Posts Tagged ‘nocleanfeed’

Thinking … now with fewer consequences

I keep coming back to the issue of ‘filtering’ the internet that is most concerning to me.  I don’t care so much about morals – everyone has a different set; and I’m not that convinced of the technology – it will improve or not as it always does.  What concerns me most is the effect that a filtered feed from all sources will have on us as a society and as individuals within that society.

It’s not so much that Big Brother is watching us 1984-style, it’s that we won’t be able to think our way clear on any issue. It’s not that we will have ‘thoughtcrimes’, it’s that we won’t have thoughts.  Our perceptions, our knowledge, our reality will be reduced to whatever it is that we can access.  Mindless facebooking, linking stuff, grabbing stuff, accumulating links[1].  It’s like the EPIC thing, the Evolving Personalised Information Construct.

But, where EPIC2014 hints at the commercialisation of the process, the current filtering proposals don’t even give us the option of anything evolving.  Anything not appropriate will be filtered, we won’t have any choice.

We’re already seeing people mindlessly buying stuff on the internet, witness the Beijing Ticketing scam[2].  It’s that idea of ‘functional literacy’ in a hyperconnected world.  People believe what they want to believe, they read what they want to read.  But sometimes there is no thought behind the reading.  There is no way for them to fully participate in the business of living.  Hence we have people losing thousands of dollars to scammers, and not just any people, but even the tech savvy[3].

The idea that anything bad for us should be filtered, that children should be protected from accidentally realising that maybe, just maybe, their parents have sex, is quite disconcerting.  Or is that the point of the filters – children shouldn’t even think that sex is normal[4].

I wonder at what will become of our ability to think when we have a clean feed.  Here is your box, think inside it.  Outside is bad, very bad.

Perhaps there is a better way.

  1. I shouldn’t talk, my delicious is way big []
  2. I would link to it, but it was taken down []
  3. once that paper is published, I’ll insert a link to this stuff []
  4. yes, there are problems with the normalisation of pornographic representations of sex, but that’s a different argument []

Tags: , , ,

Moore’s Law and Wetware

Senator Conroy (our dear, dear friend) invoked Moore’s Law with regards to the filtering systems currently available.  I haven’t actually heard what he said about it[1], although I’m quite able to comment on just the fact that he did mention it and luckily read the transcript.

Moore’s Law, as depicted by the Wikipedia page linked above “describes a long-term trend in the history of computing hardware” (emphasis added). In layman’s terms, it is often rendered as “computers get twice as good every two years”. It sounds simple enough, but if you read on, the entry continues:

Since the invention of the integrated circuit in 1958, the number of transistors that can be placed inexpensively on an integrated circuit has increased exponentially, doubling approximately every two years.

So, we have a physical capacity that is increasing, relating to the hardware.  So, surely that can apply to the software running on it?  After all, the filter will be software that is run on hardware (which we’ve just established is getting better).

Let’s think about that.  We had Windows 1 in 1985, Windows 2 in 1987 (so far, it works), Windows 3 in 1990 (slightly behind schedule), Windows 4 (AKA Windows 95) in 1995 (slipping a bit here), Window 5 (AKA Windows 98) in 1998 (almost back on track), Windows 2000 (and its variations) and Windows XP (in 2001) which together should make 6 and 7, but are probably variations on Windows 5[2].  These two were nearly on schedule according to this mythical Software verstion of Moore’s Law.  Then we got Vista … in 2006.  Whoops, running a bit behind schedule.  The next version coming will be Windows 7 (see, I did mention there was something wrong with the versioning system of Windows) is currently in Beta which means it could be ready for 2009 (still behind MSML – Mythical Software Moore’s Law).

To turn the other cheek, so to speak, Macintosh System Software (Version 1) was released in 1984 (January to be precise), System 2 in 1985 (April, we’re doing pretty well here), System 3 came out in January 1986 (ahead of the ball game here), System 4 was released in 1987 (March – still meeting targets), System 5 was 1987 (no month available) and System 6 in 1988 (unverified on Wikipedia from which all the above are drawn).  I’m no expert on all of these systems, but I’ve played with a few.  The Wikipedia article suggests there were major updates in Systems 1, 4, 5 and 6 which gives us periods of 3 years, some months, then one year.  Following System 6, we had system 7[3] released in 1991, but there was no major update until Mac OS 8[4] in 1997, giving us 6 years, rather than the suggested two.  OS 9 was released in 1999 (back to the 2 years), then OS X in 2001 (and a version of that every year or two … Mac users are suckers for the shiney).

So, without even going near the run of the mill application software, we see intermittent development (some coinciding with major developments in the technology – probably related to Moore’s Law) with no pattern emerging.  There’s no Moore’s Law for software!  We cannot predict when improvements will happen, because as soon as something is done, the chips are all updated and it has to be tested again with new parameters and invariably, the code that runs it, no longer does in the way that was anticipated.  So, we can’t even predict when things will change, unlike the physical measurements that have been observed with hardware.

So what about wetware?  What’s that you say? What is wetware?  Well, that’s our brains.  I’m fairly sure there has been some significant improvements in the functioning and capabilities of the human brain, and I’m pretty sure that Moore’s Law does not apply.  Although, perhaps it simply applies to the propensity to develop new ideas[5].  Perhaps we will find that  Moore’s Law of the Human Psyche will allow our politicians (not mentioning any names, Senator Conroy) to develop a new idea every 2 years.  Which would be positive, because we’ve already lived through enough of this filtering crap.

Can we have our new idea early, Senator Conroy?

  1. I find it too nauseating to watch for too long at once, although the female panelists seemed to be quite the critical thinkers []
  2. I don’t profess to be a Windows expert, but how many people are? []
  3. which was on the first Mac I ever bought []
  4. a system I somehow missed []
  5. at least in some individuals []

Tags: ,

There’s a pattern here, somewhere

Tracing patterns – there’s something.  It’s not good.  In fact, it’s terrible for us, the people.

  1. Copyright
    1. Copyright was designed in th 1700′s to protect creators from publishers. (Source)
    2. Copyright is an economic right, automatically vested in creators by governments. (Source)
    3. Copyright is now a weapon used against both creators and consumers.
    4. Rightsholders more often seem to be publishers, not creators.
  2. Buttons
    1. The Button Makers Guild was the RIAA of the 1600′s. (Source)
    2. Hollywood owes its location and prominence to its avoidance of paying licence fees to Thomas Edison for making movies. (Source)
    3. CDs, DVDs, whips, buggies, iceboxes, buttons are all outmoded technologies.
    4. We haven’t yet gained the right to make our own modern buttons.
  3. Computers
    1. The Internet and the World Wide Web opened up ways of interconnecting, collaborating and organising.
    2. WWW technologies are law-blind.
    3. Xanadu failed.
    4. Rightsholders want Xanadu, not WWW.
  4. Censorship
    1. The Internet and WWW allow massive sharing and exchange of information.
    2. People love this.
    3. Rightsholders and Governments fear this.
    4. Governments, rightsholders and some corporations have more power.
  5. Technologies
    1. Technology is not neutral.
    2. Many activities are enabled by technology.
    3. Many activities are broken by technology.
    4. Technology can make or break us.
  6. Information
    1. Information is a key to learning.
    2. Learning is a key to participation.
    3. Participation is central to our ways of being.
    4. We are Information.
  7. News
    1. News is dying.
    2. News is ever more important.
    3. Paper is obsolete.
    4. We are news.
  8. Change
    1. Change is necessary for growth.
    2. Technologies change us (see 2, 5 and 6 above)
    3. Some people fear change (see for instance Australian Christian Lobby)
    4. We are change.
  9. Democracy
    1. Dissent is necessary for democracy.
    2. Democracy is about the people.
    3. We are the people.
    4. We are being silenced.

There’s something that links all of these together.  Something bigger than our current economic crisis or even our fight against censorship.  There’s something striking at the heart of us.  I fear we have no power, that our democracy has failed us in the face of massive greed and corporatism.

I used to think that the main difference between Australia and the US was that Australia arose from injustice.  We got the convicts, the US got the Puritans.  This gave us an insight into injustice, even though we perpetuated it here.  It underlies our larrikinism, our dissent against propriety.  But we have been invaded.  We have lost our way.  We are not who we thought we were, and those of us who remember are shaking our heads in dismay.  We are being overwhelmed by a new form of puritanism.

This pattern is pervading my thoughts, and yet I cannot quite see it.  What is it that I see?

Edited to add:

  • Serfdom is making a comeback.
  • People don’t understand numbers.
  • More children are abused in their home than by strangers.
  • Moral panics!

Tags: ,

Keep the Pipes Clean!

I was sending an email this morning and I noticed something about my email signature, which I must admit I have not changed for quite some time (perhaps 2 or 3 years). It reads thusly:

======
Education is the kindling of a flame, not the filling of a vessel. (Socrates, apparently.)
======
++++++
This email is sent using recycled, sustainable electrons!  Keep the pipes clean.
++++++++

I realised, belatedly, that the last bit of that could be interpreted in two ways.  Obviously with the “Clean Feed”, that last statement could be read in support of a filtered internet, but it is not my intent.  Given the analogy that is often used to help explain the internet as a ‘series of tubes‘[1], and the network neutrality debates, I seek to make a statement that the tubes/pipes/network should not be limited nor blocked in any way.

I figure it this way: if all our data flows through these pipes, then any kludge on the sides of the pipes restricts the flow of information.  Providing preferred ‘flow’ for any information, as has been proposed by some very large ISPs particularly in the US, is a form of kludge for all other information.  So too for the “clean feed”.  It is, in effect, a blockage in the system.  It is dirtying the pipes, something we would be loath to do with our actual plumbing.

I guess the real problem, then, is that some people already have their pipes partially blocked with spyware, malware and popup generators of all kinds.  And just like our actual plumbing, when you get a problem on your end, you call a plumber.  You don’t whinge and complain that there is too much poop in your plumbing.  You fix your plumbing.  You clean out your pipes!

Perhaps we need an education program around how much like a toilet your computer really is.  Or perhaps not.

But, wait, yes!  This is what we need.  If you are relying on the Government to clean and look after your toilet, there is really something wrong!

Which brings me to the first part of my signature.  Filling a vessel vs kindling a flame.  Two very different views of learning.  One tells us that we have no control, that we are passive and need guidance and will be filled by whatever anyone tells us [2].  The other, well, it points to the very nature of the Internet – a brightly burning source of inspiration, knowledge, connection and the potential to provide for ourselves.

I know which Internet I want.

  1. the plumbing analogy []
  2. I’m looking at YOU, Jim Wallace! []

Tags: ,

An exercise in substitution: I can haz internets?

Qld survey finds pool internets supervision rests with parents

Posted Mon Jan 19, 2009 7:47am AEDT Parodied: TODAY!

The survey found 78 per cent of people believed the responsibility rested with parents. (Source: cheezburgers)
The survey found 78 per cent of people believed the responsibility rested with parents. (Source: cheezburgers)

The Lokal Gubmint Ass of Kweensland (GLAK) says a survey it commissioned on home swimming pool drownings internet usage suggests parental supervision is the key to saving lives cyber-safety.

The GLAK has urged the State Gubmit to take into account public opinion when it frames new legislation on pool internet safety.

The Gubmit is proposing a statewide register breakage of pools internets, mandatory inspections filters and new fencing filtering surveillance standards for home pool owners internet users.

GLAK president Paul Bell Chez Burga says the survey found 78 per cent of people believed the responsibility rested with parents.

“Sixty per cent of people responding rated education of parents as the first or second most favoured solution - 46 per cent [rated] subsidised swimming surfing lessons for toddlers everyone as a first or second most important solution,” he said.

“We urge the State Gubmint to listen to what this survey has found and that is we need to have our children educated and swimming surfing at the earliest age,” he said.

“We need to make sure that parents are educated annually, we need to look at how pools internets are protected and how pool fencing internets compooter is really securely positioned.

Swimming Pool Surfing Internets and Spa Torrenting Association president Rodney Worldwide Webb agrees that the main focus of proposed pool internets safety laws should be adult supervision.

“We back that whole heartedly that most important with parental supervision is just nothing else that can beat that – a lot of other issues are combined with it but that is number one on our list as well,” he said.

“If you have got a visitor to a home, is it the owner’s responsibility or the parents’?

“It has got to be the parents’ [responsibility] – if the phone rings twitter tweets or the door bell rings download finishes do you go and answer lookit that or do you look after the kids? It is as simple as that.”

Original here. Emphasis and substitution is mine.

Image Source: CHEEZBURGERS

Tags: ,

Theme by RoseCityGardens.com
Modified by Me!