Snowden and Venezuela: My bizarre experience in the surveillance state – Boing Boing.
If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. Except for your words being used against you in a media/social network PR shitstorm by your political opponents. And, apparently, out-of-context statements possibly being used as evidence in a criminal investigation.
blah blah charcoal blah blah BACON
I’ve said a lot on this topic, so a lot of these will be posted without comment. Plus I have some related articles to read/comment on.
The rise of Nazi Germany: Did the prevalence of hunting and singing clubs help Nazis come to power?.
It’s an interesting idea, that “network capital” can lead to horrific social policies (a la the Holocaust). That’s not to demean the potential benefits of social clubs. But the potential of these organizations to be used to exclude, demean, or demonize the “other” is pretty well established. In extreme cases you have more immediate effects (e.g. mob mentality violence) but this article hints and potential slow-building, long term effects.
Russell Brand on MSNBC Mocking Media – YouTube.
Just another demonstration of how comedians can be some of the most insightful people. Without even trying Brand shames the panel of Morning Joe.
Adactio: Journal—Battle for the planet of the APIs.
This is a great exposition on the beauty an utility of RSS. The open web is being shunned by most large consumer-oriented “public” spaces these days so that the can control the user experience and try to capture the benefits of network affects. It doesn’t have to be this way. You can build a great service and also provide open access. The reasons for not doing so may make business sense in the short run but in the long run you’re only alienating your business from the rest of the web and the opportunities for larger network effects.
The open web isn’t going away. Developers should embrace it, not shun it.
Blowing a Whistle – NYTimes.com.
This post by Friedman perfectly sums up the wrong-headed argument that some people use to justify extensive government intrusion into the personal lives of U.S. citizens and the secrecy with which such programs are run. Fear should never be the arbiter of policy. Certainly fear can inform an area that needs attention, but the type of actions taken should be based on rational observation and discussion of the issue. Hiding your head in the sand and asking others to do whatever it takes is not a reasonable or rational response. This is exactly what Friedman is suggesting, because the nature of these programs is unknown to the general public, resulting in an inability to hold rational discussion.
It’s really not that hard to address the problems with the government programs. But fear, not rational and intelligent analysis, are driving decisions about our national security apparatus.
Is the U.S. Still the Land of the Free? – Bloomberg.
This is a good overview of what’s wrong with the current security/intelligence practices in the U.S. The issue is government secrecy and over-reach, and just plain bullying tactics in regard to it’s own interests.