Since we've gotten political, wanted to bring the newest Lawrence Lessig project to the fore.
Lessig, the same fellow who brought you the Creative Commons. Yeah. This new project is http://change-congress.org : This non-partisan movement invites members of Congress to agree to: 1) Support public financing of elections 2) Support banning earmarks 3) Swear off taking money from Lobbyiests and PAC's 4) Support transparency If the legislator agrees, Change-Congress will have a digital army ready - pledged - to send $X.00 campaign dollars their way. Don't agree? No money. http://change-congress.org/about/ Carrots, baby. Money talks. Jan On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Steve Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well yes the trend towards laws that crackdown on this sort of stuff > is alarming, and does not bode well. > > Frankly I expected even worse by now, recalling that in the first few > years after 9/11, there were stories about how seemingly innocent > video of tourist attractions was actually fiendish terrorist planning > videos. So the London police camera posters fill me with despair but > the satirical treatment of them gives me some small hope. > > Even without a war on terror moron error, Im not someone who feels too > comfortable waving a camera round in public, as I know some humans > feel it is invasive. > > I dont know about the USA but in Britain the internet is commonly > mentioned on TV news & debate shows in a negative light, paedophiles & > terrorists, so I just roll my eyes when I see similar tactics in the > newspapers too. > > Anyway you know I have speculated in the past as to what future our > governments may be planning for, although its also possible that there > are more basic motives at work. The police usually want as much power > as they can get, more laws to be on their side, new weapons and > evidence gathering devices. Some corporations make the technology that > suits this paranoid surveillance game, so theres the basic profit > motive & potential to corrupt government there. > > As for this not arguing anymore, in order for that to work you > possibly shouldnt mention most of the points argued about, or goading > those that 'defend the corporate agenda' to respond. Where does my > position fit into that narrow representation? Because you hopefully > know that I believe government imposed restrictions that affect > vlogging are already here in some countries, and remain a real > possibility at any time in the future. Restriction of such things is > one of the first things governments tend to do when they feel under > threat, and even in tines of relative security, its the sort of right > that ebbs away unless continually fought for. But this would happen in > a counry without corporations too. And you know I scoff at the idea > that corporations have an agenda to crush independent media. Mostly > because they dont need to. Corporations strengths over small business, > indies, individuals, is part of their design, business as usual > assures their dominance, they dont need to take extra measures to > crush. Now over the course of a generation the whole game could change > because of the internet, but its by no means a cert, and its entirely > possible they could dominate the net without taking any special > measures or doing any deliberate crushing. > > I mean really, I am hardly a fan of corporations, I read lots of stuff > about bad things they do, just as i know small business and government > also cause bad, as do individuals. Due to their scale, governments and > corporations can do the harm on a far larger scale, and we have > greater expectations about what good they should be doing instead. And > yeah, humans appear to be too hypocritical and corrupt to save the > world. Some think that if we can only harness the sorts of thinking > that can happen in war, but in the struggle against climate change and > resource depletion in a time of peace, we might stand a chance. I fear > that it will be harnessed through actual war. > > Can anybody imagine the global internet existing as we know it if > there ws a non-nuclear war on the scale of world war 2 in future? And > that would also be an end the the complexities of debates about free > speech, rights to photograph, gossip, whistleblow & be a real > journalist or citizen? 'Theres a war on' will be the justification for > everything, and the grumbling will have to be more low-key than we > have become used to. Now as much as the war on terror effect has been > used to bring in lots of legislation, and fight a few regionalized > wars, and although it did cause a lot of critical debate to fall > silent for several years in the USA, it has not had the huge impact > that a real world war would actually have on all these issues. So > whats my message here, 'this is as good as it gets?', 'you aint seen > nothing yet?'. Hope not. > > Cheers > > Steve Elbows > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Ron Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > What a strange new world, eh? > > > > So interesting... > > > > These laws are yet another affront to a citizen's media. > > > > I've no desire to bring up another 'Net-Neutrality' and 'Crushing > > independent content producers' argument, in fact I'm done with > > argument, so I'll just say what I want to say and shut my mouth. > > > > I find the removal of cameras and criminalization of camera use in > > public spaces to be very interesting, and it seems to me that this is > > the State 'Crushing' the independent content creators. I wonder if > > this will bring the defenders of the Corporate agenda, and their lack > > of desire to crush independent content creators to the discussion. > > > > In an era of 'It's the Economy Stupid', a Cheap Labor Economy, and > > feeding people to the Economy, I see no difference between the > > authoritarian control by the State and need to feed a Corporate Grow > > or Die agenda. It's the same thing. They are entirely dependent upon > > eachother. > > > > See, I am attacking the government for the same damn thing. I am, > > however, not attacking the idea of government, just as I was not > > attacking the idea of economy. Both are absolute perversions of their > > foundational concepts. They are extremely unhealthy, BOTH of them. > > We've got to fix them - BOTH. > > > > They are becoming one and the same, and I wish I could be more > > persuasive because, like Global Warming, the environment, perpetual > > war and the destruction of Democracy, once it's readily apparent, > > it's too friggin' late. > > > > It's so naked, how can people not see it. > > > > blech... > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 31, 2008, at 5:44 AM, Jan McLaughlin wrote: > > > > > Yeah, Ron, I concur: great post. > > > > > > Well, well, well... > > > > > > Cameras = guns. > > > > > > Based upon states' recent leaps to control 'em, you are onto > > > something, > > > particularly if these hand-held projectors will be battery-powered. > > > > > > As you might imagine, find this product extremely exciting news. > > > > > > Already, images are being projected on sidewalks, floors, walls. > > > Mostly > > > logos, single words. Slideshows. Graphical. > > > > > > Narrative structure / storytelling will be affected because people are > > > deeply resistant to having their audio-space cluttered. Net-net: these > > > projected motion pictures will inevitably have to work as silent > > > films. > > > > > > There's both rub and irony that in this beginning of the high tech > > > age, we > > > return to the silent film. > > > > > > Perhaps advertisers will have Bluetooth-available audio? Perhaps if > > > the > > > motion pictures are delivered via the web, one might stream the > > > audio over > > > one's cell phone. The challenge would be to sync the sound. > > > > > > I'm on fire with possibility. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > Jan > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 3:08 AM, Ron Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Great post, Mike! > > > > > > > > I can't wait to get my hands on one of those little projectors! > > > > > > > > I share your concern with the ubiquity of advertising, but > > > > > > > > "The camera is the new gun." > > > > > > > > Is a HUGE statement! > > > > > > > > I think it is. One camera can take down a government. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Ron Watson > > > > http://k9disc.blip.tv > > > > http://k9disc.com > > > > http://discdogradio.com > > > > http://pawsitivevybe.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 30, 2008, at 7:29 PM, Mike Meiser wrote: > > > > > > > > > One of my favorite things about pixelodeon was not the set > > > > > screening room > > > > > sessions but the widespread use of 17 macbooks for impromptu > > > > > screening of > > > > > all manner of videos over beers, at party's or simply > > > gatherings in > > > > > hotel > > > > > rooms. > > > > > > > > > > It's these shared interactive viewing experiences that really make > > > > > video > > > > > come full circle as a part of real world face to face > > > conversations. > > > > > > > > > > If the following nytimes article is correct pocket-able projection > > > > > units are > > > > > expected to hit the market by years end at $300-350. This could in > > > > > 2009 > > > > > usher in a whole new possibility for impromptu video screenings. > > > > > > > > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/30/business/30novelties.html > > > > > > > > > > I'd be curious to know if anyone has gotten their hands on any > > > early > > > > > prototypes yet. > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps there is some potential for sponsorship here at future > > > video > > > > > blogging events. > > > > > > > > > > Of course, cheap portable projectors could have far more > > > > > ramifications then > > > > > simple video blog screenings. > > > > > > > > > > I cannot begin to imagine how useful these things might become in > > > > > the next 5 > > > > > years. > > > > > > > > > > As they get cheaper they could one day become as common in laptops > > > > > as video > > > > > cams are now, and they have some interesting ramifications as > > > > > secondary > > > > > information displays for "ambient" information such as twitter, > > > > > friend feed, > > > > > Digg Spy, news, weather, and things we have yet to dream up. > > > > > > > > > > If they become ubiquitous enough they could further blur the > > > spacial > > > > > boundaries between office chair and arm chair, or put in other > > > > > terms between > > > > > computer screen and tv. > > > > > > > > > > As an information architect I find this prospect of a more > > > ubiquitous > > > > > physical information space fascinating. > > > > > > > > > > Anyone who has ever been on a trading room floor at an exchange > > > > > will know > > > > > what I'm talking about by ubiquitous information space. > > > > > > > > > > Or for that matter anyone who's watched a scifi movie where whole > > > > > walls are > > > > > information displays. > > > > > > > > > > Geography / real world space is the new frontier of > > > cyberspace / media > > > > > space. We've brought meat space to cyberspace, now we're > > > increasingly > > > > > bringing cyberspace back to meat space. > > > > > > > > > > This has tremendous implications for memory, productivity, and > > > > > privacy. > > > > > > > > > > If the medium is the message, such bringing of video to meat space > > > > > means > > > > > that today's trends such as the personal and non-linear nature of > > > > > videos > > > > > will be nothing in comparison o the non-linearity and personal > > > > > nature media > > > > > created for this eventual future. Video made to be projected > > > > > ubiquitously > > > > > into the real world will have to be more non-linear, and in order > > > > > to grab > > > > > our attention be more personal then ever. The narrative will be > > > ever > > > > > increasingly abstracted and exploded. TV shows like south park, > > > the > > > > > simpsons and so called "reality tv" that are increasingly > > > dependant on > > > > > direct references to larger narratives in culture rather then > > > their > > > > > own sub > > > > > plots will look as quaint as Leave it to Beaver in coming years. > > > > > This goes > > > > > for MTV's non-linear programing as well. > > > > > > > > > > It also means our notions of information overload today will > > > quaint in > > > > > comparison to those of tomorrow. > > > > > > > > > > Case in point these cheap tiny projectors are not just consumer > > > > > technology. > > > > > They may be used to assault our senses in yet new ways. They are > > > > > perfect > > > > > for projecting advertising in all manner of unpredictable > > > spaces... > > > > > subways, > > > > > public bathrooms, elevators and more since they will be much > > > > > cheaper, easier > > > > > to install, and easier to secure then today's ad display systems. > > > > > > > > > > Of course a simple piece of gum will become a great weapon for > > > > > future ad > > > > > busters. :) > > > > > > > > > > I'm reminded of Jan of Faux Press's ideas of "vlogvertising". > > > > > > > > > > We artists mine as well be the first to explore and exploit > > > this newly > > > > > opening media space. > > > > > > > > > > My dream of widespread true traditional gallery spaces for video > > > > > blogging > > > > > will increasingly become possible, even probable. > > > > > > > > > > Of course my 1984 type prediction is projected media will one day > > > > > be as > > > > > ubiquitous at assaulting our senses as video cam's are already > > > > > becoming at > > > > > recording our every action. > > > > > > > > > > My answer to that is we as citizens must preserve our right to > > > give > > > > > as well > > > > > as we get in this future. Such is the important front line of the > > > > > battle > > > > > with public photography and graffiti. The right to arm oneself > > > with > > > > > a camera > > > > > should be as protected as the right to free speech, or even > > > more so > > > > > then our > > > > > right to Carry a gun. The camera is the new gun. > > > > > > > > > > I'm continually reminded of William Burrough's "Apocalypse". Art > > > > > leaps from > > > > > its frames. > > > > > > > > > > A whole new frontier is starting to open for media space. > > > > > > > > > > And you thought all the real innovation had already happened. > > > > > > > > > > P.S. Don't even get me started on on 3D holographic projection. ;) > > > > > > > > > > -Mike > > > > > mmeiser.com/blog > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > The Faux Press - by whatever media necessary > > > http://feeds.feedburner.com/diaryofafauxjournalist - RSS > > > http://fauxpress.blogspot.com > > > aim=janofsound > > > air=862.571.5334 > > > skype=janmclaughlin > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- The Faux Press - by whatever media necessary http://feeds.feedburner.com/diaryofafauxjournalist - RSS http://fauxpress.blogspot.com aim=janofsound air=862.571.5334 skype=janmclaughlin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
