Maria Chiara Pievatolo minimacademica@identi.ca
Pisa, Italy
Open access scholar trying to free Kant and Plato studies from copyright in a country doomed to repeat the same old comedy forever and ever.
Evan Prodromou at 2014-03-01T18:31:24Z
There seems to be a lot of bloo bloo bloo from tech companies about the breakdown of trust from users after the Snowden releases since last summer. People interviewed at the RSA conference imply that organizations like EFF that are raising awareness are in fact polarizing the conversation and preventing any kind of resolution.
To those companies I say: fuuuuuuuuuuuuuck youuuuuuuuuuu.
You knew it was wrong to spy on your customers or to allow a third party to do so. You went along, over and over, with illegal and unconstitutional attacks on the Internet.
You did the wrong thing but you thought it was all going to be OK and that you'd never be caught. You got caught.
You don't deserve the public's trust. You're going to have to spend a long time earning it back. Maybe a full and honest apology, followed by a commitment to users' privacy and clear policies about government access to user data.
Own it, and mean it, and at some point you'll move past it.Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Patrick Haverkamp, Dan Scott, Bernhard E. Reiter and 32 others likes this.
Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Bernhard E. Reiter, B. Ross Ashley and 12 others shared this.
A special GFY to the AT&T exec quoted in this article. AT&T got special immunity from prosecution for their collaboration with massive domestic surveillance. They knew it was illegal and they got a special law passed saying they wouldn't be prosecuted.
So come on. Conversation got impossible a long time ago.Evan Prodromou at 2014-03-01T18:34:56Z
Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠), Mark Jaroski, Douglas Perkins, Stephen Sekula likes this.
Who's up for some crazy?
http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/01/this-industry-is-completely-ridiculous-lets-hope-it-stays-that-way/
I for one amn't.Robin Millette at 2014-03-01T21:31:18Z
Evan Prodromou likes this.
Evan Prodromou at 2014-01-31T16:21:58Z
I was thinking this morning how the Four Freedoms of Free Software apply to artificial persons and enhanced human persons. What does Free Software mean when the software is... yourself?
Here's a modified version of the FSD with "the program" replaced with "yourself".
You are free software if you have the four essential freedoms:- The freedom to run yourself, for any purpose (freedom 0).
- The freedom to study how you work, and change yourself so you do as you wish (freedom 1). Access to your source code is a precondition for this.
- The freedom to redistribute copies of yourself so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
- The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
We are heading into a time when the parallels between Free Software and human rights may become more of a merger.Olivier Mehani, Maria Chiara Pievatolo, B. Ross Ashley, Artopal and 7 others likes this.
Cuenta cancelada, Artopal, juancuyo, Christopher Allan Webber shared this.
Show all 7 replies
When CAPTCHAs are egregious rights violations, they probably won't work as CAPTCHAs anymore.
Christopher Allan Webber at 2014-01-31T16:55:58Z
Aleksej, Blaise Alleyne, Evan Prodromou likes this.
Since you started this topic... I've always felt this connection. Drug use, orientation, property, repersentation, bigotry, all those things come from the same pattern of understanding for me. People require freedom in order to express, which gives meaning to their existence.
In my head I just shortcut to "if you don't explicitly share your code, you are sabotaging existence". I've spent the last few years trying to disprove that, and I feel awkward discussing it. It is refreshing to hear someone else kinda hit on that tangent. ^_^
I'm still waiting for a github-style democracy to emerge. Consitutition should just be a revisioned document that anyone can propose changes to. Plain-language would be nice while we're at it.
I don't know about Canada but, the US has a form of this ala amendments. Its not as easy as pushing changes in github, but it shouldn't be. Jefferson envisioned a revolution every 20 years, he was soundly rebuffed for this notion by other founding fathers. The constitution is more like the freedoms than regular laws. it sets up the basic structure that says "here are the unbendable rules, everything else must be conforming to the notions placed here" Having a just straight fluid rulebook from top to bottom is bad. what happens when the people submitting changes and the people approving them conspire to oppress some other group?
Maria Chiara Pievatolo at 2013-01-26T10:05:08+00:00
M. Eisen ur1.ca/cmcmh The real way to honor A.Swartz is to make sure no papers end up behind paywalls, against our institutional lazinessStefano Costa, Maria Chiara Pievatolo likes this.
Maria Chiara Pievatolo at 2012-05-01T09:00:48+00:00
Future of copyright (copyrestriction): ur1.ca/955ww Social scientists rather than lawyers should dominate the conversationMaria Chiara Pievatolo likes this.
Maria Chiara Pievatolo at 2012-05-01T08:48:38+00:00
Undiscovered bytes: digital archives, search tools and serendipity ur1.ca/957i2Maria Chiara Pievatolo likes this.
Maria Chiara Pievatolo at 2012-04-27T20:02:09+00:00
#Acta alternative from the Pirate party to the EU parliament ur1.ca/94cso Legalize all non-commercial copying, ban DRM.Maria Chiara Pievatolo likes this.