Declan McCullagh On Geek Activism 303
die_jack_die writes "Declan McCullagh, formerly of Wired News, lately at News.com, has written an insightful piece about the realities of geek activism. Short version: spend your time coding, not lobbying.
(You might also want to check out Politech , his mailing list for this sort of stuff.)" This in contrast to Lessigs call for more lobbying.
How long can we run? (Score:2, Insightful)
I agree with Lessig's call for more lobbying (Score:2, Insightful)
Microsoft is proof that lobbying is more important. Windows doesn't come close to the power, security and stability of nearly every other OS popular today; yet it remains solidly on top in marketshare.
Don't get me wrong, more coding is always a good thing, however, to do it at the detriment of lobbying is a sure fire plan to navigate your project into oblivion.
nice recipie (Score:3, Insightful)
ye gods.
look, ever lived in a condo or worked in a union? the people who don't have lives gravitate to the elected positions. very few people with a homelife of any detail will contribute their extra time unless they feel immediately threatened. and the bit rot begins. the committees get controlled by the cranks and the con-men.
_do_ code like the man is suggesting, but then turn off your tv for part of your down time and do something about your social environment. yes, geeks make poor lobbyists. but they're good educators and agitators of other lobby groups and sectors of the population. you're not alone, regardless of how well you simulate that around your monitor. talk to people.
"hey, computer joe, what's that dmca shit they're talking about?"
"dude, i don't worry about it. making a way around it with my l33t skillz."
and dude goes off believing the archtype few honest men will protect him like hollywood says, and no longer worries about it himself either. great.
political activism doesn't work? man, jack. half of what we call history is records of revolutions, and political evolution.
sorry, this kid's feel-good nilhism may be hip, but it's a personal delusionism of someone who had to justify to himself wanting to say "don't put off today what you can put off tomorrow".
don't underestimate the politicos (Score:5, Insightful)
Politicians are just as good at what they do as geeks are at what they do. If we ignore the politicians, they *will* win. They can shut down the things we love to all but those who are willing to break the law. Don't kid yourselves.
Geeks have to fight the lobbying fight to protect the technology fight.
But if we don't find some way... (Score:3, Insightful)
Slightly longer short version... (Score:2, Insightful)
Spend your time coding, not lobbying. Stay in your place. Don't bother having an opinion on anything other than the design of your software- just leave it to the politicians to know what is good for you. Stay in your place- there's no way a coder could know anything about politics, nor should she be able to have an opinion.
Which is utter bullshit. I'm not going to listen to some schmuck tell me to hold back my ideas just because I'm paid to do something other than be a politician. Just because I get paid to code, it doesn't mean that's all I'm capable of. A lame attempt at putting these socially aware "geeks" "in their place." when you classify you divide.
I don't know about you, but I'm not eating the bullshit-burger with a side order of lies. RISE MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS, take back the freedoms which we have a birthright to uphold- the world would be better run by geeks than layers (the profesion from which most politicians come) anyway.
Pretty weak. (Score:5, Insightful)
It wasn't that long ago that somebody mentioned that the best way to protect our rights was to do something like the NRA does. Gather our resources and blow away a single person. (I mean that metaphorically, I dont mean shoot anybody. Normally I wouldn't need to clarify this, but there's always one dumbshit...) We may not be able to gather enough money to sway political opinion, but it is possible to make one person in particular suffer some sort of consequences, whether it's financially or public opinion.
This doesn't seem like a big deal unless people like Senator Dis^H^H^H^HHollings realize that if they piss off a community like Slashdot, they could end up getting targetted. As I said, that's how the NRA's been able to hang around this long. If anything, we should be looking in their direction. They obviously have a better idea about how to go about maintaining rights than suggesting that people just stay home and clean their guns.
Yes and No (Score:5, Insightful)
It's important to keep writing the software that forces changes in the culture. But it's equally vital to educate people about those changes, to help ensure that the changes that come are positive. McCullagh's argument reads far too much like "Gee, this politics thing is hard. Let's go back to coding and pizza. I'm sure it will all work out" (or, for the more cynical, "Nothing I do will matter anyway.")
If these issues matter to you, then get out there and educate the less tech-savvy. That includes Congresscritters. It also includes family members, coworkers, etc. Don't surrender just because it looks hard. Or to put it another way: Yes, geeks organizing politically might fail to stop this headlong rush into technological totalitatianism. Even if we speak up, the worst might happen. But if we don't speak up, then the worst is guaranteed to happen.
I applaud people creating the disruptive technologies, but they aren't enough. It's interesting to offer up Shawn Fanning (Napster) as a shining example. How, exactly, is Napster doing right now? Yes, he helped usher in an era of peer-to-peer filesharing (ironically through the failure of the Napster model). But now we face increasingly aggressive legal attempts to legislate away computer security, privacy, and fair use rights to counter the things he's unleashed. Maybe unleashing it needed to be done -- but don't you think that maybe, just maybe, things would be in a better state if someone had clearly and forcefully articulated why these things are good, instead of leaving the field uncontested, to be defined by the PR flacks of the *AA groups?
The DMCA passed unamiously because the geeks were silent, by and large. Congresscritters had no white hats telling them what was at stake; and there wasn't even a nascent organized lobbying effort. And of course Rep. Coble would say the law is "performing the way we hoped." -- he helped write and pass the thing! Why not a quote from, say, Rep. Boucher [com.com]:
We as geeks have failed to make clear to Joe Sixpack and Jane Q. Public why they care. If we do that, then we're halfway to a victory. Anyone who says that Congress votes for their corporate sponsors over the vocal deamnds of their constituents must have been under a rock in July, when senators and representatives were falling over each other trying to be the first to fix the issues of corporate responsibility that they were shocked -- shocked! -- to discover in American capitalism.
The big lobbiess don't win because Senator Bob votes against his constituents and ignores their please. The big lobbies win because no one else is speaking
So go ahead. Code the next generation of encryption software. Write the next secure anonymous emailer. Protect privacy at the router level. But, while you saving the world in codepsace, take a minute or two to write your senator or explain to your mom what's going wrong, why we're on the wrong track.
Only a multi-pronged approach holds any chance of success.
I don't think this is the right idea. (Score:2, Insightful)
Its the ignorance, stupid. (Score:3, Insightful)
Politicians can get away with what they do because no one is watching. not enough people to make a difference, anyway. few people care, because few people pay attention. few people pay attention because few people understand what's really happening.
If you want to stop (or at least curb) this crazy behavior, you need to educate yourself and others about what is going on. Find facts, and spread them to everyone you know. Education such as this will help people make up their own minds (don't do their thinking for them, you may be wrong).
EDUCATION is the ONLY way you'll ever get the numbers you need to get people moving in the right direction.
Educate yourself on every aspect of politics, and you'll soon see that it is the only way to get people to move. People go into fits when their favorite ball player is traded because they understand what's going on. Do the world a favor. Be a political reference for your friends. Make things known to people who otherwise would not know about these things. It will help more than you expect.
Re:VOTE DEMOCRAT! (Score:2, Insightful)
The moral of the story is, knee-jerk voting for any political party isn't the solution.
You have to pay attention, do research, get involved, vote intelligently.
You can't code in peace and safety if it's illegal (Score:2, Insightful)
Correction... (Score:3, Insightful)
BTW, Mr. Declan, that was a voice vote for the DMCA. It doesn't mean the bill had 100% support, only that the actual tally wasn't enumerated. Maybe you should pay closer attention.
The sad facts (Score:5, Insightful)
1) They have more money than we do. In Washington, money buys access, and money buys influence. Unless Bill Gates suddenly sees the light on the issues that are important to the average /. geek, this will continue to be the case. The new campaign finance law will not change this fundamental truth of Washington.
2) Geeks and hackers are Bad, and there are no White Hats. Technologically savvy people have been demonized in the press and in the political system as "hackers." While we would apply the term "cracker" to the people our politicans are really talking about, the average American isn't capable of understanding the difference between a "hacker" and a "cracker." Until Joe Average is able to tell the difference, we will remain outsiders.
3) People like Shawn Fanning, Kevin Mitnick, and the publishers of 2600 give us a bad name. It doesn't matter that Fanning or Mitnick or 2600 have or haven't broken the law. As an old math teacher once told me on a totally unrelated issue, "It is not only impropriety we must avoid, but also the appearance of impropriety." Fanning and Mitnick look, to Joe Average, like criminals. See Fact #2.
4) They are better organized than we are. This is closely related to Fact #1, because money brings organization. The EFF, as well as we respect it here on /., doesn't have the organization to be an effective grass roots organization (Christian Coalition) or enough money to be a monied interest (RIAA). That won't change until enough people get interested enough to either do the grass roots education or spend the money. I for one do't have the time to do the former, or the money to do the latter. I'm sure I'm not alone.
5) Joe Average doesn't care about civil liberties. Joe Average cares about a fuel-loaded MD-11 flying into [insert large building he works in here]. Joe Average sees in his little mind, and is frightened of, millions of towelheads screaming "Allah akbar!" and shooting their Kalashnikov's and Uzi's into the air. He agrees with Trent Lott that questioning the government is unpatriotic; he believes that by giving up his freedom, the government can catch all the towelheads before they fly those planes. He also believes that "hackers" (see Fact #2) are at least partly responsible for the government's failures, and that restricting their ability to hack things is essential to stopping the towelheads. Since it's not him secretly locked up with the towelheads without access to an attorney or a court, he doesn't care. [Editorial comment: "... And when they came for me, there was no one left to complain."]
6) Joe Average wouldn't know what to do with the ability to copy something if it jumped up and bit him. He sees no need to copy CDs, and wouldn't understand what to do with a ripped DVD if someone told him. He doesn't understand the point of backing up software, and doesn't reinstall his operating system or upgrade his machine (if he even owns one) frequently, so antipiracy codes like the one in WinXP doesn't make any difference to him. He's not blind, so using a screen reader on an Acrobat file is something that would never enter his mind. DRM technology isn't even a buzzword for him; entering that screen of data to get the program to work is just like filling out a form at the local bank -- you do it because they won't do their thing if you don't. "Fair use" is a foreign concept, and since he's so busy trying to hang onto his job, pay for his kids' education and food, keep a roof over his and his family's head, make the car payment, and worrying about the towelheads, he doesn't care to be educated about fair use and why it's good for him. He also doesn't care who looks up his library records because he doesn't even have a library card and hasn't been to a library since he was in grade school.
These are the facts. Whining on /. about it will not change it. We here on /. are not normal people. We are above Joe Average in intelligence and education on these kinds of issues, because we pay attention to them and they are important to us. They are not important to Joe Average, and they will not become important to Joe Average until he can see them directly affecting his pocketbook or his job. And we can not change that, at least not now.
It may in fact be that the only way we can change the law and influence the system is to obsolete it. It sure wouldn't be the first time that's happened.
Re:The sad facts (Score:2, Insightful)
Then again, I remember, for example, how in A Tale of Two Cities how Madame Defarge would quell impatient revolutionists by telling them that the time to fight had not come yet, and the the rage of the people takes time to build force, like a volcano before eruption. Otherwise, a premature attack would fail, and put the whole movement even further behind. Perhaps that's what we need, to let things get bad enough for the average American Joe to not only give a shit, but become enraged about.
Either way, we shouldn't completely ingore the problem. Groundwork for the revolution must be laid now, even if the real fighting has yet to begin.
libertarian vs democrat (Score:4, Insightful)
Declan is a libertarian, as such, he is in favor of small government and on priniple doesn't like using the government as an agent in shaping society. Lessig on the other hand is a democrat (note the small "d"). As such he holds out hope that masses of people can express a collective set of values that does not cede rights or nonmaterial values to corporate interests.
Generally I dislike libertarianism as it is often used as what I perceive as cover for the rich to get richer at everyone else's expense. I read the WSJ, the Economist and Cato stuff pretty regularly and find that that doesn't generally get addressed. I think the reaction so far here points to the lack of that in Declan's piece.
The story that we get taught in school is that democracy is supposed to be this thing that "the people" participate in, Declan says don't bother. Is this story a myth or not? History tells us that its very hard for democracy to work like in that story, ie, the civil rights struggle or the pitched battles for the 8 hour day early in 1900's.
A more modern example that we can look at is the environmental movement. Environmentalism has made politcal headway because of hard work by millions working hard over decades. It hasn't "won" by any means, but it does have impact.
Are geektivists up to this kind of organization and campaigning? Well we have the ability to be far more organized that any political movement ever. This can't be underestimated. Anyway, I think Declan has thrown down the gauntlet.
Re:Yes and No (Score:1, Insightful)
People who don't know shit about technology don't know shit about technology for a reason - they don't use it, they don't want to use it, and frankly, they're a little afraid of it and the people who DO use it.
Also, having my tech-illiterate relatives writing in to politicians, half parroting and half misremembering/misinterpreting what I've said would not seem to be something that would help much.
How do we educate people? (Score:5, Insightful)
If someone asks me why they should care about the DMCA, i want to be able to give them some basic facts, or point them in the right direction. But to someone with only a casual interest, activism sites that don't come out and say, in plain english, what's bad about the bill will just get overlooked.
Yeah, it's late, mod me for stupidity or whatever you want. That's what karma's for, right?
Re:The sad facts (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Pretty weak. (Score:2, Insightful)
I've always disliked the negative ads. When I see one of them, I'm reminded of all the nasty stuff that gets passed as riders on other bills. For instance, a couple years back the RIAA slipped in a change to copright law that made music a "work-for-hire" by default, as a rider on a bill to support some sort of holiday to commemorate firemen, or something like that. Anyone voting against the RIAA rider gets targetted in the next election as being "against firemen".
When I see a negative ad slamming a candidate over their voting record, I can't help but suspect that it's a similar situation being twisted around. I have no respect for mudslinging ads.
Keep going.. (Score:2, Insightful)
If Delta stopped flying, would demand for flights lower? Hardly. Which means one of two things would happen, one of the other companies would expand to take up the slack, or a number of other smaller companies would rise to fill the niche.
Since all the larger companies are having enough trouble on their own, my bet is on the number of smaller companies.
Now, what if part of the money given to Delta was instead placed in a fund to help out small start-ups? Instead of a few CEO's of a poorly run company being able to claim bonus stock options, you'd have multiple people working to compete with each other, lowering the price of airline service for everybody, while simultaneously putting pressure on to better the service.
The only time a failing company should be bailed out is when that company is governmentally owned to begin with - and the only reason a company should be governmentally owned is to provide a basic service to people that private enterprise wouldn't bother with because it's a losing money option (such as telephone/power service into the boonies - or medical service for people too poor to afford insurance)
Re:don't underestimate the politicos (Score:4, Insightful)
That's not even the biggest problem. His general idea is this:
"By participating in the lobby process, you're effectively giving money to the political system," Back says. "It's effectively a favor-trading system where the politician wins and the geek loses...You're better of spending time writing code and influencing Internet protocols to work towards making the politicians irrelevant in the future." (emphasis mine)
Doesn't he realise, that this will simply be made illegal? If you invent something that stops the politicians controlling what you see/download on the net, this program is illegal, and you are now a criminal. That's the whole point of the DMCA, and the reason we're all pissed... Because it makes it a crime to defeat greedy companies' desires on our freedoms with technology.
Re:libertarian vs democrat (Score:3, Insightful)
If you get rich, it doesn't have to be at my expense, but it is possible to do so. I think you'd agree that the spate of scandals we've seen lately involves a very few rich people get rich at others' expense. That's just an existence proof, but I think its not warped.
One could go into the current round of scandals and the bubble burst as evidence of manipulation by the rich and that the media is only noticing because they got too greedy but do that all the time etc. I think there's good evidence there, but as a line of arguement its easy to get bogged down in details so I'll make a more general point.
I don't have the stats at my finger tips, but over the last 30 years, the top 1/4 of society has seen an enormous increase in wealth, getting more disproportionate as you go up the scale. Everyone else has been pretty flat. Is it really the case that that those people at the top are exclusively responsible for adding wealth to our society? Its certainly the case that the working class have made great increases in productivity, one would think they would benefit too. Could it instead be possible that wealth for workers has been flat because labor unions have had a severe decline in power over that period?
Power is at the heart of the Marxist critique. Those in power will make the rules to continue their power, seems pretty self evident to me. Democracy involves the idea that this doesn't have to be the case, that some expressions of power should be made without regard to wealth. One of the prime occupations of libertarians, as far as i can tell, is to attempt to place limits on where democratic power can be exercised, like the example before us. They appear to be much less interested in placing limits on the power exercised by the rich.
Re:don't underestimate the politicos (Score:5, Insightful)
I am not a coder, and if anything I'm more suited to politics than science. But through my associations with coders, and through reading books by Lessig and Stephenson and following discussions on
Basically what Declan was saying was that it comes down to specialization. Coder's don't sew their own clothes because there are people and machines that do that for them better than they could. Same goes for lobbying and public influence of any kind. Coders have more power in the creation of subversive and revolutionary technologies than they do in their socio-polical skills.
And here I agree with Declan, but he also should have pointed out the need for a greater link between coders and skilled lobbyists and culturally minded individuals. The most active and revolutionary figures on the digital rights boat may not be coders, but they wouldn't be where they are if it weren't for Coders telling them what was up. Its that communication between people of differing skill sets, but similar value systems, that causes communal change.
In summary, the greatest challenges that coders can meet are those of coding (as Lessig himself would say) an architecture that is more free than Washington (or Hollywood) would want, and at the same time making sure that the people they converse with outside the tech community understand the battles that are being waged over the internet and technology (and the stakes that are involved). Its up to everyone, coders and everyone else, to talk about the things that are most important to them at all times, and to forge an understanding between those that are most affected by these new laws, and those that are most effective at fighting them in every arena.
We need more coders speaking up about their rights to a wider audience, but more than that we need more coders wispering into the ears of those who already have an audience. Lessig is such an important asset to the community precisely because he is outside of it. He is the voice of the coder (not to mention musician, user, free thinking individual) in the world of the law, because he devoted his life to law and legal discourse. If he had gotten a BS and a
Therein lies the ultimate goal. Accessing the greatest potential of your abilities in the name of freedom, while understanding the need of other individuals of different abilities in the same name. Helping those individuals do their jobs with a greater understanding of the dilemmas that face your specific community.
Re:How do we educate people? (Score:2, Insightful)
Now, many will no doubt ignore it, but a lot of people won't. Many who didn't know much about DMCA would at least start to recognize the issue in the newspapers and other media. Some people might be moved to write their Congresscritters about what's going on. This would be no bad thing, for in spite of what Declan says, Congresscritters *DO* pay attention to what their constituents think. If enough of us tell them how mad and frightened we are of the direction things are heading, they will be forced to consider our concerns.
If you want an example of this, consider the Aircraft Owners and Pilot's Association, of which I'm a member. AOPA has just over a half a million members, which doesn't seem like much compared to the 280 million in the country. Yet regularly, when issues of concern to pilots are in consideration in Congress, AOPA's letter writing campaigns do affect the votes of members of Congress. All the money Disney hands to Berman and others won't matter a fig if Berman ever gets it in his head that he could lose the next election. It wouldn't take many of his constituents writing him to get that message to penetrate.
What should a message like this say? Something along these lines: "Do you know that rights you now take for granted could be taken away by law?" Then a simple explanation of what DMCA is, and how it has already led to one person being jailed for simply giving an academic talk, while other researchers have cancelled talks rather than risk jail. Then: "well, why should we care about a bunch of professors and scientists, anyway?" Because they were simply exercising their free-speech and fair use rights. Then go on to explain that fair use means that it's OK to rip CD's and make MP3 tracks to play on your computer (providing you bought the CD, of course). Fair use means that you can sell a CD or a book after you buy it and are done with it. Fair use means you can go to a library or music store and listen to a CD to see if you like it before you buy it. And all of these fair use rights are in jeopardy because of DMCA and other proposed laws.
If done right, I think this kind of grassroots campaign can be very effective. Can someone see why it wouldn't at least help? I can't think of any reason myself. It won't solve everything, but it would be a step in the right direction.
Declan and Lessig-both right,both wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
His analysis of the current political situation is right, but only as far as it goes. What he's missed is that o1ur jobs are at stake. High tech R&D will have to move out of the USA if Hollywood gets everything it wants and at the moment, MPAA/RIAA have NO meaningful opposition.
He is WRONG about the options being to keep doing futile educational attempts or go home.
Lessig is RIGHT in that we have to stay engaged in the political process. He is WRONG in saying we have to do the same old things, only bigger and better.
BOTH are wrong in thinking there are no other options.
The third choice is ORGANIZE in a clueful way.
Is the average member of the National Rifle Association a major record label suit making $1M a year?
Is the average retiree member of the American Association of Retired Persons a VP of Universal making $2M a year?
I think you know that the answer to both questions are NO.
Does Congress listen to the NRA or the AARP? Not always, not all the time, but in general, the answer is "YES!". The "not always" simply means that nobody gets everything they want all the time.
Is the income of the average member of either group that much greater than ours? Of course not, our average incomes are far higher than theirs. Is the average intelligence or wisdom of the average member of each group so much greater than that of the average "geek" that they deserve political influence and we don't?
What does the NRA/AARP do?
The high-tech part of the US economy is $500B, the entertainment sector about $50B. They are the tail, WE are the dog. Who's getting wagged?
There seems to be an assumption that just because we work with computers, there's a collective cluelessness that will make it impossible for us to combine as a whole to save our own asses, that we are too stupid to understand what our own self-interest is and too selfish to give our own money and time to do anything about it.
Declan has offended us because he's the first geek public figure to make the assumptions that our opposition makes about is explicit.
Our options are:
- Do what the NRA/AARP does. Band together, open our wallets, donate our own time to make sure our friends get elected and our enemies get retired. One $100 contribution to a Congresscritter can be ignored. 100,000 such contributions aggregated by a "geek" organization means that when the Department of Commerce sets up a DRM conference, our people will be invited VIP guests and maybe Hollywood doesn't get invited.
- watch corporate high-tech R&D move to places where Hollywood doesn't 0wn the government to escape the drastically increased costs of compliance and slower development cycles with the legislation passed or in progress will mandate.
- bet on every government in the world adopting the same shackles on its own high-tech that the US entertainment industry wants. I think this a sucker bet.
Get ready to open your checkbooks to buy insurance against having to move out of the USA to practice any high-tech profession via the political process. Or start saving up for relocation and startup money in a new country. Or see what kind of fast-food uniforms you look best in.The individual geek option in this case is to move out of the US when this happens to wherever the most interesting companies are going or learn how to love flipping burgers. Do you want to say "Would you like fries with that?" on the job?
People, it's "Join or Die" time.
We can find something to join or invent something, but we WILL stand up and be counted or we WILL be rolled over.
You have run out of time to decide. What's it going to be?
There is no Joe Average (Score:2, Insightful)
Scientific Statesmen? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's our jobs, or what's left of them.
Or if you aren't working, whether there will ever again be a wave of high-tech company expansion that'll get you a job.
CDTBPA, BPWG recommendations, and we don't know what next mean that the cost of US high-tech R&D go through the roof, and the brain-damaged technology Hollywood is likely to approve will reduce the functionality of hardware, software, the Internet itself in a way even or especially noticeable by Joe Sixpack *and* his PHM. What does this economy look like for a high-tech worker?
The example for us to follow is the NRA, not the Federation of Atomic Scientists. We have to learn how to play hardball politics in the big leagues. NOW.
This isn't about taking a noble stand. It's about kicking asses and taking names. It's about raising enough money to tell politicians "Our way or the highway. Your choice." Our chunk of the economy is 10x that of the entertainment industry. If we can't figure out a way enough money given this to make guys like Hollings go away, we deserve what we are getting.
This is also about the future of whether there is going to be any human freedom or not in this part of the 20th century.
However, I think the motivation that's going to get us to open our wallets and checkbooks and get up early some morning to walk a precinct for a candidate our organization's political analysts say is our friend is or point-and-click faxes to our elected officials every other week is... a few rich, greedy assholes want to protect a dying business model that is publically denounced by their own employees in a manner which will probably end the IT or other high tech careers of a whole lot of us.
So they can inflict a few more boy bands or Britney Spears soundalike on us before they retire.
Re:don't underestimate the politicos (Score:3, Insightful)
You made that statement, his story didn't.
But you've also made the mistake of talking as though Politicians are Borg. They are not, THEY DO NOT THINK AS ONE.
There is as much embarrassed by the few industry stooges in Congress and the Senate as there is anger among Geeks at their behaviour. Attacking those stooges is not counter productive.
ESPECIALLY WHEN ELECTIONS COMING UP.
Now Howard Coble is so tainted by this, that he can't even open his mouth without people automatically assuming he will say something rabid and pro-RIAA/MPAA.
I'm starting to read geeks comments in Newpaper, reflected in politicians speeches, discussed even on TV (the TV piece had Shakira in the background as illustration of the low value of music).
So No, the geeks attack isn't counter productive, its very very productive. Those few politicians are shitting themselves. So when a Washington insider journalist tells us to shut up you know you are winning.
Declan, Gore and the GOP (Score:3, Insightful)
What he did was he published a piece in wired on Gore's CNN interview, then he got a comment on that piece from his girlfriend at the Cato institute. Then he reported on the comment from the Cato institute and the article was circulated by Newt Gingrich's office. Of course the smear would have died instantly if the media ever bothered to check sources.
Declan also has a pretty sordid history.
After the election Declan was real pissed that the Bushies didn't even invite him to the inauguration and published nasty stories about their Web site. So now he is persona-non-grata in both the Republican and Democrat camps.
Re:libertarian vs democrat (Score:3, Insightful)
As a Libertarian, I have to vigorously disagree. If that were the case, why is it that Cato and the LP do not attract the super huge sums of money from the wealthy that other organizations do? (The Economist and WSJ are certainly free market oriented, but that is not necessarily Libertarian to me.)
Indeed, at the most recent Libertarian convention, Otto Guevara [libertario.org], head of the Movimiento Libertario came to speak. Based in Costa Rica, with the help of proportional reprsentation, Movimiento Libertario holds 10% of the seats in the Costa Rican National Assembly (most any Libertarian movement has had anywhere anytime.) (Note: not only am i very involved in the LP, i also happen to be Costa Rican as well.)
Anyway, he said that when he was getting started, he thought that Libertarianism would most appeal to business people and the wealthy. He found out that they simply weren't interested--because often their wealth stemmed from government regulations, or at least government regulations today protected their wealth/livelyhoods from competition.
Instead, he appealed to the common man...the taxi drivers, the street lottery sellers, the ice cream vendors who walk through the neighborhoods of San Jose. They saw the opportunities that Libertarianism offered, because often it was government regulations which were preventing them from advancing (regulations promulgated by an unsympathetic bureaucracy.) . I don't believe that there could ever be too many Taxis in the Metropolitan region of San Jose, but regulations make it difficult for drivers to get taxi medallions. Pirate taxi drivers (those unlicensed but do it anyway) know that it's not a safety issue, it simply is a revenue maker for the government and it keeps competition out.
Even though my grandmother said it would be heresy to vote for any other party than Liberacion, one of the two main parties, I know many in my family were attracted to the ML message. My uncle runs a gas station/car fix it place, and the ML message hit him pretty strongly--these are not wealthy people, they are simply trying to make their lives better through their own capabilities and blessings.
When you live in a small nation, it is so much easier to see what the results are of any one law.
My Letter to Declan Re: Giving Up (Score:1, Insightful)
I agree that politics is primarily driven by lobbyists paying politicians money. However, your article essentially states that public opinion makes no difference to politicians. This is patently false. Do you really believe that no law was ever changed due to public opinion? I doubt it.
The original USA Patriot Act had language that would have made computer hacking an act of terrorism, punishable by life in federal prison. This WAS NOT limited to hacking that lead to someone's death. The law was changed before it went through Congress.
The Justice Department's Operation TIPS program was killed in large part because of public outcry. Dmitry Skylarov was released and the company who asked him to be prosecuted, Adobe, changed their stance because of public opinion.
And you're here telling people to give up? You might as well be telling people, after the closest
Presidential election in history, that their vote
doesn't count, so they shouldn't bother.
If you think political activism is "mostly waste of time," you might also want to pull out a history book and read about the American Civil Rights movement and a guy named Mahatma Gandhi.
I often believe that my Congressman doesn't listen to me and doesn't care. Regardless, I have an obligation to stand up and fight for what I believe in. It's called integrity. Try writing an article about that, because this one was mostly a waste of time.
Re:You missed the part Declan got right (Score:2, Insightful)
-The AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) is a HUGE base of politically educated, moneyed (having money) people, most of whom have fought in wars for our freedom and right to complain about it on just such a forum as this, to say that they do not care/can't learn what we are talking ablout is to not give enough credit to the generations that invented the Computer, A-Bomb, Fought for integration of minority races, and to this day can effect the outcome of elections (do you really think the elderly in Broward county didn't know who they were voting for? how many times have they voted using those same ballots?)
-The NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) Loves a good fight they love to fight for the constitutionally protected rights of others, and have a long and glorious history of being patriotic beyond reproach!
We need to get these groups informed about our side of these issues. forget about forming our own groups, we need established, respected, informed activists working on these issues with us because otherwise, all congress is going to see is a bunch of criminal hackers or some geek with Spock ears... I know this isn't truly what there is, but that's all they'll see
Of course, if all else fails, we can alwaus move to Rio De Janeiro to do our geek thing in peace... they know english, they throw great parties, and they have a great climate... why aren't we there already?