Measure Twice. Cut Once?

Sometimes it can be helpful to think before acting. Even more, it can behoove one to keep thinking after acting. If you take a turn and it seems to lead to an unfamiliar place, getting the map back out can help. Trace where you were to wherever you are, and then where you wish to go. Maybe you'll keep trucking down that same road; maybe you'll take a sharp turn to find a better route. There is no GPS to life, for that we have minds and memory and feelings; in fact, that's why we get on the road in the first place.

The following is copied from the Wikipedia. The full article is even more informative. As it implies: no certainty; no GPS. But we do know where the road led back then.

The Reichstag fire, a pivotal event in the establishment of Nazi Germany, began at 9:14 PM on the night of February 27, 1933, when a Berlin fire station received an alarm that the Reichstag building, assembly location of the German Parliament, was ablaze. The fire seemed to have been started in several places, and by the time the police and firemen arrived a huge explosion had set the main Chamber of Deputies in flames. Looking for clues, the police quickly found Marinus van der Lubbe, naked, cowering behind the building. Van der Lubbe was a Dutch insurrectionary council communist and unemployed bricklayer who had recently arrived in Germany. Adolf Hitler and Hermann Göring arrived soon after, and, when they were shown van der Lubbe, Göring immediately declared the fire was set by the Communists and had the party leaders arrested. Hitler took advantage of the situation to declare a state of emergency and encouraged aging president Paul von Hindenburg to sign the Reichstag Fire Decree, suspending the basic rights provisions of the Weimar constitution.

What Are They Afraid Of?

Today's NY Times has a disturbing article about our treatment of "terrorist" detainees, this time in Afghanistan. This looks like it might be serving as a 'Guantanamo under the radar.' No names, no pictures, no charges, no lawyers, no hope. Most of us believe it 'can't happen here' but things aren't shaking out that way. Just what is the government afraid of if it lets international public monitors visit and report on the people we incarcerate? Openness in our society is supposed to be one of its virtues and attractions. In the heyday of the cold war people wrote of the restrictiveness of Soviet society, of controlled access or non- access to towns and cities, of the lack of road signs, etc. Now we are told that we need to keep a tight lid on our own country to protect against terrorists. But terror is only a name; some claim that our own government terrorizes peoples around the world. Our administration's position seems to be that it can do anything to anyone anywhere and not have to be held accountable. Of what are they afraid? Will someday there be a new Nuremberg trial and our leaders will be held accountable?

Some would claim that if one is innocent of wrongdoing then there is no need to fear the government's spying on us. Lots of problems with that idea, in addition to the fact that only a dunce would espouse it. First, this nation was founded on the principle of freedom over tyranny: we don't have to petition for our rights; the government has to ask us for empowerment. We don't need to prove our innocence; they have to prove our guilt. And in the real world things often get complicated. The alphabet agencies of our government want to spy on terrorists and they end up spying on peaceful protestors. Bush complains about dissidents giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Does this mean that an elected member of Congress, let alone an average citizen, can be considered a terrorist? Suppose a House member introduced Articles of Impeachment on the House floor. Could Bush declare him (or her) an enemy combatant and sweep that person into some hole in the ground to be lost forever?

A minor amount of research shows that terrorist attacks have increased each year since the Iraq invasion. Current and former members of the armed forces and the administration admit that Iraq has become the largest training ground for terrorism. Some think that this war makes us and the world a more dangerous place. We armed the mujahadeen against the Soviets and next they turned their sights on the other infidel: the United States. The chickens came home to roost.

If there is hope for us and our neighbors in this world it's certain to come through letting the light shine through. If we don't need to fear Caesar, then why does he fear us? Just what are they afraid of?

Does knowledge want to be free?

The rampant spread of digital technology overwhelms us like the flu pandemic that has yet to arrive, and as in a medical emergency we scramble frantically, seemingly in the dark, seeking out solutions. We feel that we have to do something but what? Certain players on the field, having money at stake, are driving the agenda. Once something is created in or transcribed to digital form its distribution over the internet is very cheap. With one purchased music CD I could "give" free copies to a few billion of my dearest and closest friends. While distribution costs do exist, these are low and the unit cost tends to zero. So, does information want to be free? Or is there some happy middle path that will satisfy all?

Commercial digital media distributors have teamed with software and hardware suppliers to work on Digital Rights Management (DRM). One problem is that these systems aren't robust enough to hold hackers and the curiousity-driven adepts at bay. And even if they can't stave off the barbarian assaults they do interfere with historically legitimate rights. Such that your movies work at home but not if you take them on vacation to Europe. Or it works in your computer but not in the car or on your neighbor's computer. These are difficult issues. In the 'old' days people didn't buy two records, one to use at home, the other to use at the school dance. And before magnetic tape came into play noone expected to listen to their favorite music in the car; you simply listened to (or put up with) the radio. At least the 45rpms worked on all record players.

Another problem with the DRM people is that their search-in-the-dark solutions do more than protect their "rights" by invading the larger space of your computer. Witness the Sony-installed rootkit. There are kids in jail right now for doing less than Sony. Some DRM schemes may have the effect of not letting you share files that belong to you or are otherwise unemcumbered legally. In their haste to protect their pocketbooks and thereby their control over us, their influence with legislators may bring us draconian laws that we will later regret. And not satisfied with prosecuting thieves they want a techno-fix that will render theft impossible. How's that for chutzpah!

The digital revolution has changed the landscape. The genie is out of the bottle and can't be put back in. One thing that's occurred is that different groups' interests have been more clearly exposed. The companies that sell this stuff and now even the the companies who own the transportation pipes are all eyeing our wallets. Our interests are broader. Should we want to protect the rights of content creators? Yes. Should we disown theft and let thieves be prosecuted? Yes. Should we accept media companies as our masters and let them rule the ways we work, play and communicate? Of course not.

Artists and authors need protection and so do we. After all we own that landscape. That copyright and patents exist is a matter of law, and I don't mean God's. Perhaps we need to find a way to compensate the creative ones and rely less on the industrial behemoths. That's their biggest worry. With broadband and P2P we don't need the middlemen. Let's deal with the issues directly. Protect artists' rights. Protect fair use. Preserve and enhance our liberty. And let the dinosaurs die, again.