Imagine my teen daughter's relief when this morning at 4:45am, she logged into
an article on the Element Zinc, and there was all that tasty information so
freely given so that she can continue to do her homework with the least amount
of work possible. Wikipedia is a wonderful tool. I spent the whole
day yesterday talking with people about obscure trivial topics, then I'd say,
"You know, you'd know more about that topic, if you looked it up on
Wikipedia!" then I'd paus and say, "Oh wait. You can't!" Great Editorial--very reflective of the amazing byproducts of what
happens when people are given the freedom to create useful tools together
cooperatively of their own free will and choice. It really is
changing the world.
I can't believe people still want Obama as President...Two big
things:TakING away personal rights.AddING to National Debt.ING means he is still doing it.
Ares,What rights have you lost, or think you are losing?How would the debt under McCain/Palin have been different? Specifics, please.And - what on Earth does your comment have to do
with a letter about Wikipedia?
The trouble with bills like the "Patriot Act" is that members of
Congress vote for the title without reading the actual law. Nobody wants to vote
for something entitled "An Act to Repeal the Bill of Rights." I think
Benjamin Franklin said it best when he said, "Those who give up their
liberty for some temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety."
Well said. I only hope you are right about our DNA of freedom. When 93 of our
elected Senators (including one from Utah) vote for the NDAA and give government
the ability to indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or trial, I
fear we may have lost the soul of our liberty.
We do need stronger, quicker ways to nail those who take and use Intellectual
Property without permission and/or licencing/payment for use. Deseret News will
go after people and organizations that take your stories and put them up
elsewhere. Maybe these laws are poorly written but we need more than DMCA
takedown notices to protect those who actually create art, articles and
Intellectual Property. Thieves are thieves, just because they do so on the
Internet does not and should not give them protection.
Fine. I intend to put the Deseret News up for sale to the highest bidder. I'm
sure there's a Russian mobster who will pay my price for control of your
intellectual property. What's that you say? I don't "own" the Deseret
News? What difference does that make? Jay Evensen says my stealing your IP is
the price of his freedom!
Commercial conservatives would have us believe that freedom, given to us from
God, floats on the air around us and that we may collect all we want. Unless,
that is, some really bad guy, government, stops us.The real truth is
that God gives us life and nothing more. No guarantees, no rights and no
freedom. The only rights and freedoms that we have are those gained
by the sharing and participation in society and its government. It is the
agreements (laws and rules) with each other that gives freedom.A
good example would be the freedom of religion. If we didnt have the
Constitution and a government to enforce it there would not be any freedom of
religion in America. I like the internet, However, there are many
bad guys on the internet, and I dont know how to fully protect myself. They
sometimes collect and steal information about me that they can do great harm to
me. The often impose information on me that I really dont care to know. Its
hard to not be captured by those animated ads. If government does
not protect me, I have no protection at all.
Sometimes in a nightmare I find myself in a very dark street with bad guys
attacking me. When I awake and remember the street lights on the streets I
travel, I feel very relieved. Sometimes on the internet I wish
there were some street lights to illuminate the danger.
Great piece Jay. I know of only one presidential candidate that has stood up
against all those things you mention. President Obama said he opposed the
Patriot Act as a Senator, and then signed the extension as President. Mitt
Romney said he was fine with the NDAA, and that we could trust him or Obama to
not abuse that power. Some of the canidates have supported all 3 of the things
you mention.Only Ron Paul has opposed the Patriot Act, the NDAA, and
SOPA. Ron Paul is the only one who will err on the side of freedom every single
time. For those serious about Constitutional rights, Ron Paul is the man to
SOPA and PIPA was legilation written by commercial interests.Video
and Record Industries are no longer making the Billions $$$ they once were.Music and Acting groups can now by pass Producers and an endless Supply Chain
of middlemen and go straight to the market place and sell directly to the
consumers.But "I'm not as rich as I used to be" could
never get pasted into law.So they sugar-coat it with words like
"Protection" and use scare tactics with words like
"Terrorism".And although that is the driving force, The real problem is miss use of these new powers - which like with the Patriot
Act, and the nose of the camel - will not go away anytime soon, and will only
continue to grow until one day you wake-up and find you are no longer free.That's why it's called an Erosion of Freedom.BTW - The
Germans never thought anti-Terrorist laws they passed in the 1920-1930's to
portect them were bad.But history shows how one-Party can take control and
assume absolute Totalitarian Power by abusing them -- all perfectly Legal.
Guess what ? Even after Wiki was off for 24 hours, the sun came up, the birds
sang, and I woke up !!
Personal free starts with the "person", not from some governmental
office.Until we understand that "fact", we will continue
to look to "goverment" for our freedoms.The Revolutionary
War should have clarified that point, but people who are too lazy to read
history are doomed to repeat it.