sort of group.
Three chimps in a closed room. A banana is hanging from the ceiling. At first, they naturally try to reach and grab the banana, but at that very moment the floor is electrified, and kept that way until they stop.
After a while, and a few more tries, they just don't think anymore about the banana.
A chimp is taken out and a new introduced , he notices the banana and tries to reach for it. The two others jumps on him and teaches him the lesson the hard way.
Another chimp is replaced, the new one enter and even before noticing the banana gets beaten up by the two more experienced chimps.
The funny thing is that after a while no remaining chimp knows anymore about the electricity.
no idea if that's actually true, but I like the thought of it.
(and sorry for my english)
Here is a new project attempting to provide a tool for groups to democratically write any sort of text: vvv.sourceforge.net. I believe it is related to this article.
I haven't thought deeply (yet) about authentification, anonymity and security, but as far as I can see, the bottom line rely on the administrator and how much you trust him... will he encrypt the database? Will he sell your data? Will he ensure his system is secure?
sorry for my url, altern is having legal trouble lately (douce france)