New Game by Days of Wonder Coming: Small World

Small World

It's a World of Slaughter
A World of tears...
It's a World of Dopes
And a World of fears...
There's TOO much that we share
So beware...
It's a Small World after all...

Technology Wars

I often am complaining about how technology is evaluated. I am not an Apple fan (except their iPod, which was well designed and a very well thought through device when it was released). A friend of mine sent this to me the other day and it nailed how ludicrous defining good technology has become..... the Apple Wheel.


Apple Introduces Revolutionary New Laptop With No Keyboard

Foucault & Chomsky - Applicable to today?

This is a famous debate and while obviously dated, I was watching and pondering whether it applies to modern times. Foucault's point of systems of power, specifically around knowledge, seems to define contemporary times. While western democracy has propagated freedom and rights, knowledge has been constructed as a market "good." Thus, knowledge can be owned in our society and another who accesses another's "knowledge" without permission is a criminal. What I find fascinating in this construction of knowledge is that it is a system, designed or by accident, that oppresses humans via knowledge; and puts the moral blame on the oppressed. This would be analogous to not allowing citizens to read, and any citizen who could read was a criminal and immoral. The mechanisms of knowledge have changed since the 12th century; but the drive to control and own knowledge remain the same.

Part 1:


Part 2:

Fear

I realize I haven't posted in a while and that is something I am going to try to be better at. I have been ruminating on many different current issues recently and feel that this is a good place to attempt to articulate my thoughts on where the world is going, specifically the USA (where I live).

It was a relief to have Obama elected as the next President of the USA not because of political views, or promises made presidential candidates (as if the promises meant anything, which they don't as ruled by the Supreme court), or as a correction to our previous administration. My relief in this election is a subtle and refreshing transition in the citizens of this state.

Obama ran on the platform of hope which stands in juxtaposition to the previous administrations platform of fear. America seemingly is fueled by fear. Currently we face many fears: the economy, terrorism, house foreclosing, unemployment, and the safety of our families to name just a few. I was pleasantly surprised that despite the bleak world and how much fear there is in our culture, people came out in mass to say, "I will no longer be afraid, there is hope."

I believe humanity is greatest when it holds hope. My hope is that we maintain our new found hope and fight against political cynicism and fear over the next decade no matter who is in office.

I am grateful to have a politician call out how base American political election cycles have become. Although, ironically the video ends with "let's talk about something serious and something real....."

Democracy, Freedom and Liberty.....

.... for the living only.

I only wish to say that the stories shared here are the exact reason that I believe war is not a tool for a civilization or society to influence, change, or assist another civilization and/or society. War is to destroy, annihilate, and eradicate an enemy.

Morality and ethics are a concern of the living.

I am find it hard to express the deep disgust I have for leaders of nations in modern times that lack the intellect, wisdom, and conviction to make decisions. Embrace war, embrace the slaughter, embrace the eradication of a people. To do otherwise is disingenuous and a mockery of history. If you can not embrace such a blood lust then maybe war was not the answer to the problem. Seldom has war really resolved conflicts.

Iraq Veterans Against the War

I respect and honor every soldier who has left their family to answer a call made by those who sit in offices. "When the rich wage war, it is the poor who die." And the poor who do return home continue to carry the burden of a choice that wasn't theirs.

The Ethics of Intellectual Property Rights - Part 1

I have been pondering the issues of Intellectual Property Rights, copyrights, piracy, the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) as of late. I have come to some conclusions and have decided to share my views.

Critique #1 - Creation in a Vacuum

The concept of intellectual property rights is a continued assumption that the individual is the primary agent. That is to say the individual being is the nexus point for all action and thus reducible to the individual. This is exemplified in the mental health field with mental diagnoses being only focused on individual diagnosis. This is exemplified in the criminal court system with crimes being reduced to the individual "who does the crime." While these are two quick and broad stroking examples, such ideologies also seem to be applicable to the intellectual property rights as it questions: "who owns intellectual property?", but the question is framed in the assumed context that an individual is the answer, so we debate which individual that should be. The overt egocentric, and overly base, conception that the individual is the creator, doer, and owner of everything in its own domain is yet another perversion of Manifest Destiny.

I ask of anyone who creates, discovers*, invents, etc, the following question (I would hope this would include every living human):

Do you believe that you are the necessary and only necessary condition for your invention, creation, etc. to exist? In other words, would whatever you are supposedly the creator exist if and only if you created it AND only because you exist to create it?

I believe the above question is impossible to answer yes to. Furthermore, I would contend that intellectual property rights are based on answering that question yes and thus is a deluded sense of grandeur that the I exists, in some peculiar way, outside the socio-historic context that situates the individual. If I were to take a simple example of an artist who paints a painting. To believe that the artist is the SOLE creator of a painting she paints is interpreting creation as necessarily only teleological in nature. This is an overly reductionist interpretation. Any interpretation of creation take into consideration the socio historic context. For example, the artist has had access to a multiplicity of social resources (e.g. paint, training, time, knowledge of art, etc.) in order for the painting to come to fruition. I suggest we reject reductionist interpretations of creation and take into consideration the interactions of individuals in their community and society. If one does interpret the process of creation as inclusive to those interactions, then the creator any knowledge can not be reduced to a single individual.

NOTE: While at this point I can see my first argument being interpreted that I will claim that no one has ownership of any knowledge and thus artists create their art for the good of society with no compensation, I do not hold this view nor will I be arguing for some for of neo-Communist ideologies. At this point I am only calling into question and critiquing the accepted ideas around intellectual property rights.

Footnote: * - discover versus creation is an argument around whether or not knowledge is a priori or a posteriori. How one answers this question also will play into the legitimacy of intellectual property rights and is an issue I will investigate later.

Geek Mafia - Good book and Ethically Distributed

If you don't care for the reasons, you can just go to the book I am suggesting here: Geek Mafia by Rick Dakan

For about a year now I have been struggling with a few concepts and while I am not done struggling I have come to a few conclusions along the way. I will post the thoughts, reasons, and insights later; but for now just the conclusions and what that means.

• The current conception of intellectual property in the United States is not only epistemically bankrupt, but unethical.
  
• Knowledge, Information, and Power are interrelated to the point of inseparability.
  
• Ownership of knowledge and/or information is social and political power.
  
• Domination and exploitation exist in the cognitive sphere of humanity as much as the emotional and physical.
  

You may be asking: "so what?" Well for 2008 I have set a goal to support and utilize as little "all rights reserved copyrighted" materials and instead support artists, writers, and any other individual who offers their time to totalizing human intellectual capital. I just finished a book that falls in such a category and would highly suggest it.

Rick Dakan's book was published under the Creative Commons copyright.

You can get his book here: Geek Mafia by Rick Dakan