I see this as an enforcement arm for spying on buisiness and stealing secrets in the name of protecting copyrights as a ruse. They could essentially find out what company A might be up to by seizing computers claimed to be used in crime as they call it such.
They now search computers coming into the US or leaving for purposes which I bet have more than terrorism in mind.
If new technologies get crushed and undeveloped it will be people using these kinds of laws to hold information back and to classify research deemed a threat to national security. They are attempting to criminalize thinking, after all you can hum a song in your head, therefore you are infringing a copyright, since merely copying the song into your brain would still technically be stealing in their worldview.
People dld because they have had recording technologies like the cassette tape or VHS for decades. To imply now that all of that was illegal or should be illgal seems about 30-40 years after the fact, meaning they appear to be criminalizing a large share of the population by this measure, the point of view that has been articulated appears to me to fail to live up to any kind of realizable effect.
This would be like setting up a vehicle inspection police that would take your car away if you used it to go to places unauthorized by the manufacture.
Or if you used too much electricity and were deemed a threat to the environment and had your power turned off to protect the polar bears.
These laws merely move power from the domain of the computer user into the domain of the courtroom and attempt to negate the balance of power that has been redistributed back into the hands of the state. The state surely wants a monopoly on information by engaging in producing these stated laws. They simply think that by creating a monopoly of distribution they can scare people into their distribution.
When in fact you could buy music recordings made by artists and never buy a coprorate recording ever again, that my friends would be why they want a regulated market so they can destroy competition which has also eroded their disribution monopoly.
Too bad they appear inent on destroying the whole point of music which was to have fun. Not much fun in listeing to music if you can't listen to what you want.
As Wilhelm Reich once said, in a book that was burned by the Nazi's and the US in the 1950's:
"Man's authoritarian structure---this must be clearly established---is basically produced by the embedding of sexual inhibitions and fear in the living substance of sexual impulses."
"With the restriction and suppression of sexuality, the nature of human feeling changes; a sex-negating religion comes into being and gradually develops its own sex-political organization, the church with all its predecessors, the aim of which is nothing other than the eradication of man's sexual desires and consequently of what little happiness there is on earth. There is good reason for all this when seen from the perspective of the now thriving explotation of human labor."
a seven year old IS NOT MENTALLY FORMED ENOUGH TO CONSENT.
Umm, what happens when a seven year old starts masturbating in front of the relatives because they all of a sudden feel like it? Does that mean the parents should smack the childs hands and scream at them to stop abusing themselves? What scientific measurement are we talking about here about harm, or does this really just boil down to "dogma" "religion" "ideology" and "morality". If that forms the basis of the harm argument, then I think we have a witchhunt going on. You need to have a blood test to determine harm, where are the cancerous growths of body corruption and mental brain cell death? Seems like children are not sexual only to those that would bring about the new "hitler youth" and pledge allegiance to the "furor"? Afterall a person can be manipulated to beleive almost anything as long as they are sexually repressed and this has been proven to last well into adulthood if started early enough.
Children are dependent on someone therefore they need protection but to protect them from pleasuring themselves or being naked seems to ignore the natural reality of behavior. To pretend they are not sexual at all, simply pretends they have no feelings, of a sexual nature and therefore they are less human than ourselves. They are less rational based upon some kind of blood test? Where are these natural laws in terms of physical symptoms and can they be comparable to gravity?
Sexually liberated people fail to follow dictators, ergo we need repression to start at an early age if we want to be run by fascist dictators, therefore a politican thinks we need a fascist dictator to run our lives? These same people that want to protect our children could care less about the ones killed by vaccination or injured or the ones being pumped full of psychotropics so they express no sexual feelings let alone simple emotions, the lie maybe in the idea that to express sexual feeling as a young person means you are sick and need medication. To find pleasure gratifying means punishment to the child and hence the real threat to their minds. If they plasure themselves I guess that means they should get a lobotomy so they conform to the expectataions we have of them as a society?
I'm at a loss for words, I find the dishonesty of these measures to be appalling and non-rational. The middle east represents the MOST sexually repressed places on the planet, apparently the liberals want AMericans to be more like the Taliban.
I have a picture of myself taken of me naked as a child, it's my favorite, how dare you try to deny me the right to look at myself as a child in full nakedness. How dare you tell me what to think about myself and whether I can express a feeling towards my girlfriends when I was a teenager, stay out of our lives. I'm apparently abused according to all this hyperbole and insanity being thrown around, how dare you define for me my existence, as If I didn't already have enough problems with the economy and just getting a bit to eat. These censorship politicians make me feel sick. Thanks for turning me into a victim you bunch of morons.
They seem keen on censoring people's minds too. Not just porn but politics. These are the new liberals of change. The idea of change means calling all your enemies right wing extremists. Since this censorship coupled with economic collapse will result in increases of crime and violence or overall anarchy in the streets these politicians will reap a whirlwind of chaos and they won't even know what happened and how they created this environment of corruption. Pyramid scams will increase, hysteria will overtake rationality and there will be some that will feel happy with this except when they lose control over the outcome of their lives. If you are in a room full of liberals and speak your mind you will be ignored or shouted down, in reality the left are no less fascist then their arch enemies of the republicans. We've had newsgroups since the beginning, these morons might as well wipe out http to "save the children" and shuttle us all onto a disney land mall like architecture for shopping and sharing our tips on goods or products for sale, what a rip off. They killed radio and tv and now they seek to wreck the internet.
The founding fathers must have been child molesters too by these standards of free speech, we now implicate free speech as child porn. That basically sums up insanity. To think freedom means crime means war, civil war, and disaster. Why don't they just line us up and shoot us in the head and ditch us in the graves? Seems what they are aiming at, since they don't like free speech and equate it as child porn. Free speech means favoring child porn according to these geniuses. Since they are probably lying they must be planning somthing like 911 right now. Get your survival foods, ammo and guns, since Obama thinks we are all paranoid bible thumpers that are backwoods rednecks. The hatred of the south as well seems to be invasive like a diseased infection in the liberal democrats, they actually believe that people that live differnetly then themselves are stupid and if the government says so then it must be true. Dumb people make dumb laws but evil people make hell for everyone, these censorhip moves are evil, they are death star, darth vader like destructive. I don't like this child porn but I am not dumb, free speech on usenet doesn't equal child porn. These are semantic sicknesses being instituted through society. Freedom means slavery, etc. A redefining job, a twisting of language, a twisting of meaning. Laws on sex vary all over the planet and throughout all 50 states, only the muslims would rejoice at this kind of censorship, these laws belong to the taliban. Hey, they just censored all the media and we had 911, any connection between censored media and massive violence? Wake up people, wake up or they'll make more attacks. this has everything to do with power, violence and religion. Repression brings about a nazi like state of affairs. Ok liberals are you for censorship or freedom? Make up your minds because you sound worse than bible thumpers at his point. A single democrat decided to shut out free speech like a Mullah, he hate's speech doesn't that constitute "hate speech"? Can anyone answer that? Does hating speech mean you are a hate speech maker?
Just a thought but maybe they don't care because they are the ones doing so, or maybe it could be Viacom and RIAA MAfiaa MPAA doing the posting we all know how much they love NY and Spitzer and now Cuomo. Can't people figure that this people are running protection rackets and it happens to be the North Eastern seaboard that has begun our descent into middle eastern style sexual repression. Next he'll be calling for Shria Law to be enforced in NY city, thus the constitution dies from a thousand multicultural cuts to the trunk of the metaphorical tree.
You've got government wanting to bomb the world, media companies wanting to control communication, sexually repressed mentally ill wanting to inflict maximum lowering of intelligence on the rest of us wild eyed sexual freaks and political radicals, which will of course lead to fighting in streets rather than on the messege boards, which maybe where the morons in the war on drugs want this to go, where they can inflict the sadistic pleasure they so greedily desire with their safe sex rubber bullets and clergymen with billyclubs can get off all they want on bashing the protesters heads in.
Obama means a war on speech, MCcain means a war on movement and speech, funny they both want to stop speech, what a coincidence. I bet the kids will revolt when they figure out what this war has costed them and they come back from the gulf to a censored internet, it'll probably be cops busting the heads of ex-soldiers from the gulf demanding their rights back, this will be a nasty next 4 years maybe.
I was thinking wouldn't it be easy to create a backdoor? You know a way to put things on the net that could then be used to destroy people's ability to communicate. Nobody knows who posted the stuff for all we know the government could have been the posters, right, you know like planting a gun or drugs on the suspect. Then Cuomo comes along and plays the good cop. Afterall the feds have THE largest database of child porn on the planet, maybe they might be doing something with it other than using it to identify the victims?
Without it the objectives of creating a repressed mass cannot be achieved. We are supposed to have seperation of powers, what these moves signify are that "rule of law" has now borken down, Industry and government have started to collude to such a degree as to undermine the liberties they are entrusted to provide via communication networks.
When there are no seperation of powers between branchs or industry we will see total tyranny. We have to get in the way and shut this and other moves down, they are declaring war on freedom itself. This century might very well fulfill total nuclear annhilation, and the faster communication gets slowed or shut down the sooner we will have all out war and anarchy. They must want this to happen, otherwise why short circuit the economy and the communication infrastructure.
If they think this will bring about world peace they are fools. If one can sexual repress the young than one can effectively control the masses through mysticism and fascism. Masses will then seek out a dictator to fullfill the desires and ideas they are repressed from and lack. This happened in Germany in the 1930's. If we are seeing a repeat then there will truly be massive destruction and warfare in the near future, I'm afraid that this needs to be sent all over the net, people need to understand the ramifications of censorship and sexual repression.
The problem with your ideas of finding people amounts to where in the world are you going to go and decide what constitutes child porn? In canada age of consent appears to be 14 in mexico 12 and on and on. Give me a break if you think we can impose law on the entire planet that will just lead to bombs flying around because in the long run this maybe about more than porn, this actually has more to do with the value of life. Why on the one hand can we bomb a hospital full of sick kids and come up with excuses for that behavior and then decide for kids what they can and can;t do with their bodies? Seems to me that it's perfectly ok to bomb them to pieces but not to observe them naked or heaven forbide that those kids might engage in this behavior on their own. For these things the net should be censored? Seems like more kids will get bombed the more censored the net becomes, can't you understand the connection? Life becomes even less valuable the less you protect the right to communicate. I would rather their be free speech and some things that I disagree with than no free speech and bodies in pieces on the 6 o clock news? Sexual repression leads to fascism. When looking at political actions ask yourself "what would hitler do?" Hitler would be for shutting down the usenet and he would applaud the efforts of the ISP's to get rid of the alternatives to one true media source.
You could say the same about radio, bicycles, printing presses, atari 2600, but you'd still be wrong, they are relevant because some kid in the future will discover them and reinvent them or be inspired by these inventions to make something even better. Where has the sense of wonder and discovery gone, I'll tell you where it has gone.
Spitzer was hunting prostitutes on a regular basis and then was caught red handed with his hand in the cookie jar, ala J.Edgar Hoover. Now Cuomo goes looking for "child porn" and finds it, doesn't that constitute a crime, somebody should sue him, what he did ala looking at child porn constitutes a crime, maybe he has an issue with this stuff like Spitzer, maybe he might be another Hoover waiting to occur. Just one more hyper sexually repressed fascist. You might not be shocked to think these politicians should get slapped with stickers on their bumpers saying "what would hitler do?", maybe they deserve it for attempting to shutdown the free international communication networks.
I don't trust his judgement. 88 groups constitutes some kind of threat? Maybe in a hyper paranoid and hyper repressed way to people that are scared of a naked anything, this will surely protect nobody but his voting position in the appearance of morality and repressed sexuality. These are the kinds of people that arrest teens for filming themselves. He seems mentally ill, because young people have sex and this doesn't stop it. We were all young once and all did crazy stuff, if you say no your a liar or I'm sorry that your teenage years were not more ideal and crazy. But to hear him talk you'd think the world was ending, which of course it doe not end. The real sick people will just go elsewhere where he can't find them, which makes this move on his part naive and ignorant, or calculated for other reasons. he would probably have a few bones in his closet and I'd be shocked if he became the governor. Spitzer was a walking contradiction and this guy seems cut from the same cloth, we'll see.
Last time I checked the Constitution says "any" restriction of the free press would be a violation of the first amendment, not "some", not "community standards". And the reason for this was to protect us from politicians, government from destroying our means of communication, by the stroke of the pen these ISP's just roll over and play dead and yet they are entrusted with keeping the communication channels open, oh I suppose only open in the ways the NSA can easily sift, maybe they feel it too much work to have to go through and moniter the newsgroups so why not just shut it down, then flash to 4 years from now and the same method gets used to close any "unmonitored" free networks of communication, at this rate they might as well start placing cameras in your homes, you tube becomes the auxillary of the NSA via Viacom which should be better described as Via communist media monopoly. Ah, we'll just invent something else to make them all scratch their heads in astonishment at the cleverness and then they will need another 20 years to catch up.
Now that the French hate information I suppose the rest of Europe should follow suit. Seems to be a bit psycho to take information and make it illegal. reminds me of the Inquisition trying desperatly to force people to believe that the sun revolves around the earth.
Old europe happily bringing about the conditions that created massive wars and massive destruction by blocking the free flow of communication and information. Total control equals total tyranny. Which brings about global war. Since they can't get you to go to war for them they will now make you live a life of exclusion. The taboos must be enforced and the heathens kicked out of the holy church of tryanny.
Here comes professional disabling, an attempt by "experts" to project amature and inferiority upon the masses and to make their media a one way communication. Actually this could create more dysfunction more crashing of economies. Who would want to contribute anything to a society that excludes free expression and free speech? Oligarchy here they come. Anarchy will be the reaction of course and these people are already agent provocaturing by trying to exclude criticism. They only want their ideas and solutions to be followed and known. Instead of increase of knowledge and communication these governments are advocating anti-communication, anti-freedom, anti-intellectualism.
These ISP's have basically thrown in the towel on the users. They simply don't care if everyone gets dumped down to 1gb per day or 40gb per month, they say use another usenet provider, "child porn"! has wiped out everything else, just to satisfy some guy in NY and a bunch of super ultra paranoid liberal democrats that think free speech means what people say on the TV and everything else has been banned. They would burn books if given the chance, in fact they grab people and throw them in jail in Europe and now Canada for writing subversive literature, as if the words are the same as an act? These people are mentally ill, they will destroy free speech, once that goes war, murder, plauges, bombs and bloodshed will surely follow. Say goodbye to western civilization all in the name of protecting the children...I mean.005 percent of the children that are victims. Now 100% of anything else gets wiped out, Usenet has been around for 20 plus years and now they pull the plug so Hate groups can practice brainwashing on the face of the Internet? Actually, that maybe just an excuse, now they will roll out the dollar per mile pricing scheme, that will surely slow us down, of course it will crash the economy as well, not very smart these people at the ISP's. Just what we need LESS use of the internet, LESS purchases until we can turn it into kindergarten for grownups. People are so paranoid about sex in general and just mention in the news over and over that the children are being abused and people go into a moral frenzy and behave absolutely like wackos.
Forget about freedom, the northeast liberal establishment wants to throw this country into civil war and are hell bent on censoring everything they don't like, at least the right had a little smarts, these people on the left simply use fear and violence to intimidate people into not talking.
Soon, you will be paying your state to drive $1 per mile through the insurance, your internet provider $1 per gigabyte while there are terabyte plus drives for only pennies per gigabyte, these people want to go backwards to dial up days. And of course they will also charge you for each item you want to download, then the internet will become a ghost town and they can implement the restructuring of the net into a cable tv style neutered and spayed corporate playground, of course they will have porn just like they have on cable and satellite today, except none of us will have a spot at the table for our videos or our music or thoughts. No activity equals no checks and balances, no balance of powers, just free reign for the people that want a fascist techno serfdom, and just a few years ago people would have laughed at the idea, now we see the actions as fact, not much else left to do but completely storm the gates of the barricade if these insane costs and increases shut out alternative media and voices.
Instead of the cult of the amature as some book tried to scare the net with the real threat would be that writer and the "cult of the oligarch fascists". A blogger would not be to be feared, the tyrant and person that wants to put a dollar sign on everything on this planet .
When I ran a blog on politics a couple years ago somebody kept uploading porno links into my comments section, i later found they originated from government addresses, possibly hacked machines or somebody trying to trash my site that doesn't like my politics. Maybe somebody did this to him, or he just thought it didn't matter what he did on his computer. Apparently having a penis while being a Judge has become a crime, but the weird stuff would likely be a weird sense of humor, but most people are incapable of finding humor in stupid pictures, I never get forwarded stupid pictures in long chain emails created by stupid people?
They are waging war against cognitive liberty. They don't want any mind to be free of their controlling systems. Therefore all information must be "verified" and "trusted". The war on drugs really maybe better titled a war on cognitive liberty, these attempts to control computers falls under the same heading as a war on cognitive liberty. Your opinions apparently maybe against the law. This has a chilling effect. If you can be shut up, locked up, or stopped from being free then you will be controlled, medicated with pharmaceuticals and pumped full of information thought control propaganda. This represents an attempt at coercion. They want to coerce everyone into a jail or steal their information and pirate it so there can be no competition with media oligopolies. This bill should be called the "Oligopoly Media protection" bill.
Say goodbye to Google, Yahoo, You Tube, etc. ad infinitum. Why would you just seize private citizens computers when these companies have so much more to get at. This law disrespects constituional protections against search and seizure. These sound like communist dreams. To be able to seize anybody brain extension simply if it has dubious information, would lead to iinsane censorship on par with totalitarianism. In the houses world everything on computers must be Illegal, therefore all computers belong to the state. All your base belong to the state, the ultimate hacker pirate of all would become the State. They would steal your songs if you don't copyright and pay them the fee, even if you create your own songs. They want to steal everything kind of how they like to make paper currency and just by default.
They stole your Social Security, now the criminals want your papers and effects.
This would be mistaken and erroneous legal work. The presumption can not be that a person maybe guilty of something, in fact this bill decides such by implicating that concealed identity commits a crime or would be indicative of guilt. Guilt can not be established on the basis of refusal to give identification, this would be anti-constitutional and would violate his oath of office as a political representative. This needs to be brought to the attention of his community what he has done here.
Similarly in our space of news-making, many people are asking how the blogosphere can be
controlled, can become more responsible.
Responsible to whom? Lawyers? They are just as prone to corruption as any groupe of
anarchists. Besides they also are financial vultures just waiting for a government mandated
opportunity to swoope down and utilize their uncreative and unfree agendas.
Does anonymity, for example of wikileaks, have to be curtailed?
Surveillance maybe nothing more than a tool of those that seek to deprive indivuals of their
power, power to think, power to act and power to function independent of experts and
social norms, without these the internet would simply evaporate, why would someone use
such a system controlled by people that essentially deprive others of freedom. Why would
anyone trust not just the internet but government itself? There are no incentives to
cooperate with a government when they specifically seek to confuse and distract individuals
so they can foster a attachment of individuals to outsiders that are the experts, only
experts capable of answering life's problems and also only experts having permission alone
to act in a entirely fascist or communist system. Nobody would go along with that, an
attempt to control the net would result in anarchy in the real world instead of the net.
"The anarchy of the bottom right does not produce much order beyond the small-scale, and
is largely parasitic on other orders."
What, parasitic? How could a bunch of small groups of people or individuals alone be
refered to as some kind of virus incapable of creating anything? They create so much that
maybe considered the best of community. For someone to say that I by myself can't
produce thousands of thoughts, books, songs, artwork and then share those with the
world and not effect a natural anarchist order seems absurd. Nature maybe nothing more
than Anarchic Harmony.Oligarchy and the purported objective frame of reference leads to
toxic outcomes, how does anyone know for certain that malware maybe only made by
anarchists? Maybe the government and corporations are actively creating these products
on purpose to shutdown possibilities to maintain market dominance.
"So which code is it that makes you good? Not actually open source computer code, but the
normative codes of institutions. In the cyber-world, each web-site with a community around
it becomes its own polis, and it is life in the polis that makes virtue and fulfillment possible."
Community alone cannot fulfill the entire equation, community will be there with you when
you die, you have to understand that if one cannot be an individual than no community will
ever make any sense. The notion that what we see with our eyes can be entirely agreed
upon to represent reality ignores the modern sciences. Even amongst communities people
differ markedly in not just perception but outcome. Many people pursuing various oscillating
processes will naturally appear chaotic to the ignorant, make the oligarch get over such
reality, not the other way around, the world we live in simply can't be serialzed and
measured with any confidence, without forgetting that the map is not the territory. These
virtual worlds are merely maps, we choose to believe in whatever we see, creating belief
systems, these systems can chain us down, in fact they mostly do without even any help
from governments or corporations. Citizenship maybe nothing, citizen of what? What time
or place are citizens of, all can occur and be apprehended nonsimultaneously. Reality can
be apprehended nonsimultaneously, just because some grouop agrees that one argument in
medicine appears correct doesn't mean that another individual or group has figured out a
falw and maybe working diligently to comphrehend and extract meaning from the data while
most are blindly unaware of the refutation and grow so large as to overtake all discussion.
Size and prestige alone are no indicator of truth.
To assert and imply that there are no arguments against the chemical basis for depression maybe similar to arguing that chemistry can solve any or all problems in the brain, as if no other models over brain function work.
There are many ways to approach a model on brain function that utilize a framework not based entirely on chemical reactions, but if the mind controls the body, then shouldn't people that are bombarded with negative thoughts or negative outcomes exhibit specific identifiable characteristics that can be tracked and traced over time and therefore be shown to modify whether or not one takes drugs to modify these expressions or not. Couldn't the brain maybe modify the chemical structure alone after repeated exposure to negative emotions or thoughts and defy the model of depression by subverting these processes from overriding the function of the brain?
To believe that brain modification only occurs under specific conditions mostly direct chemical stimulation or inhibition confers too much authority to the chemical model alone. Chemicals are you but you are not chemicals alone, some force acts upon the brain that has eluded science even to this day, I think maybe that explains the function of placebo as well as spontaneous remission in cancer patients. These outcomes defy chemical models by themselves as sole actors and creators of outcomes. There are many books written by educated PHD's and MD's that refute the chemical model acting alone and refute the "imbalance" model as well.
My question maybe more along the lines of how do people whom exhibit depression yet have no verifiable chemical imbalance through the use of modern tools for measurement such as FMRI still fall into a imbalance model? There appears to me at least some major reasearch awaiting funding on why some people don't exhibit the same chemical reactions when placed under observation, why brains can differ to such large measured degrees and why some people that don't measure out at all under the current tools of observation still request and state depression for reasons other than malingering.
Personally, I am growing weary of a chemical based solution for a few reasons.
1. People can behave badly and blame the behavior on a genetic trait out of there ability to control. 2. People can ignore very uncomfotable information and thoughts that have to be accounted for and understood by making their minds unconscious and unaware through drug modification, this especially can be useful to governments for obvious bad purposes. 3. Free will seems to be contradicted through a chemical model theory, without such ability to make the world around you through action why would a person bother to attempt to improve themselves, why would one change or grow if the model only allows for strict chemical adherance to a specific set of chemistry laws. 4. With one model held above all others, that pretty much turns the argument into a finished research, when in fact too many anomalies exist to rule out possible dangers in the use of many of the drugs that are currently offered as harmless, as someone else said "like candy" to people. What are the long term effects of useage and what are the effects of dependency and who benefits from major usage as well as model paradigm control over the reasearch. 5. Where do chemical drugs that are "bad" fit into the brain models, such as non-addictive chemicals such as LSD, etc. Do these drugs simply go into a dustbin due to moral ignorance? Or do we have many studies yet to undertake that are currently being repressed to support more harmful and addictive approaches?
I would encourage anyone in the drug chemical paradigm to consider other fields of research including physics as well as other areas of research in reading materials such as Blaming the brain, or Toxic Psychiatry by Breggin. There are many people that disagree with the current fad over the tools of measurement being capable of representing all of neurological understanding. Another thing to keep in mind maybe the
People can buy gasoline without a license, checmicals and poisons, knives and blunt objects. Not to mention tools such as saws, ice picks, etc. Why would guns have to be banned anymore than all of the above. If a nut wanted to kill a bunch of people they could make bombs out of parts from all over the place. If you don't trust me and other people whom don't have nuclear weapons or various other tanks and missles, then why do you trust them in the hands of the government, when history appears to give numerous examples of governments gone bad. Why disarm yourself but give guns to strangers especially when you have a family with children to protect, people that hate guns appear to hate families protecting themselves from criminals or government criminals. Criminals don't only exist in the private sector, please think about what I just said.
Anyone that wants to create and pass more and more laws forbidding more and more behavior needs to get their heads examined. As far as this goes, just forget about it...the future will be vastly different than a centralized electrical grid system because there maybe no real purpose of having a system that can be easily taken down by people with some gasoline and a few matches. To think that someone would need a computer to destroy the grid maybe more akin to fantasy. Remember the recent blackouts that occured thanks to a bird? How many times do we need to have the fact of "total" deregulation put into effect with home generation systems based on the new cheap and efficient solar paneling now coming onto market and we also need to have cars that can also run a house come onto market we are still thinking in the 1950's kind of pattern and it needs to be shattered into a new paradigm. The old paradigm of massive internet providers instead of local wifi or massive electrical plants for homes instead of tiny self contained units should be about over, if we can decentralized computers then we should do the same for the grid, it maybe time for the society to crawl out of the womb.
What also tends to be forgotten maybe that Major Labels desperately want people to believe that their artists are good and valuable. In a sense these laws tend to make people think that these companies sell something of value instead of some other artists on some other small labels or some out of print lost classic, etc. If people are not shown to be wanting their product then maybe that would be bad business. They desperately need people to want their music but when people share artists that are unknown to most people or are on small labels that cuts the large label out of the market. Competition maybe driving them into obscurity, for many years specific artists and specific ages have dominated the recording industry, this has recently changed and become less prevalent due to home recoding technologies and the internet. These older artists and business critters feel no longer in control of their fans, so they resort to lawsuits and threats in an attempt to scare people away from other artists or internet communications. Maybe these RIAA critters would rather abuse potential uses of technology by creating "class war" with teirs of privelege and one class with the rights to do whatever they want, namely one involving themselves. In the industry you can find fairly common the practice of artists sharing recordings of their projects with one another, this has always existed even prior to the net there were huge underground bootleg vinyl presses. The idea that these practices can stop because new technology exists seems a bit misguided and ignorant of historical precedent, tapes, DAT, cd, etc. These technologies can be considered both legal and illegal, depending on your point of view and frame of mind, as well as political or religious persuasion. In some societies music maybe something akin to dangerous devilish nonesense. We don't need this kind of ignorance anymore than we need the ignorance that seeks to restrict free access to information in societies such as the west. All of these restrictions maybe bring about more problems and distortions of reality into narrow possibilities. If you can restrict what I see or hear, you can manipulate my mind, if you have the power to manipulate my mind, you can brainwash me and make me buy, worship, or kill for access to what you provide by your ability to restrict or control my access to it. Religions have much in common with science and politics. If you can convince people that they are small, unimportant and insignificant you can also convince them that you have the answer to what troubles their hearts and minds. Do what thou wilt...not do what I wilt, as most politicians or religious nutjobs prefer to exclaim. It's up to you to think about who really has control over your own mind and your own society, letting reactionaries lead you into their grasp will only cause them to tighten their grip. I'm sure or certain that as technology advances it will begin to seem almost magical and began to take on a mystical experience, if not already, these people are trying to sue their way into being priests of an era to which they don't belong. Most of the art and music that has been created over the past 10 to 15 years fundamentally differs from anything that occured during the last 50 years, just pick up a WIRE magazine if you are unsure of what I say. Art and music today doesn't fit with a model of the 1950's. We live in a world that maybe changing so rapidly for the foreseeable future that to try to arrest this change will only serve to increase it's exponential growth. Maybe these critters at the RIAA are just as scared of the future as your average middle eastern muslim, does that mean we should accept thier arbitrary distinctions of reality just to make them feel good, so they won't sue or attack us? Of course not. Maybe they will have to come around to the way the world evolved without them instead, maybe these are just the birth pangs of something far better, far more vibrant and eclectic as well as just. Maybe freedom brings with it resonsibility to accept those with whom you curren
They are operating more like an oligarchy and cartel then a free society. They choose to go after people that want to "communicate" with each other, whom want to talk, share speech, art, ideas because information leads to power. If you are informed you can defend yourself, you can dispute, dissent, etc. This they are against 100%. No questions, No answers just follw orders, follow instructions, do as you're told. It's no more logically than promising you a hundred virgins in heaven, they are the terrorists, they simply can't have people talking and expressing doubts on the war on drugs, war on terror, etc. The internet makes their jobs impossible and instead of giving up they now want to go after those responsible for their disenfranchisement. They feel powerless to stop anything going on, so the easiest solution might be to criminalize everyone then if you step out of line, speak up, protest, etc. you get dunked. That's fascism plain and simple. Profit off of ideas? It's the same principle that garners profit off of paper money. It's pure information that makes no bones about it's abundance, abundance equals death to monopoly control. Like a faucet for a society to drink from, if you restrict it and charge a fee people will do whatever they can to follow your orders. Announce it's freely available or that you have no control over where it rains and how much, then they lose control. Nature doesn't feel sorry for the RIAA or the record companies or the movies, nature doesn't care if you are destroyed in a car accident or eaten by a lion in the mountains, the same for people caught up in this "New Inquistion". These people were right at one time in the past when science was more controlled and the world was a differnet place, but today the world simply will not evolve properly with such ridiculous controls put in place, in fact I predict that the more information becomes restricted the more violent conflict across the globe will break out, call that "Peterson's law", although I must admit I haven't brought out my evidence yet, I think the founders knew this and that might be why the 1st amendment brings so much value to the world. Where you find stringent law enforcement of speech you find a equal correlation to violence either projected at outsiders or upon those indwelling in the society. There's probably a few anomalys but maybe not.
Kinda reminds me of the idea of gun confiscation...how much you want to bet the same people pusing these restrictions on speech also love restrictions on guns. You can have it when you pry it from my cold dead fingers as they say. These might be the beginning of national socialism as we know it. First they eviscerate the idea of our basic founding and now they want to censor and control the media, just like any two bit dictator in some far off country, except now America might better fit that model.
and announce that were "all under arrest", that's obviously what they are trying to do, why do it slice by slice or step by step.
Maybe a million-man black ski masked anarchist march will grab their attention in WDC. "right to assemble" if we are not left alone.
Slashdot Mirror
This just increases' paranoia and anxiety, what a waste of taxpayer dollars.
I see this as an enforcement arm for spying on buisiness and stealing secrets in the name of protecting copyrights as a ruse. They could essentially find out what company A might be up to by seizing computers claimed to be used in crime as they call it such. They now search computers coming into the US or leaving for purposes which I bet have more than terrorism in mind. If new technologies get crushed and undeveloped it will be people using these kinds of laws to hold information back and to classify research deemed a threat to national security. They are attempting to criminalize thinking, after all you can hum a song in your head, therefore you are infringing a copyright, since merely copying the song into your brain would still technically be stealing in their worldview. People dld because they have had recording technologies like the cassette tape or VHS for decades. To imply now that all of that was illegal or should be illgal seems about 30-40 years after the fact, meaning they appear to be criminalizing a large share of the population by this measure, the point of view that has been articulated appears to me to fail to live up to any kind of realizable effect. This would be like setting up a vehicle inspection police that would take your car away if you used it to go to places unauthorized by the manufacture. Or if you used too much electricity and were deemed a threat to the environment and had your power turned off to protect the polar bears. These laws merely move power from the domain of the computer user into the domain of the courtroom and attempt to negate the balance of power that has been redistributed back into the hands of the state. The state surely wants a monopoly on information by engaging in producing these stated laws. They simply think that by creating a monopoly of distribution they can scare people into their distribution. When in fact you could buy music recordings made by artists and never buy a coprorate recording ever again, that my friends would be why they want a regulated market so they can destroy competition which has also eroded their disribution monopoly. Too bad they appear inent on destroying the whole point of music which was to have fun. Not much fun in listeing to music if you can't listen to what you want.
As Wilhelm Reich once said, in a book that was burned by the Nazi's and the US in the 1950's:
"Man's authoritarian structure---this must be clearly established---is basically produced by the embedding of sexual inhibitions and fear in the living substance of sexual impulses."
"With the restriction and suppression of sexuality, the nature of human feeling changes; a sex-negating religion comes into being and gradually develops its own sex-political organization, the church with all its predecessors, the aim of which is nothing other than the eradication of man's sexual desires and consequently of what little happiness there is on earth. There is good reason for all this when seen from the perspective of the now thriving explotation of human labor."
Complacent sheep....we look like morons, letting them play with election results in such flagrent manner.
a seven year old IS NOT MENTALLY FORMED ENOUGH TO CONSENT.
Umm, what happens when a seven year old starts masturbating in front of the relatives because they all of a sudden feel like it? Does that mean the parents should smack the childs hands and scream at them to stop abusing themselves? What scientific measurement are we talking about here about harm, or does this really just boil down to "dogma" "religion" "ideology" and "morality". If that forms the basis of the harm argument, then I think we have a witchhunt going on. You need to have a blood test to determine harm, where are the cancerous growths of body corruption and mental brain cell death? Seems like children are not sexual only to those that would bring about the new "hitler youth" and pledge allegiance to the "furor"? Afterall a person can be manipulated to beleive almost anything as long as they are sexually repressed and this has been proven to last well into adulthood if started early enough.
Children are dependent on someone therefore they need protection but to protect them from pleasuring themselves or being naked seems to ignore the natural reality of behavior. To pretend they are not sexual at all, simply pretends they have no feelings, of a sexual nature and therefore they are less human than ourselves. They are less rational based upon some kind of blood test? Where are these natural laws in terms of physical symptoms and can they be comparable to gravity?
Sexually liberated people fail to follow dictators, ergo we need repression to start at an early age if we want to be run by fascist dictators, therefore a politican thinks we need a fascist dictator to run our lives? These same people that want to protect our children could care less about the ones killed by vaccination or injured or the ones being pumped full of psychotropics so they express no sexual feelings let alone simple emotions, the lie maybe in the idea that to express sexual feeling as a young person means you are sick and need medication. To find pleasure gratifying means punishment to the child and hence the real threat to their minds. If they plasure themselves I guess that means they should get a lobotomy so they conform to the expectataions we have of them as a society?
I'm at a loss for words, I find the dishonesty of these measures to be appalling and non-rational. The middle east represents the MOST sexually repressed places on the planet, apparently the liberals want AMericans to be more like the Taliban.
I have a picture of myself taken of me naked as a child, it's my favorite, how dare you try to deny me the right to look at myself as a child in full nakedness. How dare you tell me what to think about myself and whether I can express a feeling towards my girlfriends when I was a teenager, stay out of our lives. I'm apparently abused according to all this hyperbole and insanity being thrown around, how dare you define for me my existence, as If I didn't already have enough problems with the economy and just getting a bit to eat. These censorship politicians make me feel sick. Thanks for turning me into a victim you bunch of morons.
They seem keen on censoring people's minds too. Not just porn but politics. These are the new liberals of change. The idea of change means calling all your enemies right wing extremists. Since this censorship coupled with economic collapse will result in increases of crime and violence or overall anarchy in the streets these politicians will reap a whirlwind of chaos and they won't even know what happened and how they created this environment of corruption. Pyramid scams will increase, hysteria will overtake rationality and there will be some that will feel happy with this except when they lose control over the outcome of their lives. If you are in a room full of liberals and speak your mind you will be ignored or shouted down, in reality the left are no less fascist then their arch enemies of the republicans. We've had newsgroups since the beginning, these morons might as well wipe out http to "save the children" and shuttle us all onto a disney land mall like architecture for shopping and sharing our tips on goods or products for sale, what a rip off. They killed radio and tv and now they seek to wreck the internet.
The founding fathers must have been child molesters too by these standards of free speech, we now implicate free speech as child porn. That basically sums up insanity. To think freedom means crime means war, civil war, and disaster. Why don't they just line us up and shoot us in the head and ditch us in the graves? Seems what they are aiming at, since they don't like free speech and equate it as child porn. Free speech means favoring child porn according to these geniuses. Since they are probably lying they must be planning somthing like 911 right now. Get your survival foods, ammo and guns, since Obama thinks we are all paranoid bible thumpers that are backwoods rednecks. The hatred of the south as well seems to be invasive like a diseased infection in the liberal democrats, they actually believe that people that live differnetly then themselves are stupid and if the government says so then it must be true. Dumb people make dumb laws but evil people make hell for everyone, these censorhip moves are evil, they are death star, darth vader like destructive. I don't like this child porn but I am not dumb, free speech on usenet doesn't equal child porn. These are semantic sicknesses being instituted through society. Freedom means slavery, etc. A redefining job, a twisting of language, a twisting of meaning. Laws on sex vary all over the planet and throughout all 50 states, only the muslims would rejoice at this kind of censorship, these laws belong to the taliban. Hey, they just censored all the media and we had 911, any connection between censored media and massive violence? Wake up people, wake up or they'll make more attacks. this has everything to do with power, violence and religion. Repression brings about a nazi like state of affairs. Ok liberals are you for censorship or freedom? Make up your minds because you sound worse than bible thumpers at his point. A single democrat decided to shut out free speech like a Mullah, he hate's speech doesn't that constitute "hate speech"? Can anyone answer that? Does hating speech mean you are a hate speech maker?
Just a thought but maybe they don't care because they are the ones doing so, or maybe it could be Viacom and RIAA MAfiaa MPAA doing the posting we all know how much they love NY and Spitzer and now Cuomo. Can't people figure that this people are running protection rackets and it happens to be the North Eastern seaboard that has begun our descent into middle eastern style sexual repression. Next he'll be calling for Shria Law to be enforced in NY city, thus the constitution dies from a thousand multicultural cuts to the trunk of the metaphorical tree.
You've got government wanting to bomb the world, media companies wanting to control communication, sexually repressed mentally ill wanting to inflict maximum lowering of intelligence on the rest of us wild eyed sexual freaks and political radicals, which will of course lead to fighting in streets rather than on the messege boards, which maybe where the morons in the war on drugs want this to go, where they can inflict the sadistic pleasure they so greedily desire with their safe sex rubber bullets and clergymen with billyclubs can get off all they want on bashing the protesters heads in.
Obama means a war on speech, MCcain means a war on movement and speech, funny they both want to stop speech, what a coincidence. I bet the kids will revolt when they figure out what this war has costed them and they come back from the gulf to a censored internet, it'll probably be cops busting the heads of ex-soldiers from the gulf demanding their rights back, this will be a nasty next 4 years maybe.
I was thinking wouldn't it be easy to create a backdoor? You know a way to put things on the net that could then be used to destroy people's ability to communicate. Nobody knows who posted the stuff for all we know the government could have been the posters, right, you know like planting a gun or drugs on the suspect. Then Cuomo comes along and plays the good cop. Afterall the feds have THE largest database of child porn on the planet, maybe they might be doing something with it other than using it to identify the victims?
Without it the objectives of creating a repressed mass cannot be achieved. We are supposed to have seperation of powers, what these moves signify are that "rule of law" has now borken down, Industry and government have started to collude to such a degree as to undermine the liberties they are entrusted to provide via communication networks.
When there are no seperation of powers between branchs or industry we will see total tyranny. We have to get in the way and shut this and other moves down, they are declaring war on freedom itself. This century might very well fulfill total nuclear annhilation, and the faster communication gets slowed or shut down the sooner we will have all out war and anarchy. They must want this to happen, otherwise why short circuit the economy and the communication infrastructure.
If they think this will bring about world peace they are fools. If one can sexual repress the young than one can effectively control the masses through mysticism and fascism. Masses will then seek out a dictator to fullfill the desires and ideas they are repressed from and lack. This happened in Germany in the 1930's. If we are seeing a repeat then there will truly be massive destruction and warfare in the near future, I'm afraid that this needs to be sent all over the net, people need to understand the ramifications of censorship and sexual repression.
Freud called it "the return of the repressed".
The problem with your ideas of finding people amounts to where in the world are you going to go and decide what constitutes child porn? In canada age of consent appears to be 14 in mexico 12 and on and on. Give me a break if you think we can impose law on the entire planet that will just lead to bombs flying around because in the long run this maybe about more than porn, this actually has more to do with the value of life. Why on the one hand can we bomb a hospital full of sick kids and come up with excuses for that behavior and then decide for kids what they can and can;t do with their bodies? Seems to me that it's perfectly ok to bomb them to pieces but not to observe them naked or heaven forbide that those kids might engage in this behavior on their own. For these things the net should be censored? Seems like more kids will get bombed the more censored the net becomes, can't you understand the connection? Life becomes even less valuable the less you protect the right to communicate. I would rather their be free speech and some things that I disagree with than no free speech and bodies in pieces on the 6 o clock news? Sexual repression leads to fascism. When looking at political actions ask yourself "what would hitler do?" Hitler would be for shutting down the usenet and he would applaud the efforts of the ISP's to get rid of the alternatives to one true media source.
You could say the same about radio, bicycles, printing presses, atari 2600, but you'd still be wrong, they are relevant because some kid in the future will discover them and reinvent them or be inspired by these inventions to make something even better. Where has the sense of wonder and discovery gone, I'll tell you where it has gone.
Spitzer was hunting prostitutes on a regular basis and then was caught red handed with his hand in the cookie jar, ala J.Edgar Hoover. Now Cuomo goes looking for "child porn" and finds it, doesn't that constitute a crime, somebody should sue him, what he did ala looking at child porn constitutes a crime, maybe he has an issue with this stuff like Spitzer, maybe he might be another Hoover waiting to occur. Just one more hyper sexually repressed fascist. You might not be shocked to think these politicians should get slapped with stickers on their bumpers saying "what would hitler do?", maybe they deserve it for attempting to shutdown the free international communication networks.
I don't trust his judgement. 88 groups constitutes some kind of threat? Maybe in a hyper paranoid and hyper repressed way to people that are scared of a naked anything, this will surely protect nobody but his voting position in the appearance of morality and repressed sexuality. These are the kinds of people that arrest teens for filming themselves. He seems mentally ill, because young people have sex and this doesn't stop it. We were all young once and all did crazy stuff, if you say no your a liar or I'm sorry that your teenage years were not more ideal and crazy. But to hear him talk you'd think the world was ending, which of course it doe not end. The real sick people will just go elsewhere where he can't find them, which makes this move on his part naive and ignorant, or calculated for other reasons. he would probably have a few bones in his closet and I'd be shocked if he became the governor. Spitzer was a walking contradiction and this guy seems cut from the same cloth, we'll see.
Last time I checked the Constitution says "any" restriction of the free press would be a violation of the first amendment, not "some", not "community standards". And the reason for this was to protect us from politicians, government from destroying our means of communication, by the stroke of the pen these ISP's just roll over and play dead and yet they are entrusted with keeping the communication channels open, oh I suppose only open in the ways the NSA can easily sift, maybe they feel it too much work to have to go through and moniter the newsgroups so why not just shut it down, then flash to 4 years from now and the same method gets used to close any "unmonitored" free networks of communication, at this rate they might as well start placing cameras in your homes, you tube becomes the auxillary of the NSA via Viacom which should be better described as Via communist media monopoly. Ah, we'll just invent something else to make them all scratch their heads in astonishment at the cleverness and then they will need another 20 years to catch up.
Now that the French hate information I suppose the rest of Europe should follow suit. Seems to be a bit psycho to take information and make it illegal. reminds me of the Inquisition trying desperatly to force people to believe that the sun revolves around the earth.
Old europe happily bringing about the conditions that created massive wars and massive destruction by blocking the free flow of communication and information. Total control equals total tyranny. Which brings about global war. Since they can't get you to go to war for them they will now make you live a life of exclusion. The taboos must be enforced and the heathens kicked out of the holy church of tryanny.
Here comes professional disabling, an attempt by "experts" to project amature and inferiority upon the masses and to make their media a one way communication. Actually this could create more dysfunction more crashing of economies. Who would want to contribute anything to a society that excludes free expression and free speech? Oligarchy here they come. Anarchy will be the reaction of course and these people are already agent provocaturing by trying to exclude criticism. They only want their ideas and solutions to be followed and known. Instead of increase of knowledge and communication these governments are advocating anti-communication, anti-freedom, anti-intellectualism.
These ISP's have basically thrown in the towel on the users. They simply don't care if everyone gets dumped down to 1gb per day or 40gb per month, they say use another usenet provider, "child porn"! has wiped out everything else, just to satisfy some guy in NY and a bunch of super ultra paranoid liberal democrats that think free speech means what people say on the TV and everything else has been banned. They would burn books if given the chance, in fact they grab people and throw them in jail in Europe and now Canada for writing subversive literature, as if the words are the same as an act? These people are mentally ill, they will destroy free speech, once that goes war, murder, plauges, bombs and bloodshed will surely follow. Say goodbye to western civilization all in the name of protecting the children...I mean .005 percent of the children that are victims. Now 100% of anything else gets wiped out, Usenet has been around for 20 plus years and now they pull the plug so Hate groups can practice brainwashing on the face of the Internet? Actually, that maybe just an excuse, now they will roll out the dollar per mile pricing scheme, that will surely slow us down, of course it will crash the economy as well, not very smart these people at the ISP's. Just what we need LESS use of the internet, LESS purchases until we can turn it into kindergarten for grownups. People are so paranoid about sex in general and just mention in the news over and over that the children are being abused and people go into a moral frenzy and behave absolutely like wackos.
Forget about freedom, the northeast liberal establishment wants to throw this country into civil war and are hell bent on censoring everything they don't like, at least the right had a little smarts, these people on the left simply use fear and violence to intimidate people into not talking.
Soon, you will be paying your state to drive $1 per mile through the insurance, your internet provider $1 per gigabyte while there are terabyte plus drives for only pennies per gigabyte, these people want to go backwards to dial up days. And of course they will also charge you for each item you want to download, then the internet will become a ghost town and they can implement the restructuring of the net into a cable tv style neutered and spayed corporate playground, of course they will have porn just like they have on cable and satellite today, except none of us will have a spot at the table for our videos or our music or thoughts. No activity equals no checks and balances, no balance of powers, just free reign for the people that want a fascist techno serfdom, and just a few years ago people would have laughed at the idea, now we see the actions as fact, not much else left to do but completely storm the gates of the barricade if these insane costs and increases shut out alternative media and voices.
Instead of the cult of the amature as some book tried to scare the net with the real threat would be that writer and the "cult of the oligarch fascists". A blogger would not be to be feared, the tyrant and person that wants to put a dollar sign on everything on this planet .
When I ran a blog on politics a couple years ago somebody kept uploading porno links into my comments section, i later found they originated from government addresses, possibly hacked machines or somebody trying to trash my site that doesn't like my politics. Maybe somebody did this to him, or he just thought it didn't matter what he did on his computer. Apparently having a penis while being a Judge has become a crime, but the weird stuff would likely be a weird sense of humor, but most people are incapable of finding humor in stupid pictures, I never get forwarded stupid pictures in long chain emails created by stupid people?
They are waging war against cognitive liberty. They don't want any mind to be free of their controlling systems. Therefore all information must be "verified" and "trusted". The war on drugs really maybe better titled a war on cognitive liberty, these attempts to control computers falls under the same heading as a war on cognitive liberty. Your opinions apparently maybe against the law. This has a chilling effect. If you can be shut up, locked up, or stopped from being free then you will be controlled, medicated with pharmaceuticals and pumped full of information thought control propaganda. This represents an attempt at coercion. They want to coerce everyone into a jail or steal their information and pirate it so there can be no competition with media oligopolies. This bill should be called the "Oligopoly Media protection" bill.
Say goodbye to Google, Yahoo, You Tube, etc. ad infinitum. Why would you just seize private citizens computers when these companies have so much more to get at. This law disrespects constituional protections against search and seizure. These sound like communist dreams. To be able to seize anybody brain extension simply if it has dubious information, would lead to iinsane censorship on par with totalitarianism. In the houses world everything on computers must be Illegal, therefore all computers belong to the state. All your base belong to the state, the ultimate hacker pirate of all would become the State. They would steal your songs if you don't copyright and pay them the fee, even if you create your own songs. They want to steal everything kind of how they like to make paper currency and just by default. They stole your Social Security, now the criminals want your papers and effects.
This would be mistaken and erroneous legal work. The presumption can not be that a person maybe guilty of something, in fact this bill decides such by implicating that concealed identity commits a crime or would be indicative of guilt. Guilt can not be established on the basis of refusal to give identification, this would be anti-constitutional and would violate his oath of office as a political representative. This needs to be brought to the attention of his community what he has done here.
Similarly in our space of news-making, many people are asking how the blogosphere can be controlled, can become more responsible. Responsible to whom? Lawyers? They are just as prone to corruption as any groupe of anarchists. Besides they also are financial vultures just waiting for a government mandated opportunity to swoope down and utilize their uncreative and unfree agendas. Does anonymity, for example of wikileaks, have to be curtailed? Surveillance maybe nothing more than a tool of those that seek to deprive indivuals of their power, power to think, power to act and power to function independent of experts and social norms, without these the internet would simply evaporate, why would someone use such a system controlled by people that essentially deprive others of freedom. Why would anyone trust not just the internet but government itself? There are no incentives to cooperate with a government when they specifically seek to confuse and distract individuals so they can foster a attachment of individuals to outsiders that are the experts, only experts capable of answering life's problems and also only experts having permission alone to act in a entirely fascist or communist system. Nobody would go along with that, an attempt to control the net would result in anarchy in the real world instead of the net. "The anarchy of the bottom right does not produce much order beyond the small-scale, and is largely parasitic on other orders." What, parasitic? How could a bunch of small groups of people or individuals alone be refered to as some kind of virus incapable of creating anything? They create so much that maybe considered the best of community. For someone to say that I by myself can't produce thousands of thoughts, books, songs, artwork and then share those with the world and not effect a natural anarchist order seems absurd. Nature maybe nothing more than Anarchic Harmony.Oligarchy and the purported objective frame of reference leads to toxic outcomes, how does anyone know for certain that malware maybe only made by anarchists? Maybe the government and corporations are actively creating these products on purpose to shutdown possibilities to maintain market dominance. "So which code is it that makes you good? Not actually open source computer code, but the normative codes of institutions. In the cyber-world, each web-site with a community around it becomes its own polis, and it is life in the polis that makes virtue and fulfillment possible." Community alone cannot fulfill the entire equation, community will be there with you when you die, you have to understand that if one cannot be an individual than no community will ever make any sense. The notion that what we see with our eyes can be entirely agreed upon to represent reality ignores the modern sciences. Even amongst communities people differ markedly in not just perception but outcome. Many people pursuing various oscillating processes will naturally appear chaotic to the ignorant, make the oligarch get over such reality, not the other way around, the world we live in simply can't be serialzed and measured with any confidence, without forgetting that the map is not the territory. These virtual worlds are merely maps, we choose to believe in whatever we see, creating belief systems, these systems can chain us down, in fact they mostly do without even any help from governments or corporations. Citizenship maybe nothing, citizen of what? What time or place are citizens of, all can occur and be apprehended nonsimultaneously. Reality can be apprehended nonsimultaneously, just because some grouop agrees that one argument in medicine appears correct doesn't mean that another individual or group has figured out a falw and maybe working diligently to comphrehend and extract meaning from the data while most are blindly unaware of the refutation and grow so large as to overtake all discussion. Size and prestige alone are no indicator of truth.
To assert and imply that there are no arguments against the chemical basis for depression maybe similar to arguing that chemistry can solve any or all problems in the brain, as if no other models over brain function work.
There are many ways to approach a model on brain function that utilize a framework not based entirely on chemical reactions, but if the mind controls the body, then shouldn't people that are bombarded with negative thoughts or negative outcomes exhibit specific identifiable characteristics that can be tracked and traced over time and therefore be shown to modify whether or not one takes drugs to modify these expressions or not. Couldn't the brain maybe modify the chemical structure alone after repeated exposure to negative emotions or thoughts and defy the model of depression by subverting these processes from overriding the function of the brain?
To believe that brain modification only occurs under specific conditions mostly direct chemical stimulation or inhibition confers too much authority to the chemical model alone. Chemicals are you but you are not chemicals alone, some force acts upon the brain that has eluded science even to this day, I think maybe that explains the function of placebo as well as spontaneous remission in cancer patients. These outcomes defy chemical models by themselves as sole actors and creators of outcomes. There are many books written by educated PHD's and MD's that refute the chemical model acting alone and refute the "imbalance" model as well.
My question maybe more along the lines of how do people whom exhibit depression yet have no verifiable chemical imbalance through the use of modern tools for measurement such as FMRI still fall into a imbalance model? There appears to me at least some major reasearch awaiting funding on why some people don't exhibit the same chemical reactions when placed under observation, why brains can differ to such large measured degrees and why some people that don't measure out at all under the current tools of observation still request and state depression for reasons other than malingering.
Personally, I am growing weary of a chemical based solution for a few reasons.
1. People can behave badly and blame the behavior on a genetic trait out of there ability to control.
2. People can ignore very uncomfotable information and thoughts that have to be accounted for and understood by making their minds unconscious and unaware through drug modification, this especially can be useful to governments for obvious bad purposes.
3. Free will seems to be contradicted through a chemical model theory, without such ability to make the world around you through action why would a person bother to attempt to improve themselves, why would one change or grow if the model only allows for strict chemical adherance to a specific set of chemistry laws.
4. With one model held above all others, that pretty much turns the argument into a finished research, when in fact too many anomalies exist to rule out possible dangers in the use of many of the drugs that are currently offered as harmless, as someone else said "like candy" to people. What are the long term effects of useage and what are the effects of dependency and who benefits from major usage as well as model paradigm control over the reasearch.
5. Where do chemical drugs that are "bad" fit into the brain models, such as non-addictive chemicals such as LSD, etc. Do these drugs simply go into a dustbin due to moral ignorance? Or do we have many studies yet to undertake that are currently being repressed to support more harmful and addictive approaches?
I would encourage anyone in the drug chemical paradigm to consider other fields of research including physics as well as other areas of research in reading materials such as Blaming the brain, or Toxic Psychiatry by Breggin. There are many people that disagree with the current fad over the tools of measurement being capable of representing all of neurological understanding. Another thing to keep in mind maybe the
People can buy gasoline without a license, checmicals and poisons, knives and blunt objects. Not to mention tools such as saws, ice picks, etc. Why would guns have to be banned anymore than all of the above. If a nut wanted to kill a bunch of people they could make bombs out of parts from all over the place. If you don't trust me and other people whom don't have nuclear weapons or various other tanks and missles, then why do you trust them in the hands of the government, when history appears to give numerous examples of governments gone bad. Why disarm yourself but give guns to strangers especially when you have a family with children to protect, people that hate guns appear to hate families protecting themselves from criminals or government criminals. Criminals don't only exist in the private sector, please think about what I just said.
Anyone that wants to create and pass more and more laws forbidding more and more behavior needs to get their heads examined. As far as this goes, just forget about it...the future will be vastly different than a centralized electrical grid system because there maybe no real purpose of having a system that can be easily taken down by people with some gasoline and a few matches. To think that someone would need a computer to destroy the grid maybe more akin to fantasy. Remember the recent blackouts that occured thanks to a bird? How many times do we need to have the fact of "total" deregulation put into effect with home generation systems based on the new cheap and efficient solar paneling now coming onto market and we also need to have cars that can also run a house come onto market we are still thinking in the 1950's kind of pattern and it needs to be shattered into a new paradigm. The old paradigm of massive internet providers instead of local wifi or massive electrical plants for homes instead of tiny self contained units should be about over, if we can decentralized computers then we should do the same for the grid, it maybe time for the society to crawl out of the womb.
What also tends to be forgotten maybe that Major Labels desperately want people to believe that their artists are good and valuable. In a sense these laws tend to make people think that these companies sell something of value instead of some other artists on some other small labels or some out of print lost classic, etc. If people are not shown to be wanting their product then maybe that would be bad business. They desperately need people to want their music but when people share artists that are unknown to most people or are on small labels that cuts the large label out of the market. Competition maybe driving them into obscurity, for many years specific artists and specific ages have dominated the recording industry, this has recently changed and become less prevalent due to home recoding technologies and the internet. These older artists and business critters feel no longer in control of their fans, so they resort to lawsuits and threats in an attempt to scare people away from other artists or internet communications. Maybe these RIAA critters would rather abuse potential uses of technology by creating "class war" with teirs of privelege and one class with the rights to do whatever they want, namely one involving themselves. In the industry you can find fairly common the practice of artists sharing recordings of their projects with one another, this has always existed even prior to the net there were huge underground bootleg vinyl presses. The idea that these practices can stop because new technology exists seems a bit misguided and ignorant of historical precedent, tapes, DAT, cd, etc. These technologies can be considered both legal and illegal, depending on your point of view and frame of mind, as well as political or religious persuasion. In some societies music maybe something akin to dangerous devilish nonesense. We don't need this kind of ignorance anymore than we need the ignorance that seeks to restrict free access to information in societies such as the west. All of these restrictions maybe bring about more problems and distortions of reality into narrow possibilities. If you can restrict what I see or hear, you can manipulate my mind, if you have the power to manipulate my mind, you can brainwash me and make me buy, worship, or kill for access to what you provide by your ability to restrict or control my access to it. Religions have much in common with science and politics. If you can convince people that they are small, unimportant and insignificant you can also convince them that you have the answer to what troubles their hearts and minds. Do what thou wilt...not do what I wilt, as most politicians or religious nutjobs prefer to exclaim. It's up to you to think about who really has control over your own mind and your own society, letting reactionaries lead you into their grasp will only cause them to tighten their grip. I'm sure or certain that as technology advances it will begin to seem almost magical and began to take on a mystical experience, if not already, these people are trying to sue their way into being priests of an era to which they don't belong. Most of the art and music that has been created over the past 10 to 15 years fundamentally differs from anything that occured during the last 50 years, just pick up a WIRE magazine if you are unsure of what I say. Art and music today doesn't fit with a model of the 1950's. We live in a world that maybe changing so rapidly for the foreseeable future that to try to arrest this change will only serve to increase it's exponential growth. Maybe these critters at the RIAA are just as scared of the future as your average middle eastern muslim, does that mean we should accept thier arbitrary distinctions of reality just to make them feel good, so they won't sue or attack us? Of course not. Maybe they will have to come around to the way the world evolved without them instead, maybe these are just the birth pangs of something far better, far more vibrant and eclectic as well as just. Maybe freedom brings with it resonsibility to accept those with whom you curren
They are operating more like an oligarchy and cartel then a free society. They choose to go after people that want to "communicate" with each other, whom want to talk, share speech, art, ideas because information leads to power. If you are informed you can defend yourself, you can dispute, dissent, etc. This they are against 100%. No questions, No answers just follw orders, follow instructions, do as you're told. It's no more logically than promising you a hundred virgins in heaven, they are the terrorists, they simply can't have people talking and expressing doubts on the war on drugs, war on terror, etc. The internet makes their jobs impossible and instead of giving up they now want to go after those responsible for their disenfranchisement. They feel powerless to stop anything going on, so the easiest solution might be to criminalize everyone then if you step out of line, speak up, protest, etc. you get dunked. That's fascism plain and simple. Profit off of ideas? It's the same principle that garners profit off of paper money. It's pure information that makes no bones about it's abundance, abundance equals death to monopoly control. Like a faucet for a society to drink from, if you restrict it and charge a fee people will do whatever they can to follow your orders. Announce it's freely available or that you have no control over where it rains and how much, then they lose control. Nature doesn't feel sorry for the RIAA or the record companies or the movies, nature doesn't care if you are destroyed in a car accident or eaten by a lion in the mountains, the same for people caught up in this "New Inquistion". These people were right at one time in the past when science was more controlled and the world was a differnet place, but today the world simply will not evolve properly with such ridiculous controls put in place, in fact I predict that the more information becomes restricted the more violent conflict across the globe will break out, call that "Peterson's law", although I must admit I haven't brought out my evidence yet, I think the founders knew this and that might be why the 1st amendment brings so much value to the world. Where you find stringent law enforcement of speech you find a equal correlation to violence either projected at outsiders or upon those indwelling in the society. There's probably a few anomalys but maybe not.
Kinda reminds me of the idea of gun confiscation...how much you want to bet the same people pusing these restrictions on speech also love restrictions on guns. You can have it when you pry it from my cold dead fingers as they say. These might be the beginning of national socialism as we know it. First they eviscerate the idea of our basic founding and now they want to censor and control the media, just like any two bit dictator in some far off country, except now America might better fit that model.
and announce that were "all under arrest", that's obviously what they are trying to do, why do it slice by slice or step by step. Maybe a million-man black ski masked anarchist march will grab their attention in WDC. "right to assemble" if we are not left alone.