The elite class will rule over you on matter what system you pick. If you pick capitalism then people who have wealth will change laws to protect their wealth and keep you poor. If you are in communism then the people who control the military will try to use their political influence to get alittle extra out of the system to make it more fair than fair for themselves.
This is a problem of human nature, not systems. The problem is with people who cheat and who are irresponsible, not with capitalism or communism. Both can work if people actually played by the rules, but no one does in either system so both systems are all about positioning, and what family you are born into. The only difference is in capitalism, making others poorer is in your best interest while in communism making everyone equal is in your best interest. Communism works on equality while capitalism works on inequality.
You have to censor in capitalism, copyright, intellectual property, patents, are forms of censorship to protect wealth. You don't have to censor as much with communism because wealth is shared. Communism is open source society as compared to Capitalism which is closed source.
Crime has everything to do with how people think and what their priorities are and nothing to do with the means in which they express their violent actions.
A gun is deadly, so is poison, so is a bomb, so are ideas, just about anything can be turned into a weapon. Violence ends when people learn to love instead of hate and it just so happens that hate is more popular in Australia and America than in China, this is why the crime rates are higher, at least violent crime.
Violent crime follows violent thoughts, and violent thoughts come from violent emotions, like hate and anger, something Americans have mastered over the years and used to win wars in the past and conquer.
It's simple, if you want people to stop being violent, create a pill which lowers aggression and which prevents people from getting angry. Create a gas which makes people happy, and release it into the workplace, and then maybe violence will go down.
Americans define humans are consumers and owners. You own a business or corporation and you are "more" human than a consumer or worker.
Human rights in the USA means corporate rights. The right for a corporation to act as a person. This means the corporation is human and you are just a consumer or worker unless you own your own business.
In the USA you are less human if you arent an owner of a business, you are less human if you don't own patents, copyright (both which usually require you to own a business), stock, and other forms of intellectual property. You are less human if you are a female or minority of some sort in that you most likely won't be treated the same by society in the workplace or corporate world.
In general, being human in America requires you to be rich, and perhaps this is a flaw in our interpretation of human rights because we believe in protecting only those who own stuff and who have wealth.
The internet? According to American culture it exists to help corporations profit more efficiently, and this is the reason every technology exists. China might have something different in mind, we just don't know and I don't think we have the right to force our corporate way of life down their throats by making them use out internet, our operating systems, and surf our websites. Perhaps they want their own?
As long as we can connect to Chinas internet none of this matters. Cultures are not all equal and it should be simple to understand why China wants to avoid the mistakes of our culture. At the same time, I want to be able to access Chinese culture, so as long as their internet is not a closed system I don't really care if they use the American internet or Chinese internet, it makes no difference to me just like it makes no difference to most American consumers if their Walmart products are made in China or America, they just don't care.
The USA is not the most free country on earth. Europe is more free, there are places like the netherlands which have more freedom than we will ever have. China is not bad with human rights, in fact China's human rights history is far better than Americas history of slavery, slaughtering native Americans, exploiting illegal immigration, and outsourcing. America has the worst human rights track record in the developed world, so China with its censorship isnt really anything new from the point of view of an American. Right now the American internet is censored to protect corporations, freedom of speech is being restricted, and while we are losing our freedoms we focus on China? Iraq? Who the hell cares? We have to fight for freedom at home.
But it depends on how you look at it, you can look at it like checkers or like chess. I see it as chess.
I'm not autistic, but I understand exactly what you are saying, loyalty is a rare trait. If loyalty is rare why should trust be common? Trust for me is as rare as loyalty is in this society, so its rare for me to trust people and it takes a special person to earn my trust.
The media is paid to lie to you, that much is true, and corporations cannot be trusted because they lie too, so the best thing to do is try to focus on individuals and attempt to find the individuals who value loyalty and who want this element in their relationship with you. If they truly value it and its proven through their track record, this is a good sign. If they just say they believe in loyalty but don't act it, then treat them how they act.
Most normal people are braindamaged.
on
Trust in a Bottle
·
· Score: 1
Look, if you want to be a sheep who blows in the winds of whichever way the authority figures tell you to blow, then you should be naive like that. If you want to be an independent thinker who makes their own decisions and lives with the consequences, then you have to learn to trust yourself, your decisions, and your ability to figure people out. Your form of trust makes absolutely no sense, you trust based on trust? huh? You trust based on social ties? huh?
Neither of these are very precise forms of trust, because you can be wrong. This means anyone can influence you because you trust everyone, and not everyone is looking out for your best interest. Your strategy leads down the path of consistant betrayal and disloyalty. From experience the only way to have loyalty is to stop accepting anything less. Trust is based on loyalty, not social ties, not emotion, not how long you've known someone. Until you figure this out, you'll be rolling dice instead of playing chess, and its all based on how you'd like to use your mind to figure people out, you can either use your logical mind or you can leave it all to chance.
I prefer to use my logical mind because I don't feel theres room for error. When you make an error you can end up in dozens of really bad situations which require really bad solutions, and the only way to avoid those solutions is to avoid those situations to begin with by not acting emotional or illogical.
Prediction is just pattern recognition. When you have a good reputation with others or with me, it helps you earn trust quicker because its by your track record, this is the best kind of trust that can exist. Nothing else matters, what you say has no influence, its all about how real you are and how responsible and loyal you act. If you act fake it won't help people like me trust you, it only makes people like me suspicious of you. I don't really trust a person who smiles in my face and expects me to trust them, I trust the person who has the reputation from everyone else telling me they are loyal, and who from my own experience I've been able to verify. If I cannot verify, then I don't trust you, and thats basically how it works. Verified trust.
Stop generalizing everyone into one pot. Some things wich work on you and everyone you know won't work on EVERYONE on earth.
Doctors you don't have any choice but to trust, if you don't trust a doctor you'll most likely die, so you don't have much choice, you have to trust one of the doctors. There is no reason to ever trust a salesman, and while a doctor is a salesman for drug companies, there are ways to figuring out which doctors are honest and which doctors arent. Doctors also have reputations.
I don't generally trust strangers unless I have no choice. Deep down I know that any stranger can be a potential backstabber. The key is to get to know a person as well as they know themselves before you trust them. This takes time to establish, more time than your typical salesperson would like to invest.
Social skills has nothing to do with faking trust and everything to do with how you act. If you don't act trustworthy then I'll never trust you and it wont matter what you ever say to me, you cannot hide your actions, you cannot hide your reputation, you cannot hide your fakeness.
Trust is something you have to build over time, its something you have to earn, and depending on who you are earning it from decides how difficult or easy it is to earn. There is not going to be a spray will which clear your record as someone who picks up girls. When these girls talk about you, and how you picked them up their point of views form the entire point of view no matter what you tell people. So unless you plan to hide your past and look suspicious, your past will be up for review along with you.
What the poster above tried to tell you is if you stay fake for too long you lose the real you, you become fake. Do you want to be an expert at manipulating people or do you want to have people who actually like the real you? You can't have real friends if you resort to faking trust because friendship is based on loyalty, if you arent every loyal or trustworthy in actions it will never matter how good you become at faking it. Hopefully you don't forget how to maintain real friendships.
First, real trust has nothing to do with gambling or business. You don't have to trust in situations like that, you just have to make decisions based on previous knowledge.
Example, if I lend you money and you pay it back on time, keep your word, etc, your word gains worth and value, and I'll be more likely to lend you money in the future. This is not trust, this is simply tracking a persons reputation. You can invent a pill to help people trust but theres no pill on earth which will make a person stupid. If this is an attempt at making a sucker pill, well its a nice attempt and I'm sure a few people will buy the sucker pill and start trusting strangers. Myself, I won't trust anyone who hasnt earned it, and earning it isnt easy, takes time, effort, and a proven track record.
Trust isnt a chemical, its a lack of logic.
on
Trust in a Bottle
·
· Score: 1
If you lack the ability to judge with logic then perhaps then its a chemical, but I always thought that trust is based on experience, logic, character of the people you are dealing with and a lot of other factors, and even then its never absolute.
We wouldnt be making it easier for the aliens by killing our own species. If theres aliens, beware of humans, we are a suicidal species who will kill anything in our path including ourselves.
Stop working for the company and start your own, otherwise have fun fighting to save social security and fighting for wages.
It's better to use motion against itself than to fight the current.
Instead of being a socialist, start your own business, make as much money as you can, and buy a bunch of companies like George Soros and Warren Buffet. Then you can promote socialism through capitalism, but you arent going to get anywhere if you are going to just yell and scream at people to pay higher taxes, and you arent going to get anywhere if you ask your boss to give you retirement or pay for your health expenses. Your boss does not care about you, so take advantage of the ownership society and become an owner like your boss.
Nothing stops employees from actually posting blogs under annonymous names and putting it on the internet to tell the truth about companies. This was already done by word of mouth but now word of mouth is increased.
I don't think blogs are bad, I think its good.
The way to be successful is to be flexible. You have to create your own job and your own situation and the blogs can either be something which help you do this or help someone else depending on how good you are at using the tool.
Blogs are marketing, but not always positive marketing. Annonymous blogs also make it impossible to track where it comes from, so how is this useful? For the worker it allows you to know which places you don't want to work for and which bosses you don't want to be under. It's a good thing for the worker, and its a good thing for the CEO if the CEO treats its workers right. These tools simply enhance workplace freedom and democracy for everyone. This is good or bad depending on the side of the coin you are.
Many pawns with increased communication simply means the suits need to actually work just as hard as everyone else now. Why? Because now the social mobility is increased. What stops you from influencing the corporation from the grassroots?
Blogging is a strength, so is the internet, but all of this power existed before in other forms so its not really new. The difference now is the fact that the power is distributed to anyone when before it was kept within certain circles of networks of peers.
If a network of peers form an alliance then it doesnt matter who your boss is, that alliance gives power to the peers in the long term. Short term the boss maintains power, so basically any group of workers who are treated badly enough can decide to use influence either from within the company or outside the company. Corporate politics are extremely complex, and a lot of it is based on favors, who knows who, and knowledge of who is in certain circles and how much influence they have.
If you are a smart suit then you have nothing to fear because you'll use your position to make yourself a likeable boss, you'll also understand the office politics, otherwise if you arent able to keep your position then who else is to blame?
The key to success in business is social magic. Guanxi as it's called in China, it's a form of office politics. Social software and blogging simply adds a new dimension to it all. If the world was flat, now its round. If the world was 2d, now its a 3d world. The internet and advanced communication plays a role in everything, and for most people in a good way.
1 Job = 1 Vote. If you work 2 jobs then you get more votes.
It shouldnt be created in the first place.
on
Revamping Freenet
·
· Score: 1
If no one creates it then theres no reason to try to control who hosts what. Kiddie porn is illegal to create, this has nothing to do with freenet and distribution. I agree people shouldnt create kiddie porn, but the stuff thats already done, its done already. Outlawing freenet wont rewind time even if the documentations are gone and theres not a trace of the incident left, it still happened.
I guess you don't know a lot about how computers work. A jpeg or gif is just a set of 1s and 0s. This is speech. If I code the jpeg format, and some child pornographer takes pictures on his physical camera and stores these pictures in the jpeg format, you don't sue the creator of the jpeg format for aiding the child pornographer. You don't sue the people who made the camera. You don't sue the internet company for allowing them on the internet. You shouldnt sue people who distribute it. Distributing 1s and 0s is the same as me telling you something and you repeating it to your neighbor and then me sueing you for it. If I can tell you a story and sue you for telling people, then am I right for trying to control what you can or cannot say? Or was I just wrong to tell you something expecting you to know not to repeat it?
The distributors job is not to be law enforcement. It's not the distributors fault that kiddie porn exists, the distributor just distributes whatever they are given, if this were business then when someone makes a bad product you don't sue the distributor, you sue the people who made the product because suing the distributors does not stop the people who keeps making the content.
Look, kiddie porn is bad content, most people can agree on this, but you don't stop bad content by trying to restrict its distribution, you stop bad content by preventing its creation. Lots of things are bad, but you cannot stop these things by restricting speech, this can quickly become thought control and you know where this will lead.
If you look at north korea, you can see how thought control works and where it leads. It starts with kiddie porn, but once they pass laws to stop kiddie porn it makes it easier for laws to be passed to protect say, intellectual property, software patents, and to control the internet in general. Child porn can be used politically to reduce freedom of speech, this is why it should be obvious why we don't want to give up freedom of speech on the internet over one issue. This is like giving up creativity to protect people from bad creativity. We should try to protect and increase freedom as much as we can while preventing people from creating bad content, concepts, or products. If you make it more difficult to create bad things like new weapons to kill people, or new cameras which can take xray pictures, or whatever new technology which could be exploited, if you don't let it be created in the first place you can protect children and have freedom. It's simple, if you make a digital camera it has to have a chip inside it to allow authorities to always know who purchased it. If a camera requires your digital signature then its like a gun, its licensed. This is how you could solve this problem. Someone who loses their license after being convicted of kiddie porn can never buy another camera and if they put it on the internet then they should never be allowed online. It's that simple.
You have to use the law in a way which prevents and discourages people from creating kiddie porn and then putting it online. You could increase sentences for people whos cameras were used to take a picture. If someone takes those pictures with the family camera then the owner goes to jail. This is look someone stealing your gun and shooting someone, you go to jail, but the point is, a camera is powerful so use it responsibly.
Free speech is too important to give it up over one issue.
Yes if you posses and distribute illegal 1s and 0s, its the same as just typing these illegal 1s and 0s on a piece of paper and showing it, or as saying those 1s and 0s, in fact you can't even think about those 1s and 0s. Thats a thought crime, all data on computers are just communications, just thoughts, none of it is real. A picture is a frozen image of a thought or a document of an action but the 1s and 0s are still thought, still just 1s and 0s. This means these arent real pictures we are talking about here, this is a digital copy, and digits are numbers which represent things, and this means you are outlawing thinking about kiddie porn in any fashion. I don't endorse creating kiddie porn, but you do nothing to stop its creation by outlawing the distribution of it. In fact, the more its distributed the less value it becomes, who is going to pay for kiddie porn? what happens to all these companies that profit from kiddie porn? Now I know you won't stop kids from being molested by family members, but you can definately go after the organized child porn businesses and the organized sexual slavery. Stopping the distribution is like telling people to cover their eyes and pretend we are fighting it by making it impossible to view, or more difficult to think about. It's not the thought, its the crime of molesting kids, the criminals who did these acts should be put in prison, but just talking about it should not put someone in prison. 1s and 0s are speech not actual objects.
When you pay AOL your ISP to provide the internet, you are also paying to host terrorist websites, communist websites, and for child pornographers to distribute their porn. Look we don't have any control over what goes on over the internet, we arent supposed to try to micromanage the internet, its not designed to work like that.
AOL cannot control what goes on in their node, yes if they find an offensive site they can remove it, but they cannot stop someone from transfering mp3s or kiddie porn over their connection. Communication by nature is supposed to be free, its not supposed to be controlled. You can censor your own communication to a point in that you dont have to actively seek out child porn and you don't have to ever pay a site thats hosting child porn. You cannot however prevent child porn from being distributed on the internet, its impossible and its morally wrong to destroy the internet to stop speech you dislike.
The way to prevent children from being harmed is put chips in cameras and make everyone get a license to take pictures. The way to stop child porn is to do a better job tracking where a picture came from. If we each camera had a signature, you could track to find out who purchased that specific camera. If the computer OS has a certain signature in the camera software you could figure out which computer it came from, you should let the forensic teams deal with this stuff and help come up with better technology to catch the people who create illegal porn. Not just illegal porn, but also people who take pictures of random individuals without permission, and people who do stuff like put videos on the internet without permission. You could stop this at the point where people upload the video onto the computer in the first place and make it so people can be sued lots of money for each unauthorized picture or video of themselves online.
Until this happens, all you are doing is attacking freedom of speech. You are focusing on the wrong people and doing nothing to stop kiddie porn or child abuse because you are fighting the technology instead of using the technology to fight the abusers.
Slashdot Mirror
The elite class will rule over you on matter what system you pick. If you pick capitalism then people who have wealth will change laws to protect their wealth and keep you poor. If you are in communism then the people who control the military will try to use their political influence to get alittle extra out of the system to make it more fair than fair for themselves.
This is a problem of human nature, not systems. The problem is with people who cheat and who are irresponsible, not with capitalism or communism. Both can work if people actually played by the rules, but no one does in either system so both systems are all about positioning, and what family you are born into. The only difference is in capitalism, making others poorer is in your best interest while in communism making everyone equal is in your best interest. Communism works on equality while capitalism works on inequality.
You have to censor in capitalism, copyright, intellectual property, patents, are forms of censorship to protect wealth. You don't have to censor as much with communism because wealth is shared. Communism is open source society as compared to Capitalism which is closed source.
Crime has everything to do with how people think and what their priorities are and nothing to do with the means in which they express their violent actions.
A gun is deadly, so is poison, so is a bomb, so are ideas, just about anything can be turned into a weapon. Violence ends when people learn to love instead of hate and it just so happens that hate is more popular in Australia and America than in China, this is why the crime rates are higher, at least violent crime.
Violent crime follows violent thoughts, and violent thoughts come from violent emotions, like hate and anger, something Americans have mastered over the years and used to win wars in the past and conquer.
It's simple, if you want people to stop being violent, create a pill which lowers aggression and which prevents people from getting angry. Create a gas which makes people happy, and release it into the workplace, and then maybe violence will go down.
Americans define humans are consumers and owners. You own a business or corporation and you are "more" human than a consumer or worker.
Human rights in the USA means corporate rights. The right for a corporation to act as a person. This means the corporation is human and you are just a consumer or worker unless you own your own business.
In the USA you are less human if you arent an owner of a business, you are less human if you don't own patents, copyright (both which usually require you to own a business), stock, and other forms of intellectual property. You are less human if you are a female or minority of some sort in that you most likely won't be treated the same by society in the workplace or corporate world.
In general, being human in America requires you to be rich, and perhaps this is a flaw in our interpretation of human rights because we believe in protecting only those who own stuff and who have wealth.
The internet? According to American culture it exists to help corporations profit more efficiently, and this is the reason every technology exists. China might have something different in mind, we just don't know and I don't think we have the right to force our corporate way of life down their throats by making them use out internet, our operating systems, and surf our websites. Perhaps they want their own?
As long as we can connect to Chinas internet none of this matters. Cultures are not all equal and it should be simple to understand why China wants to avoid the mistakes of our culture. At the same time, I want to be able to access Chinese culture, so as long as their internet is not a closed system I don't really care if they use the American internet or Chinese internet, it makes no difference to me just like it makes no difference to most American consumers if their Walmart products are made in China or America, they just don't care.
The USA is not the most free country on earth. Europe is more free, there are places like the netherlands which have more freedom than we will ever have. China is not bad with human rights, in fact China's human rights history is far better than Americas history of slavery, slaughtering native Americans, exploiting illegal immigration, and outsourcing. America has the worst human rights track record in the developed world, so China with its censorship isnt really anything new from the point of view of an American. Right now the American internet is censored to protect corporations, freedom of speech is being restricted, and while we are losing our freedoms we focus on China? Iraq? Who the hell cares? We have to fight for freedom at home.
Thats a good point. Why would China want to immitate American culture? What is so good about our profit/consumption driven culture?
If China wants to have its own internet thats fine with me as long as I can access that internet.
But it depends on how you look at it, you can look at it like checkers or like chess. I see it as chess.
I'm not autistic, but I understand exactly what you are saying, loyalty is a rare trait. If loyalty is rare why should trust be common? Trust for me is as rare as loyalty is in this society, so its rare for me to trust people and it takes a special person to earn my trust.
The media is paid to lie to you, that much is true, and corporations cannot be trusted because they lie too, so the best thing to do is try to focus on individuals and attempt to find the individuals who value loyalty and who want this element in their relationship with you. If they truly value it and its proven through their track record, this is a good sign. If they just say they believe in loyalty but don't act it, then treat them how they act.
Look, if you want to be a sheep who blows in the winds of whichever way the authority figures tell you to blow, then you should be naive like that. If you want to be an independent thinker who makes their own decisions and lives with the consequences, then you have to learn to trust yourself, your decisions, and your ability to figure people out. Your form of trust makes absolutely no sense, you trust based on trust? huh? You trust based on social ties? huh?
Neither of these are very precise forms of trust, because you can be wrong. This means anyone can influence you because you trust everyone, and not everyone is looking out for your best interest. Your strategy leads down the path of consistant betrayal and disloyalty. From experience the only way to have loyalty is to stop accepting anything less. Trust is based on loyalty, not social ties, not emotion, not how long you've known someone. Until you figure this out, you'll be rolling dice instead of playing chess, and its all based on how you'd like to use your mind to figure people out, you can either use your logical mind or you can leave it all to chance.
I prefer to use my logical mind because I don't feel theres room for error. When you make an error you can end up in dozens of really bad situations which require really bad solutions, and the only way to avoid those solutions is to avoid those situations to begin with by not acting emotional or illogical.
Prediction is just pattern recognition. When you have a good reputation with others or with me, it helps you earn trust quicker because its by your track record, this is the best kind of trust that can exist. Nothing else matters, what you say has no influence, its all about how real you are and how responsible and loyal you act. If you act fake it won't help people like me trust you, it only makes people like me suspicious of you. I don't really trust a person who smiles in my face and expects me to trust them, I trust the person who has the reputation from everyone else telling me they are loyal, and who from my own experience I've been able to verify. If I cannot verify, then I don't trust you, and thats basically how it works. Verified trust.
Stop generalizing everyone into one pot. Some things wich work on you and everyone you know won't work on EVERYONE on earth.
Doctors you don't have any choice but to trust, if you don't trust a doctor you'll most likely die, so you don't have much choice, you have to trust one of the doctors. There is no reason to ever trust a salesman, and while a doctor is a salesman for drug companies, there are ways to figuring out which doctors are honest and which doctors arent. Doctors also have reputations.
I don't generally trust strangers unless I have no choice. Deep down I know that any stranger can be a potential backstabber. The key is to get to know a person as well as they know themselves before you trust them. This takes time to establish, more time than your typical salesperson would like to invest.
Social skills has nothing to do with faking trust and everything to do with how you act. If you don't act trustworthy then I'll never trust you and it wont matter what you ever say to me, you cannot hide your actions, you cannot hide your reputation, you cannot hide your fakeness.
Trust is something you have to build over time, its something you have to earn, and depending on who you are earning it from decides how difficult or easy it is to earn. There is not going to be a spray will which clear your record as someone who picks up girls. When these girls talk about you, and how you picked them up their point of views form the entire point of view no matter what you tell people. So unless you plan to hide your past and look suspicious, your past will be up for review along with you.
What the poster above tried to tell you is if you stay fake for too long you lose the real you, you become fake. Do you want to be an expert at manipulating people or do you want to have people who actually like the real you? You can't have real friends if you resort to faking trust because friendship is based on loyalty, if you arent every loyal or trustworthy in actions it will never matter how good you become at faking it. Hopefully you don't forget how to maintain real friendships.
First, real trust has nothing to do with gambling or business. You don't have to trust in situations like that, you just have to make decisions based on previous knowledge.
Example, if I lend you money and you pay it back on time, keep your word, etc, your word gains worth and value, and I'll be more likely to lend you money in the future. This is not trust, this is simply tracking a persons reputation. You can invent a pill to help people trust but theres no pill on earth which will make a person stupid. If this is an attempt at making a sucker pill, well its a nice attempt and I'm sure a few people will buy the sucker pill and start trusting strangers. Myself, I won't trust anyone who hasnt earned it, and earning it isnt easy, takes time, effort, and a proven track record.
If you lack the ability to judge with logic then perhaps then its a chemical, but I always thought that trust is based on experience, logic, character of the people you are dealing with and a lot of other factors, and even then its never absolute.
We wouldnt be making it easier for the aliens by killing our own species. If theres aliens, beware of humans, we are a suicidal species who will kill anything in our path including ourselves.
Stop working for the company and start your own, otherwise have fun fighting to save social security and fighting for wages.
It's better to use motion against itself than to fight the current.
Instead of being a socialist, start your own business, make as much money as you can, and buy a bunch of companies like George Soros and Warren Buffet. Then you can promote socialism through capitalism, but you arent going to get anywhere if you are going to just yell and scream at people to pay higher taxes, and you arent going to get anywhere if you ask your boss to give you retirement or pay for your health expenses. Your boss does not care about you, so take advantage of the ownership society and become an owner like your boss.
Nothing stops employees from actually posting blogs under annonymous names and putting it on the internet to tell the truth about companies. This was already done by word of mouth but now word of mouth is increased. I don't think blogs are bad, I think its good.
The way to be successful is to be flexible. You have to create your own job and your own situation and the blogs can either be something which help you do this or help someone else depending on how good you are at using the tool.
Blogs are marketing, but not always positive marketing. Annonymous blogs also make it impossible to track where it comes from, so how is this useful? For the worker it allows you to know which places you don't want to work for and which bosses you don't want to be under. It's a good thing for the worker, and its a good thing for the CEO if the CEO treats its workers right. These tools simply enhance workplace freedom and democracy for everyone. This is good or bad depending on the side of the coin you are.
Many pawns with increased communication simply means the suits need to actually work just as hard as everyone else now. Why? Because now the social mobility is increased. What stops you from influencing the corporation from the grassroots?
Blogging is a strength, so is the internet, but all of this power existed before in other forms so its not really new. The difference now is the fact that the power is distributed to anyone when before it was kept within certain circles of networks of peers.
If a network of peers form an alliance then it doesnt matter who your boss is, that alliance gives power to the peers in the long term. Short term the boss maintains power, so basically any group of workers who are treated badly enough can decide to use influence either from within the company or outside the company. Corporate politics are extremely complex, and a lot of it is based on favors, who knows who, and knowledge of who is in certain circles and how much influence they have.
If you are a smart suit then you have nothing to fear because you'll use your position to make yourself a likeable boss, you'll also understand the office politics, otherwise if you arent able to keep your position then who else is to blame?
The key to success in business is social magic. Guanxi as it's called in China, it's a form of office politics. Social software and blogging simply adds a new dimension to it all. If the world was flat, now its round. If the world was 2d, now its a 3d world. The internet and advanced communication plays a role in everything, and for most people in a good way.
Japan created an entire anime industry not with lots of money but with lots of creativity. You don't need money to create anime.
1 Job = 1 Vote. If you work 2 jobs then you get more votes.
If no one creates it then theres no reason to try to control who hosts what. Kiddie porn is illegal to create, this has nothing to do with freenet and distribution. I agree people shouldnt create kiddie porn, but the stuff thats already done, its done already. Outlawing freenet wont rewind time even if the documentations are gone and theres not a trace of the incident left, it still happened.
I guess you don't know a lot about how computers work. A jpeg or gif is just a set of 1s and 0s. This is speech. If I code the jpeg format, and some child pornographer takes pictures on his physical camera and stores these pictures in the jpeg format, you don't sue the creator of the jpeg format for aiding the child pornographer. You don't sue the people who made the camera. You don't sue the internet company for allowing them on the internet. You shouldnt sue people who distribute it. Distributing 1s and 0s is the same as me telling you something and you repeating it to your neighbor and then me sueing you for it. If I can tell you a story and sue you for telling people, then am I right for trying to control what you can or cannot say? Or was I just wrong to tell you something expecting you to know not to repeat it?
The distributors job is not to be law enforcement. It's not the distributors fault that kiddie porn exists, the distributor just distributes whatever they are given, if this were business then when someone makes a bad product you don't sue the distributor, you sue the people who made the product because suing the distributors does not stop the people who keeps making the content.
Look, kiddie porn is bad content, most people can agree on this, but you don't stop bad content by trying to restrict its distribution, you stop bad content by preventing its creation. Lots of things are bad, but you cannot stop these things by restricting speech, this can quickly become thought control and you know where this will lead.
If you look at north korea, you can see how thought control works and where it leads. It starts with kiddie porn, but once they pass laws to stop kiddie porn it makes it easier for laws to be passed to protect say, intellectual property, software patents, and to control the internet in general. Child porn can be used politically to reduce freedom of speech, this is why it should be obvious why we don't want to give up freedom of speech on the internet over one issue. This is like giving up creativity to protect people from bad creativity. We should try to protect and increase freedom as much as we can while preventing people from creating bad content, concepts, or products. If you make it more difficult to create bad things like new weapons to kill people, or new cameras which can take xray pictures, or whatever new technology which could be exploited, if you don't let it be created in the first place you can protect children and have freedom. It's simple, if you make a digital camera it has to have a chip inside it to allow authorities to always know who purchased it. If a camera requires your digital signature then its like a gun, its licensed. This is how you could solve this problem. Someone who loses their license after being convicted of kiddie porn can never buy another camera and if they put it on the internet then they should never be allowed online. It's that simple.
You have to use the law in a way which prevents and discourages people from creating kiddie porn and then putting it online. You could increase sentences for people whos cameras were used to take a picture. If someone takes those pictures with the family camera then the owner goes to jail. This is look someone stealing your gun and shooting someone, you go to jail, but the point is, a camera is powerful so use it responsibly.
Free speech is too important to give it up over one issue.
Yes if you posses and distribute illegal 1s and 0s, its the same as just typing these illegal 1s and 0s on a piece of paper and showing it, or as saying those 1s and 0s, in fact you can't even think about those 1s and 0s. Thats a thought crime, all data on computers are just communications, just thoughts, none of it is real. A picture is a frozen image of a thought or a document of an action but the 1s and 0s are still thought, still just 1s and 0s. This means these arent real pictures we are talking about here, this is a digital copy, and digits are numbers which represent things, and this means you are outlawing thinking about kiddie porn in any fashion. I don't endorse creating kiddie porn, but you do nothing to stop its creation by outlawing the distribution of it. In fact, the more its distributed the less value it becomes, who is going to pay for kiddie porn? what happens to all these companies that profit from kiddie porn? Now I know you won't stop kids from being molested by family members, but you can definately go after the organized child porn businesses and the organized sexual slavery. Stopping the distribution is like telling people to cover their eyes and pretend we are fighting it by making it impossible to view, or more difficult to think about. It's not the thought, its the crime of molesting kids, the criminals who did these acts should be put in prison, but just talking about it should not put someone in prison. 1s and 0s are speech not actual objects.
When you pay AOL your ISP to provide the internet, you are also paying to host terrorist websites, communist websites, and for child pornographers to distribute their porn. Look we don't have any control over what goes on over the internet, we arent supposed to try to micromanage the internet, its not designed to work like that.
AOL cannot control what goes on in their node, yes if they find an offensive site they can remove it, but they cannot stop someone from transfering mp3s or kiddie porn over their connection. Communication by nature is supposed to be free, its not supposed to be controlled. You can censor your own communication to a point in that you dont have to actively seek out child porn and you don't have to ever pay a site thats hosting child porn. You cannot however prevent child porn from being distributed on the internet, its impossible and its morally wrong to destroy the internet to stop speech you dislike.
The way to prevent children from being harmed is put chips in cameras and make everyone get a license to take pictures. The way to stop child porn is to do a better job tracking where a picture came from. If we each camera had a signature, you could track to find out who purchased that specific camera. If the computer OS has a certain signature in the camera software you could figure out which computer it came from, you should let the forensic teams deal with this stuff and help come up with better technology to catch the people who create illegal porn. Not just illegal porn, but also people who take pictures of random individuals without permission, and people who do stuff like put videos on the internet without permission. You could stop this at the point where people upload the video onto the computer in the first place and make it so people can be sued lots of money for each unauthorized picture or video of themselves online.
Until this happens, all you are doing is attacking freedom of speech. You are focusing on the wrong people and doing nothing to stop kiddie porn or child abuse because you are fighting the technology instead of using the technology to fight the abusers.