Live data from Hacker News

Aaron Swartz: The Book That Changed My Life

aaronsw.com

81–90 of 183 posts

Re: Aaron Swartz: The Book That Changed My Life

#81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hate google on some days. More days as of late. Anyway, if you google "the herman chomsky propaganda model twenty years on" and then click the pdf link you may find what you want. I can't post the link here because google is so paranoid about being crawled that they obfuscate links to the point where you can't get easily get a link to a pdf without going through the search manually.

There's a greasemonkey script called google result privacy (several actually), which very simply turn off the url dickery so you can right click and so forth as expected.

Thank you, installed and working :)

Re: Aaron Swartz: The Book That Changed My Life

#82
"I remember vividly clutching at the door to my room, trying to hold on to something while the world spun around."

Some commenters treat this as if it must be hyperbole. But what Aaron describes is a typical reaction for someone who's just had their safe worldview shattered, and discovered that political reality is something far darker than they imagined.

There has been much written on the psychology of conspiracy denial, and the cognitive dissonance that keeps many corralled within the comforting (but false) narrative of the mainstream media propagandists.

One aspect of denial is a kind of self-worth self-preservation. To even contemplate that the world may be controlled by vastly evil powers, and that the historical fables we are all supposed to believe are actually gross lies purveyed by mass murdering psychopathic conspirators, one has to consider what that implies about one's self. To have been totally duped for so many years, by incredibly evil people... to have cooperated in their crimes, even if only by inaction... To discover that those one looked up to, respected, trusted with the wise governance of the state, are actually deranged elitist liars and criminals...

Most people simply cannot bear to contemplate such a level of gullibility and culpability in themselves. So they remain in vigorous denial. And in self defense, attack those attempting to enlighten them to the true state of the world.

http://everist.org/archives/links/!_About_Conspiracy.txt

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Director of Central Intelligence. An observation by the late Director at his first staff meeting in 1981.

Re: Aaron Swartz: The Book That Changed My Life

#83
This book may very well have changed his life, but I suggest that discovering that there are serious problems with our society is not really that enlightening. Far more important is learning why and how we got here.

My view is that John Raulston Saul has identified the very essence of the beginning of this mess and the good intentions that started it hundreds of years ago in his book, "Voltaire's Bastards". Further, the identification of the fundamental (flaws/errors/oversights) that became a part of the fabric of our civilization now based on reason.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ralston_Saul

Re: Aaron Swartz: The Book That Changed My Life

#84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The public's taxes also fund the military. Extending your principle to this case implies that the public owns the countries nuclear arsenal. Can you advise what this ownership should practically entail? Should I get access to the weapons? Should I be able to use them? Or am I limited to indirectly benefitting from their existence?

You are not the first to make the mistake of comparing I.P. with physical property. They are not the same physically, in theory, in practice or in law.

The biggest problem with I.P. is that those of us who understand that it is in no way "property" continue to allow ourselves to be maneuvered into using that term. As long as we continue to use the term "intellectual property" then the duplication of it will be called "theft" or "piracy". We must stop using these terms with are inherently wrong. The truth is that copying is not only the way that human society advances (you cannot have innovation without copying) but it is how humanity itself evolves. It is inscribed in our DNA and we would not exist without it.

Re: Aaron Swartz: The Book That Changed My Life

#85
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not the first to make the mistake of comparing I.P. with physical property. They are not the same physically, in theory, in practice or in law.

The biggest problem with I.P. is that those of us who understand that it is in no way "property" continue to allow ourselves to be maneuvered into using that term. As long as we continue to use the term "intellectual property" then the duplication of it will be called "theft" or "piracy". We must stop using these terms with are inherently wrong. The truth is that copying is not only the way that human society advance…

I really agree with you but boy I find it hard! The problem is that the legal framework as well as the general population knows it at I.P., even though this included far more than copyright and even though those different 'kinds' of I.P. are not similar at all (i.e. patents and copyright). I don't really believe in I.P. but how do I communicate with people without using terms such as Intellectual Property, Copyright, Patents, Trademarks and whatnot ? Information should be free, and as such so should be ideas.

Don't compare information with physical property :)

Re: Aaron Swartz: The Book That Changed My Life

#87
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not the first to make the mistake of comparing I.P. with physical property. They are not the same physically, in theory, in practice or in law.

The biggest problem with I.P. is that those of us who understand that it is in no way "property" continue to allow ourselves to be maneuvered into using that term. As long as we continue to use the term "intellectual property" then the duplication of it will be called "theft" or "piracy". We must stop using these terms with are inherently wrong. The truth is that copying is not only the way that human society advance…

[deleted]

Re: Aaron Swartz: The Book That Changed My Life

#88
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest problem with I.P. is that those of us who understand that it is in no way "property" continue to allow ourselves to be maneuvered into using that term. As long as we continue to use the term "intellectual property" then the duplication of it will be called "theft" or "piracy". We must stop using these terms with are inherently wrong. The truth is that copying is not only the way that human society advance…

I really agree with you but boy I find it hard! The problem is that the legal framework as well as the general population knows it at I.P., even though this included far more than copyright and even though those different 'kinds' of I.P. are not similar at all (i.e. patents and copyright). I don't really believe in I.P. but how do I communicate with people without using terms such as Intellectual Property, Copyright,…

You're right. I also have no idea how to go about it. I can insist that I.P. is not property but there is no consensus for a replacement term. This is where an organization such as the EFF could be useful. Also, just a note, I'm not saying we shouldn't use terms such as trademark, copyright, and patent. I'm just saying that we need to find a way to indicate that broadly, none of these are property. They are monopolies granted by the government which in fact infringe on individual rights and property. If framed correctly, there is a chance that these monopoly powers can be restricted in such a way that they are used only for the betterment of society and not for the enrichment of the individual (i.e. in line with their constitutional mandate).

Re: Aaron Swartz: The Book That Changed My Life

#89
post #50

I found the following review of the book interesting. I always like to read the "negative" reviews of something because I find it easier to make a decision whether to read something or buy something (books, software, food, etc...) based on whether I can identify with the negative comments or not. If someone has recommended something to me, and the negative comments are inconsequential to me (or absurd, etc...), I'm m…

Not entirely convincing. I personally prefer Falkenstein as my Chomsky critic: The spread is a debating tactic where you present a set of supporting arguments so wide and particular your opponents are unable to rebut them all because 1) they have day jobs and 2) they have limited space or time to address them in any particular forum. A champion spreader is Noam Chomsky, who selectively recites facts of world history…

[deleted]

Re: Aaron Swartz: The Book That Changed My Life

#90
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really agree with you but boy I find it hard! The problem is that the legal framework as well as the general population knows it at I.P., even though this included far more than copyright and even though those different 'kinds' of I.P. are not similar at all (i.e. patents and copyright). I don't really believe in I.P. but how do I communicate with people without using terms such as Intellectual Property, Copyright,…

You're right. I also have no idea how to go about it. I can insist that I.P. is not property but there is no consensus for a replacement term. This is where an organization such as the EFF could be useful. Also, just a note, I'm not saying we shouldn't use terms such as trademark, copyright, and patent. I'm just saying that we need to find a way to indicate that broadly, none of these are property. They are monopolie…

Better than nothing. In the short term I would be ok if it only applied commercially and not for private use but in reality we always created regardless of I.P. copyright or patents and i don't think these are tools for betterment of society but just betterment of some.
Post reply on HN