Well, Mr. Gore does seem to have a fairly compelling case for advocating technology, but it does not seem he quite understands the double-edged nature of the tech and this gives him the appearance of waffling on privacy issues. From his very own tech paper, I humbly submit the following observations, both positive and negative:
1996: A Strong Advocate of the V-Chip Technology. Vice President Gore strongly supports the V-chip technology that will assist parents in controlling what their children watch on TV. Gore led the administration s efforts to pass the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which included a provision mandating the inclusion of the V-chip in new television sets.
Well. I'm sure I don't have to tell you that this was a pretty poor idea. Asided from the issues raised by enforcability, it insults the intelligence of adults who are expected to buy that this is "for the children", not to mention there has yet to be a credible study associating Hollywood violence with crime rates. (as an aside, check out the fascinatingSciAm article about a study associating the drop in crime rates to legalized abortion).
Try the following thought experiment to reveal the true nature of V-chip supporters: Willingly embrace and implement the infernal thing, then immediately turn around and say hey, this is great! Now that we've got this protection for our kids, we can start putting adult content on cable! Bring on the naked sex violence!... What? Oh, I see. You're not as confident about the effectiveness of the V-chip anymore...
So, at any rate -- Thumbs Down on the V-chip, Al. This was actually trumpeted in another bullet as well, but I'll limit it to a single count to be fair.
1997 & 1999: Working to Foster a Family Friendly Internet. Al Gore has been a leader in ensuring that the Internet is a safe place to visit for all families. At the White House "Internet Online Summit for Kids", Gore called upon the industry to make tools that block unwanted materials, words or pictures easier to use, more effective and more available to parents. The Vice President also announced a "CyberTip Line" for parents to report suspicious activity, and a public awareness campaign, "Think Then Link" to help educate parents on ways of ensuring children s safety online. In 1999, the Vice President announced the "Parents' Protection Page" initiative. The initiative is a commitment by 15 leading Internet companies to help parents and kids safely surf the net and provide access to tools and safety tips.
As I'm sure most of you immediately think when reading this, it sounds suspiciously supportive of censorware. It does stop short of actually forcing the use of censorware, however, such as in public libraries as with the recent/. stories. This initiative seems more advisory in nature, and at least puports to do a very positive thing: educate parents about the internet. Whether that education is truly informative or all about bogeymen and hand waving, I don't know.
So, I'll have to stay neutral and go with Thumbs sideways on this one. Feel free to comment with details if you've got them.
1998: Vice President Gore Called for an Electronic Bill of Rights to Protect Personal Privacy On-line. In May 1998, Vice President Gore has called for initiatives that will protect the medical and financial information that can easily be intercepted and abused by others. Gore called for the creation of an Electronic Bill of Rights that would allow citizens to choose whether personal information is disclosed when they use the Internet. It would also grant citizens a right to know how and when that information is used and ensure that they would be able to have access to their own information so they can verify it's accuracy. After the Vice President raised this issue, Congress passed a bill to prevent identity theft and to protect children's privacy.
Excellent notion. Al has the right idea here, but it looks like Congress dumbed down the concept and made a mess of it (note to Congress: enough already of the "for the children" schtick -- leave it to the parents, whom you seem to insist on treating like children).
So I go with Thumbs Up to Al on this one, even though it got mangled in Congress. This one needs to be continually hammered home, and battles are being fought as we speak (Doubleclick, anyone?).
1998: Cracking Down on Software Piracy. Vice President Gore stated that the Administration had "declare(d) war on software piracy&intellectual property must be protected." It is estimated that in the U.S. more than 27 percent of all software is pirated and abroad estimated rates soar from 60 to 90 percent, translating into a loss of at least $11 billion to the industry. Gore announced in October of 1998 an Executive Order declaring war on piracy both in the federal government as well as directing trade officials to pursue agreements with foreign government protecting intellectual property rights of software developers.
Well, clearly, Al doesn't quite "get it" here. Whenever I see phrases like "it is estimated..." a red flag immediately goes up. Estimated by who? They weren't, perchance, in the pocket of said industry were they? I don't know how much this initiative affected or inspired our favorite friend UCITA, but it did not help at the very least.
A resounding Thumbs Down on this one Al, because the ramifications have not been clearly thought out, especially as they pertain to the protection Open Source developers.
1998: Re-Defining Encryption Policy. Vice President Gore announced in October that the Administration would relax export controls for encryption software. The initiative applied to insurance companies, health and medical organizations and online merchants. The new policy which was praised by the high-tech industry, will allow American companies to sell and use stronger encryption products to protect their product and customers from potential violations of personal and national security.
I applaud any initiative that is favorable to the wider distribution of strong encryption technology, as I'm sure most of us are. However, once again, Mr. Gore seems to be the hand maiden of "The Industry" in this case. Nowhere are the rights of individual citizens mentioned in this! You can export encryption technology, but only if you are selling it? This is nonsense, and like the piracy issue, unfortunately shows a cozy trend with Al and "The Industry".
Since any relaxation of the export controls on crypto are a good thing, but Al seems a bit out of touch with the more fundamental issues, I say Thumbs Sideways on this one.
Unfortunately, it doesn't look too good on the privacy front for Al. My tally was:
2 Thumbs Down
2 Thumbs Sideways
1 Thumbs Up
So what does this mean? Al is definitely pro-technology, as the rest of his paper clearly indicates. It just seems that he either does not cherish some of the freedoms we have in the non-tech world, he thinks that they just do not apply in the tech world, or he has not clearly thought some of these issues through in the tech context. For completeness here are the summaries for the all of the sections (including the ones I've already discussed). Whether they are all accurate claims, or whether the initiatives were effective or not, I leave to you:
1983: Gore Cosponsored the High Technology Trade Act.
1984: Investing in Educational Technology.
1986: Gore Sponsored the Supercomputer Network Act of 1986.
1989 & 1991: Gore Sponsored Bill Investing in Early Research Networks.
1992: Gore Authored the Information Infrastructure and Technology Act of 1992.
1994: Called for the Creation of a New Global Information Infrastructure (GII).
1996: Fought for the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
1996: Launched the Administration s Initiative to Wire Every Classroom for the Internet.
1996: Increased High Technology Trade with Asian Pacific Nations.
1996: Fighting for Faster Internet Connections.
1996: A Strong Advocate of the V-Chip Technology.
1997: Promoted Growth of Electronic Commerce.
1997 & 1999: Working to Foster a Family Friendly Internet.
1998: Vice President Gore Called for an Electronic Bill of Rights to Protect Personal Privacy On-line.
1998: Cracking Down on Software Piracy.
1998: Gore Led Administration Efforts to Promote Development of the Next Generation Internet.
1998: Promoting Internet Tax Freedom for Global Economic Growth.
1998: Re-Defining Encryption Policy.
1999: Gore Called for Substantial Increase in Information Technology Funding.
1999: Gore Calling For Boosting Information Technology in the Next Millennium.
Establishing a Permanent Tax Credit for Research and Development.
Expand the Global Marketplace.
Increase Investment in Information Technology.
By the way, before I go, I wanted to make note of one other thing. The much ballyhooed "Al Gore Invented the Internet" statement. In browsing through his paper, I noticed the following carfully phrased nuggets:
Experts Give Credit to Gore for Leadership on the Internet. Vinton Cerf, nicknamed the "Father of the Internet," stated, "I think it is very fair to say that the Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the Vice President in his current role and in his earlier role as Senator." Cerf is currently a senior vice president with MCI Worldcom.
Early Designers of the Defense Department Network Credit Gore. Robert E. Kahn, who helped design early Internet network for Defense Departments Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in 1969, stated that by popularizing the term "Information Superhighway," Gore raised awareness about the Internet's potential.
These are a far cry from the "invented the internet" statement; the first I suppose is commentary on the fact that Gore has consitently pushed for "pro e-commerce" initiatives, although I am not convinced that the internet would not be where it is today were it not for the hand of Al Gore. But he has promoted the internet, and played a role in raising awareness with the general public back before the commercial net exploded.
Have fun, folks. Be vigilant, and if you want more policy, politics, and legalities surrounding technology and privacy, check out technocrat.net.
The swing and the sway of corporate involvement is just a magnifying glass of the true linux "movement".
The movement will do what it will, but there is no reason that corporate america cannot profit on that movement -- think of how power can be extracted from the tide. The waves certainly don't care, but there is value in tracking and harnessing the motion.
So -- carry on. Nothing to see here. It's still cheaper to tweak the tide for your purposes than maintain the ocean.
As an aside, at my company I had a minor scuffle with the Corporate Nannies because juggernautsearch.com was blocked -- juggs, indeed, I told them.
Anyway, my gut feeling is that "the children" are a big red herring. You can deploy logic all you want to shred this flimsy justification, but it remains and emotional hot button. And, for exactly that reason, it will remain the crowbar the censors will use to pry open our 12oz can of freedoms.
When it comes to the desire to control the thoughts of others, the real agenda is never directly stated. Just like when you were a kid catching lizards, by far the best technique is to wave one hand distantly in front of the lizard while the other hand slowly creeps up from behind.
This question is obviously an allegorical device, but also one that the geek community would be happy to discuss literally.
With all of the tribalism and jingoism emerging in this so-called "Geek Ascendant" culture, and the resulting hostility -- the ire commonly directed towards you is a fine example -- how can we, the technological elite, ever hope to have meaningful dialogue with an alien species, should such an event come to pass?
To be sure, the opinions emerging from such contact would certainly be strange and likely different from anything we've wrapped our little minds around in the past. Should we flame the aliens as hopeless newbies?
Yes, I understand your point. I was not trying to take issue with Open Source -- I was merely wondering about the dynamics of implementing something like CoSource. Though tracking down contributers is a horrible task, it would be nice if CoSource took it upon themselves to trickle down the monetary benefits.
Two problems, though: 1) CoSource probably would never do such a thing, merely because it is such a potentially complex task, and 2) perhaps this will change, but so far the amounts of money do not "trickle" very well!
At this point, you probably stand to make more from the generosity of companies such as Red Hat and VA Linux.
And, of course, none of this is relevant to coding for the sake of coding.
First, I hope these "judges" police extreme code sniping in cases where the sponsors are unaware of an existing partial solution. If a 90% solution already exists from thousands of man-hours, is the lucky sot who comes along and spends five hours implementing the final feature they need deserving of the entire reward? I don't know. Part of me says "the original developers should have been quicker on their feet if they wanted compensation", and the other says "but it doesn't seem fair".
I should add, that this could be considered a necessary evil. On the one hand, code sniping could occur, but on the other it would be excellent preventative medicine for extorters sitting on known bugs in their code. Mojotoad
First, I hope these "judges" police extreme code sniping in cases where the sponsors are unaware of an existing partial solution. If a 90% solution already exists from thousands of man-hours, is the lucky sot who comes along and spends five hours implementing the final feature they need deserving of the entire reward? I don't know. Part of me says "the original developers should have been quicker on their feet if they wanted compensation", and the other says "but it doesn't seem fair".
Second, I think the author touches on an excellent point regarding how this method of code economics bridges entire global markets. There is a world of coders out there that will work for sums that a coder in the states or Europe would not touch (at least in cases where financial gain is the main incentive). This will persist until there is an equalized global economy -- sites like CoSource are conduits that bore straight through economic dams.
I'm all in favor of that. Pay rates will shift on both sides of the equation, and once equalized, coders will have to compete based on quality. That's a good thing.
Mojotoad
Re:Future without any privacy a good thing
on
Profiling A Nation
·
· Score: 1
Another similar book along these lines: The Truth Machine, by James L. Halperin. In this, everyone eventually wears portable devices that indicate whether they are lying or not. It of course begins with an invasive "lie dectector" type of atmosphere, but eventually the citizenry adopts it wholeheartedly once they realize that politicians must quickly play the same game. After all, if you have nothing to hide, why not wear one?
It's a great concept book...Halperin is a bit stark and clumsy with his writing, as many "big idea" authors sometimes are, but it's worth the read.
On an unrelated topic, I recommend his second novel, "The First Immortal", as well. Great treatment of cryonics, nano, etc, somewhat subject to the "big idea" phenomenon but well worth the read.
Mojotoad
Re:Future without any privacy a good thing
on
Profiling A Nation
·
· Score: 1
Ah!
Human nature will always be human nature, whether a particular human is the repressor or represee.
Here we have an excellent suggestion. Turn the power of the system, in this case technology, back on itself to harness the beast. As any of use who have studied TnT or perused GEB know, this creates an interesting situation. The beast is indeed harnessed for derivable truths, yet there are inevitable pockets of underivable tautologies that provably exist!
All the jousting over the minutia of legalities vs. social tyranny miss the point.
Many of the themes I see in the various works of Mr. Katz seem to revolve around social hysteria and the psychoses that our society, as a whole, seem to be stricken with. Personal freedoms, whether by law or by custom, do not amount to much when society reacts to the slightest provocation like a skittish school of fish.
We are bored folks. It is human nature to complain, and this trait will always be with us. People will complain about whatever is on their mind. In a land of bounty, if a hangnail is all you have to complain about, then complain you will. People will scream bloody murder over who's fault their hangnail is right up until the day they lose an arm. It's all about perspective.
We need a Frontier, big time. A challenging, even deadly, Frontier. When there are no significant challenges to survival, society loses perspective on what really matters. When you're busy trying to survive you don't have time for psychoses.
We can't all be on the frontier, of course, but frontier perspectives help to balance social discourse. I guarantee we'd have more voices like Ventura if we *did* have another frontier.
Keep up the good work, Katz. It is not difficult to see the themes in your work; at least not nearly as difficult as many of these ninnies insist.
Is anyone reminded of Garrison Keillor's Lake Wobegone, "where all of the children...are above average".
Funny notion -- perfection is a moving target. There will always come a day when our environment will throw a curve ball and only the most genetically diverse population will survive.
You might want to shop around for a low overhead contract firm. In my case I get 80% pass-thru with full benefits out of the 20% they keep (not matching funds in the 401k, though).
The benefits are obvious. Detriments? Not a big bench, plus you might have to beat the bushes for quality assignments and gigs.
Not bad, and it suits my lifestyle. Unfortunately I tend to be too absent minded to keep up with little details such as TAXES and INSURANCE PAYMENTS.
Seriously, though, going with a low overhead firm isn't going to shut any more doors than being independent will.
Slashdot Mirror
The FSF should immediately endeavor to help the new public human genome effort by crafting the Open Spoorce gene license.
Mojotoad
I have a question...
When, eventually, they reach 5.00 will there be any sort of attempt to distinguish casual references from X.500?
Mojotoad
- 1996: A Strong Advocate of the V-Chip Technology. Vice President Gore strongly supports the V-chip technology that will assist parents in controlling what their children watch on TV. Gore led the administration s efforts to pass the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which included a provision mandating the inclusion of the V-chip in new television sets.
Well. I'm sure I don't have to tell you that this was a pretty poor idea. Asided from the issues raised by enforcability, it insults the intelligence of adults who are expected to buy that this is "for the children", not to mention there has yet to be a credible study associating Hollywood violence with crime rates. (as an aside, check out the fascinating SciAm article about a study associating the drop in crime rates to legalized abortion).Try the following thought experiment to reveal the true nature of V-chip supporters: Willingly embrace and implement the infernal thing, then immediately turn around and say hey, this is great! Now that we've got this protection for our kids, we can start putting adult content on cable! Bring on the naked sex violence! ... What? Oh, I see. You're not as confident about the effectiveness of the V-chip anymore...
So, at any rate -- Thumbs Down on the V-chip, Al. This was actually trumpeted in another bullet as well, but I'll limit it to a single count to be fair.
- 1997 & 1999: Working to Foster a Family Friendly Internet. Al Gore has been a leader in ensuring that the Internet is a safe place to visit for all families. At the White House "Internet Online Summit for Kids", Gore called upon the industry to make tools that block unwanted materials, words or pictures easier to use, more effective and more available to parents. The Vice President also announced a "CyberTip Line" for parents to report suspicious activity, and a public awareness campaign, "Think Then Link" to help educate parents on ways of ensuring children s safety online. In 1999, the Vice President announced the "Parents' Protection Page" initiative. The initiative is a commitment by 15 leading Internet companies to help parents and kids safely surf the net and provide access to tools and safety tips.
As I'm sure most of you immediately think when reading this, it sounds suspiciously supportive of censorware. It does stop short of actually forcing the use of censorware, however, such as in public libraries as with the recentSo, I'll have to stay neutral and go with Thumbs sideways on this one. Feel free to comment with details if you've got them.
- 1998: Vice President Gore Called for an Electronic Bill of Rights to Protect Personal Privacy On-line. In May 1998, Vice President Gore has called for initiatives that will protect the medical and financial information that can easily be intercepted and abused by others. Gore called for the creation of an Electronic Bill of Rights that would allow citizens to choose whether personal information is disclosed when they use the Internet. It would also grant citizens a right to know how and when that information is used and ensure that they would be able to have access to their own information so they can verify it's accuracy. After the Vice President raised this issue, Congress passed a bill to prevent identity theft and to protect children's privacy.
Excellent notion. Al has the right idea here, but it looks like Congress dumbed down the concept and made a mess of it (note to Congress: enough already of the "for the children" schtick -- leave it to the parents, whom you seem to insist on treating like children).So I go with Thumbs Up to Al on this one, even though it got mangled in Congress. This one needs to be continually hammered home, and battles are being fought as we speak (Doubleclick, anyone?).
- 1998: Cracking Down on Software Piracy. Vice President Gore stated that the Administration had "declare(d) war on software piracy&intellectual property must be protected." It is estimated that in the U.S. more than 27 percent of all software is pirated and abroad estimated rates soar from 60 to 90 percent, translating into a loss of at least $11 billion to the industry. Gore announced in October of 1998 an Executive Order declaring war on piracy both in the federal government as well as directing trade officials to pursue agreements with foreign government protecting intellectual property rights of software developers.
Well, clearly, Al doesn't quite "get it" here. Whenever I see phrases like "it is estimatedA resounding Thumbs Down on this one Al, because the ramifications have not been clearly thought out, especially as they pertain to the protection Open Source developers.
- 1998: Re-Defining Encryption Policy. Vice President Gore announced in October that the Administration would relax export controls for encryption software. The initiative applied to insurance companies, health and medical organizations and online merchants. The new policy which was praised by the high-tech industry, will allow American companies to sell and use stronger encryption products to protect their product and customers from potential violations of personal and national security.
I applaud any initiative that is favorable to the wider distribution of strong encryption technology, as I'm sure most of us are. However, once again, Mr. Gore seems to be the hand maiden of "The Industry" in this case. Nowhere are the rights of individual citizens mentioned in this! You can export encryption technology, but only if you are selling it? This is nonsense, and like the piracy issue, unfortunately shows a cozy trend with Al and "The Industry".Since any relaxation of the export controls on crypto are a good thing, but Al seems a bit out of touch with the more fundamental issues, I say Thumbs Sideways on this one.
Unfortunately, it doesn't look too good on the privacy front for Al. My tally was:
- 2 Thumbs Down
- 2 Thumbs Sideways
- 1 Thumbs Up
So what does this mean? Al is definitely pro-technology, as the rest of his paper clearly indicates. It just seems that he either does not cherish some of the freedoms we have in the non-tech world, he thinks that they just do not apply in the tech world, or he has not clearly thought some of these issues through in the tech context. For completeness here are the summaries for the all of the sections (including the ones I've already discussed). Whether they are all accurate claims, or whether the initiatives were effective or not, I leave to you:- 1983: Gore Cosponsored the High Technology Trade Act.
- 1984: Investing in Educational Technology.
- 1986: Gore Sponsored the Supercomputer Network Act of 1986.
- 1989 & 1991: Gore Sponsored Bill Investing in Early Research Networks.
- 1992: Gore Authored the Information Infrastructure and Technology Act of 1992.
- 1994: Called for the Creation of a New Global Information Infrastructure (GII).
- 1996: Fought for the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
- 1996: Launched the Administration s Initiative to Wire Every Classroom for the Internet.
- 1996: Increased High Technology Trade with Asian Pacific Nations.
- 1996: Fighting for Faster Internet Connections.
- 1996: A Strong Advocate of the V-Chip Technology.
- 1997: Promoted Growth of Electronic Commerce.
- 1997 & 1999: Working to Foster a Family Friendly Internet.
- 1998: Vice President Gore Called for an Electronic Bill of Rights to Protect Personal Privacy On-line.
- 1998: Cracking Down on Software Piracy.
- 1998: Gore Led Administration Efforts to Promote Development of the Next Generation Internet.
- 1998: Promoting Internet Tax Freedom for Global Economic Growth.
- 1998: Re-Defining Encryption Policy.
- 1999: Gore Called for Substantial Increase in Information Technology Funding.
- 1999: Gore Calling For Boosting Information Technology in the Next Millennium.
- Establishing a Permanent Tax Credit for Research and Development.
- Expand the Global Marketplace.
- Increase Investment in Information Technology.
By the way, before I go, I wanted to make note of one other thing. The much ballyhooed "Al Gore Invented the Internet" statement. In browsing through his paper, I noticed the following carfully phrased nuggets:- Experts Give Credit to Gore for Leadership on the Internet. Vinton Cerf, nicknamed the "Father of the Internet," stated, "I think it is very fair to say that the Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the Vice President in his current role and in his earlier role as Senator." Cerf is currently a senior vice president with MCI Worldcom.
- Early Designers of the Defense Department Network Credit Gore. Robert E. Kahn, who helped design early Internet network for Defense Departments Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in 1969, stated that by popularizing the term "Information Superhighway," Gore raised awareness about the Internet's potential.
These are a far cry from the "invented the internet" statement; the first I suppose is commentary on the fact that Gore has consitently pushed for "pro e-commerce" initiatives, although I am not convinced that the internet would not be where it is today were it not for the hand of Al Gore. But he has promoted the internet, and played a role in raising awareness with the general public back before the commercial net exploded.Have fun, folks. Be vigilant, and if you want more policy, politics, and legalities surrounding technology and privacy, check out technocrat.net.
Mojotoad
The swing and the sway of corporate involvement is just a magnifying glass of the true linux "movement".
The movement will do what it will, but there is no reason that corporate america cannot profit on that movement -- think of how power can be extracted from the tide. The waves certainly don't care, but there is value in tracking and harnessing the motion.
So -- carry on. Nothing to see here. It's still cheaper to tweak the tide for your purposes than maintain the ocean.
Mojotoad
How do I know you're not a bot? I dismiss your argument as entirely irrelevant until you can prove to me that you are a conscious human being.
Mojotoad
As an aside, at my company I had a minor scuffle with the Corporate Nannies because juggernautsearch.com was blocked -- juggs, indeed, I told them.
Anyway, my gut feeling is that "the children" are a big red herring. You can deploy logic all you want to shred this flimsy justification, but it remains and emotional hot button. And, for exactly that reason, it will remain the crowbar the censors will use to pry open our 12oz can of freedoms.
When it comes to the desire to control the thoughts of others, the real agenda is never directly stated. Just like when you were a kid catching lizards, by far the best technique is to wave one hand distantly in front of the lizard while the other hand slowly creeps up from behind.
Mojotoad
Hi Katz --
This question is obviously an allegorical device, but also one that the geek community would be happy to discuss literally.
With all of the tribalism and jingoism emerging in this so-called "Geek Ascendant" culture, and the resulting hostility -- the ire commonly directed towards you is a fine example -- how can we, the technological elite, ever hope to have meaningful dialogue with an alien species, should such an event come to pass?
To be sure, the opinions emerging from such contact would certainly be strange and likely different from anything we've wrapped our little minds around in the past. Should we flame the aliens as hopeless newbies?
Mojotoad
"Well, now that you mention it..."
Mojotoad
Mojotoad
Case studies are, nevertheless, informative for those of use who are interested in social dynamics and politics beyond our own back yard.
Mojotoad
Mojotoad
Yes, I understand your point. I was not trying to take issue with Open Source -- I was merely wondering about the dynamics of implementing something like CoSource. Though tracking down contributers is a horrible task, it would be nice if CoSource took it upon themselves to trickle down the monetary benefits.
Two problems, though: 1) CoSource probably would never do such a thing, merely because it is such a potentially complex task, and 2) perhaps this will change, but so far the amounts of money do not "trickle" very well!
At this point, you probably stand to make more from the generosity of companies such as Red Hat and VA Linux.
And, of course, none of this is relevant to coding for the sake of coding.
Mojotoad
I should add, that this could be considered a necessary evil. On the one hand, code sniping could occur, but on the other it would be excellent preventative medicine for extorters sitting on known bugs in their code.
Mojotoad
Two things.
First, I hope these "judges" police extreme code sniping in cases where the sponsors are unaware of an existing partial solution. If a 90% solution already exists from thousands of man-hours, is the lucky sot who comes along and spends five hours implementing the final feature they need deserving of the entire reward? I don't know. Part of me says "the original developers should have been quicker on their feet if they wanted compensation", and the other says "but it doesn't seem fair".
Second, I think the author touches on an excellent point regarding how this method of code economics bridges entire global markets. There is a world of coders out there that will work for sums that a coder in the states or Europe would not touch (at least in cases where financial gain is the main incentive). This will persist until there is an equalized global economy -- sites like CoSource are conduits that bore straight through economic dams.
I'm all in favor of that. Pay rates will shift on both sides of the equation, and once equalized, coders will have to compete based on quality. That's a good thing.
Mojotoad
Another similar book along these lines: The Truth Machine, by James L. Halperin. In this, everyone eventually wears portable devices that indicate whether they are lying or not. It of course begins with an invasive "lie dectector" type of atmosphere, but eventually the citizenry adopts it wholeheartedly once they realize that politicians must quickly play the same game. After all, if you have nothing to hide, why not wear one?
It's a great concept book...Halperin is a bit stark and clumsy with his writing, as many "big idea" authors sometimes are, but it's worth the read.
On an unrelated topic, I recommend his second novel, "The First Immortal", as well. Great treatment of cryonics, nano, etc, somewhat subject to the "big idea" phenomenon but well worth the read.
Mojotoad
Ah!
Human nature will always be human nature, whether a particular human is the repressor or represee.
Here we have an excellent suggestion. Turn the power of the system, in this case technology, back on itself to harness the beast. As any of use who have studied TnT or perused GEB know, this creates an interesting situation. The beast is indeed harnessed for derivable truths, yet there are inevitable pockets of underivable tautologies that provably exist!
As you can see, the REAL truth is inescapable:
Buy cargo pants. The more pockets the better.
Mojotoad
Then see how vigorously they pursue infringement!
Mojotoad
All the jousting over the minutia of legalities vs. social tyranny miss the point.
Many of the themes I see in the various works of Mr. Katz seem to revolve around social hysteria and the psychoses that our society, as a whole, seem to be stricken with. Personal freedoms, whether by law or by custom, do not amount to much when society reacts to the slightest provocation like a skittish school of fish.
We are bored folks. It is human nature to complain, and this trait will always be with us. People will complain about whatever is on their mind. In a land of bounty, if a hangnail is all you have to complain about, then complain you will. People will scream bloody murder over who's fault their hangnail is right up until the day they lose an arm. It's all about perspective.
We need a Frontier, big time. A challenging, even deadly, Frontier. When there are no significant challenges to survival, society loses perspective on what really matters. When you're busy trying to survive you don't have time for psychoses.
We can't all be on the frontier, of course, but frontier perspectives help to balance social discourse. I guarantee we'd have more voices like Ventura if we *did* have another frontier.
Keep up the good work, Katz. It is not difficult to see the themes in your work; at least not nearly as difficult as many of these ninnies insist.
Mojotoad
Is anyone reminded of Garrison Keillor's Lake Wobegone, "where all of the children...are above average".
Funny notion -- perfection is a moving target. There will always come a day when our environment will throw a curve ball and only the most genetically diverse population will survive.
Mojotoad
You might want to shop around for a low overhead contract firm. In my case I get 80% pass-thru with full benefits out of the 20% they keep (not matching funds in the 401k, though).
The benefits are obvious. Detriments? Not a big bench, plus you might have to beat the bushes for quality assignments and gigs.
Not bad, and it suits my lifestyle. Unfortunately I tend to be too absent minded to keep up with little details such as TAXES and INSURANCE PAYMENTS.
Seriously, though, going with a low overhead firm isn't going to shut any more doors than being independent will.
Mojotoad