Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The next SOPA

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 173 posts

Re: The next SOPA

#71

Post by mahyarm »

RexRollman wrote: post #41

Personally, I think we need to make it so that only registered voters can give money to candidates, with a maximum amount set per contributor. That would automatically disallow all direct contributions from corporations and prevent the rich from having more influence than the poor. (Of course, something like this would probably have to be a constitutional amendment, and I doubt that would ever happen.)

There are already a limit, it's $2500 per politician, $30.8k per party committee and then unlimited if you got a lot of friends/employees.

Here is a cynical primer outlining how lobbying works: http://www.2abd.com/politics/protesting/protesting-versus-lo...

Re: The next SOPA

#72

Post by khafra »

snowwrestler wrote: post #40

But I like to watch movies. I think a lot of movies are great--great enough to pay for them. Why should I shoot myself in the foot to keep someone else from shooting me in the foot? This idea that the root cause of all bad legislation is political donations: it's wrong, and not supported by the data. The vast majority of political donations are made by people who are not lobbyists. No one raised more political money…

I think you're right, but I hate that you're right. I wish government could just be sensible without needing a pressure group of sensible people riding herd on them forever.

Re: The next SOPA

#73

Post by nextparadigms »

Another interesting twist (not surprised at all, though). MPAA lied about the number of people being employed by the entertainment industry:

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/images/sopa_busted.g...

The tech industry employs 10 times as many. I'm glad their lies are finally debunked. We need to debunk their "lost revenue" numbers, too.

Re: The next SOPA

#74

Post by jiggy2011 »

TheSOB88 wrote: post #53
jiggy2011 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that is true then I'm amazed that a credible 3rd party has not yet surfaced that vowed to reform politics. Assuming even a half competent set of politicians they would be able to do an objectively better job since they would consider things on merits rather than contributions. Why do you need so much money to run a campaign anyway? Surely you could get the word out online and take donations from the public. Of cou…

I don't understand your points at all - and your last sentence sounds ironic. Should I be taking you at face value? Anyways, your 3rd party situation has one pitfall: how would it get into power? The 2 party system's devisors have us beat; nobody believes an independent can even get elected. There's an enormous barrier to entry.

No not intended to be ironic, just badly worded.

What I meant was that I am surprised how important campaign contributions are in an age where it is fairly cheap to get your message across online and get people talking.

After all the London riots were an example (albeit not a pleasant one) of how social networking etc can very quickly get people to take action.

Hopefully you could get enough contributions from private citizens and small business to run an effective campaign.

Regards the 2 parties point. It would be difficult to create a third party that would appeal to both liberals and conservatives so in reality you might need a 4th party also.

I assume your suggesting that people wouldn't vote for a 3rd party because the media would tell everyone that they were unelectable and a wasted vote?

Unfortunately I don't really have an answer for that question, the only way around it would be to hammer home just how bad the current system really is.

Re: The next SOPA

#75

Post by r00fus »

umjames wrote: post #12
r00fus wrote: post #2

A boycott is only successful if you know who owns what. Short of selling my HDTV (which would be way popular with my family), I don't see how I can avoid MPAA content.

You don't have to sell the TV, just don't watch movies on it. The harder part, is getting non-tech people to join your boycott. Good luck trying to tell people not to see the new Batman movie when it comes out. What would be good to know is if actors, directors, and other movie makers support the MPAA's actions. With the RIAA, you could sense that musicians often were at odds with the record companies that signed the…

> You don't have to sell the TV, just don't watch movies on it.

But the "content companies" don't only create movies. Now they own large swaths of normal TV. Disney owns ABC which owns ESPN. So every time you watch an advert on SportsCenter, you're funding Disney.

The fact is, you can't win at this game. The way to win is to create an alternate funding mechanism (ie, campaign finance reform and/or owning your own congresscritters). The media cartel owns the (so called public) airwaves.

Re: The next SOPA

#76

Post by rglover »

Perhaps the answer to this is to make it more difficult for politicians to sign off on bills. Require some sort of education on the topic at hand before making a decision. If the bill isn't understood by the representative, they shouldn't be allowed to vote. With the current organization of our government, this will never happen. A point that Marco touched on was that we won't be able to rely on protesting every single bad decision that comes our way; people will lose interest and control will eventually be back in the hands of the government. He's right and we need to really focus on the bigger picture of removing lobbying from congress and ensuring that those representing us actually can.

Re: The next SOPA

#77

Post by mrdingle »

The best part about stopping to support companies that support the MPAA and RIAA is that they are going to say they are loosing revenue through piracy and not direct consumer withdrawal.

Re: The next SOPA

#78

Post by jjguy »

Technology's favorite lawyer, Lawrence Lessig, has a new book out advocating for campaign finance reform. Like most things from Lessig, his arguments are well-considered, balanced and thought-provoking.

He includes a quote I found particularly compelling, especially in the light of Marco's link between 'the next SOPA' and campaign finance reform: For every one striking at the leaves of evil, there is one striking at the root. - Thoreau. Marco wants us to strike the root.

Book: http://www.amazon.com/Republic-Lost-Money-Corrupts-Congress/...

NYTimes review: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/books/republic-lost-campai...

Re: The next SOPA

#79

Post by ConstantineXVI »

rglover wrote: post #76

Perhaps the answer to this is to make it more difficult for politicians to sign off on bills. Require some sort of education on the topic at hand before making a decision. If the bill isn't understood by the representative, they shouldn't be allowed to vote. With the current organization of our government, this will never happen. A point that Marco touched on was that we won't be able to rely on protesting every sing…

Who decides that the rep is properly educated? You risk allowing more bias into the system by putting such a gate on voting.
Post reply on HN