Shared publicly  - 
*Leave Our Net Alone*"

The internet’s not broken.

So then why are there so many attempts to regulate it? Under the guises of piracy, privacy, pornography, predators, indecency, and security, not to mention censorship, tyranny, and civilization, governments from the U.S. to France to Germany to China to Iran to Canada — as well as the European Union and the United Nations — are trying to exert control over the internet.

Why? Is it not working? Is it presenting some new danger to society? Is it fundamentally operating any differently today than it was five or ten years ago? No, no, and no.

So why are governments so eager to claim authority over it? Why would legacy corporations, industries, and institutions egg them on? Because the net is working better than ever. Because they finally recognize how powerful it is and how disruptive it is to their power.

And that is precisely why we must fight against their attempts to regulate it, to change it, to throttle it, to oversee it, to insert controls into it, to grant them sovereignty over it. We also must resist the temptation to compromise, to accept the lesser of evils. Last week, Federal Communications Commissioner Robert McDowell warned of the danger of the U.N. asserting governance over the net, but then he turned around and argued that “merely saying ‘no’ to any changes to the current structure of Internet governance is likely to be a losing proposition.”

Why? I repeat: It’s not broken. This is why I urged French President Nicolas Sarkozy to take a Hippocratic oath for the net. This is why I have come to side with Sen. Al Franken on at least this: Net neutrality is not regulation; it is protecting the net from companies trying to change it. This is why the Reddit community is writing the Free Internet Act.

This is why I argued in Public Parts that we must have a discussion of the principles of an open society and the tools of publicness that enable it. This is why I wrote Public Parts. And that is why I’m posting the last chapter of the book, which argues that governments and companies are not protectors of the net and that we must be.

It’s not broken. Don’t fix it. Leave our net alone.


Post with many embedded links here:

Last chapter of Public Parts here:

* Sung to the tune of: Pink Floyd - Another Brick In The Wall (HQ)

We don’t need no regulation.
We dont need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the network
Government: Leave our net alone
Hey! Government! Leave our net alone!
All in all it’s just another brick in the wall.
All in all you’re just another brick in the wall.
Raquel DE LA CRUZ GARCIA's profile photoDiogo Melo's profile photoAndrea Mercado Valdivia's profile photoAlexa the Pariah's profile photo
Any ideas of how we the people who are not in power can show we are not a group to be messed with?
the regulation to the net is another brick to break
The internet should be nothing more then a public posting board or gathering place. You can say and do anything here without regulation as long as it doesn't physically harm someone.

No government that claims freedom of speech should even try to think they can control it. That would be like someone putting rules on the public board or stationing guards at the public meeting areas.
that would be like watching thousands mouth,inspecting every words come out,and trying stop it when it starts to kill.... 
Bring on the Chinese firewall! And let nancy Pelosi filter the content!
You left Australia out. The fight against censorship of the internet has been going on there since almost the dawn of it's adoption. I took part in a protest march in downtown Sydney in the late 90's over government censorship of the internet, that fight continues today.
Thank you for saying this, +Jeff Jarvis. This is precisely the thing I've been trying to say for months, but whenever I try to get succinct about it, I devolve into an angry, frothing rant.

I hope you are heard by the people who most need to hear you.
+Jeff Jarvis the government 's responsibility is not only to not threaten the network but to do protect it against threats. No regulation will leave it pray to egoistic interests. Regulation by the people for the people is what is needed.
And I just heard "A Brick in the Wall" and "Another Brick in the Wall" today on the radio. LOL
+Jeff Jarvis So much truth in one short post. Thanks for saying it properly for the rest of us.
The internet is only "broken" for those people that choose to fear it because of the unknown it presents to their way of life and business. This has been similar to almost every piece of technology that has changed history.
Discuss: What would really happen if a government did leave the net alone? Would it be better to have a absolutely open Internet or with some rules as for fair business and measures to deal with the people who really want to make life miserable for the rest?
+Brian Booher That's a really good question. I guess we have to mandate some sort of rules, otherwise it's anarchy?
rule tends to be broke....even if it made in good deed,nobody can guarantee it will work well
The Internet is totally broken. That's exactly why I 'm sitting here playing my harmonica and watching it, laughing my ass off between tunes. Enjoy the ride. Have fun. Humans love to watch things crash. If the internet could kill, we'd all be dead, already. Take it easy and go greasy... I think Woody Guthrie said that... :)
Because the politicians dont like to give freedom to the ordinary man only the rich ( media barons and politicians ) are deemed suitable for freedom to communicate to the world in a medium like film tv and newspapers and internet
The only reason i come online everyday is to be free from rules when out of no where we are getting more!?
Of course they want to control it. Notice how internet influence crushed SOPA and PIPA? The internet is power. Raw, uncaring of good or evil. Its almost scary. The question is, can they even do that? I don't know if its even possible as the best minds in hacking/cracking certainly don't work for the government.
Your post is timely, +Jeff Jarvis
. In Canada this month, Public Safety Minister, Vic Toews has introduced some controversial legislation, Bill C 30, an internet snooping law.
With C30, Police will be allowed to acquire information about private citizens online habits "without" the need of a "warrant".
As soon as the legislation was questioned by opposition parties in our House of Commons, Minister Toews said critics of the new law “can either stand with us or with the child pornographers.”
How does one react to a comment like that from an elected official in charge of Canada's Public Safety?
The fallout from Toews' comments has been incredible and unfortunately for Minister Toews quite personal:

For the most part, the opposition to the Snooping Law in Canada has occurred online and it has been somewhat effective.
The unintended result of Toews Bill and his unfortunate comments has been that Canadians have awakened to the reality that "free digital speech" is something that they can not take for granted.
I think the real reason behind all those regulatory steps is that the internet, now more than ever, is empowering us to voice our concern worldwide... Also the free access and sharing of knowledge is a threat to the widely varying policies of the different governments. Whatever reason they are giving is just a pretense...
I think it's because people who haven't been into it, are looking for a way to further monetize it... They figure if they can regulate it, they can skim it.
I believe that it's greed. Like how the world runs, with greed, and it's greed on both sides, We don't want to give up what we have.... so in the world order, whoever has more money has the control, even if it's less people, because less becomes more with money, Greed rules the world with money as the weapon.... So pretty much, no matter how much we fight it it, it will be taken away at one point or another....
Fun fact: this video is blocked in Germany :/
Wow, really? Another brick in the wall, hunh? The great, liberating internet? Liberating from social interaction, perhaps. Get off your highhorse. Just as is the case with everything else, money determines what remains" liberated."
Love this...another brick in the wall...
this is soo great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
TK Viau
I've been watching what's been happening with my internet already. Some of my programs I've been using are now worthless. I share a great deal of information online and some of my channels are.... missing? If Ottawa pushes through Bill C-30, SOPA will be our newest neighborhood resident (in house). I like to snuggle but, with someone of my own choosing!
'dis stuff is bootleg'...Please at least TRY to put together a complete sentence when you're attempting to be an idiot...
Nothing we can do, were just another pawn to the Kingdoms of this world.
Brian, the Internet already had all the regulation it needed before it existed. The things we really need regulation about - fraud, libel, etc., are already illegal, and the fact that they happen using the 'net doesn't make them more or less legal or any harder to prosecute. We don't need laws that add a penalty for commission of a crime "using the Internet" any more than we ever needed laws with extra penalties for commission of a crime "using a gun". If it''s illegal, it's illegal - doesn't matter if it's done face to face, through the mails, over the phone, or over the 'net.

The only thing really needing regulation is telecom-like regulation - who can create a top-level node, forbidding net-neutrality violations, standardized names, numbers, and protocols, etc.. Much of this came about as a hand-me-down from the ARPANet (ICANN, for instance), and some of it came about as a legislative (in the US) mandate to put in place for the public something that looked like the APRAPnet (but they didn't mandate enough major switching nodes across the US). In the US, the FCC should be able to handle pretty much everything that is required, but we probably need some way to tie their hands so a pro-corporate FCC Chairman can't run roughshod over the rest of the Commission as happened about one or two Chairmen back. Unfortunately, Congress would have to give the FCC the necessary powers, and we've just seen just how intelligent Congress is about such things.
There is nothing we can do, because the world is the world
Brandon, comments like that make you not have friends...
TK Viau
Pardon my grammer there George, long of the short, it's happening now! The information I send is by far "not bootleg!" It is easier to zip and send large files on the net, via a sharing service. My family/friends are scattered and we keep in touch with a variety of different services online. Now, we have to look at alternative methods. If the government is pulling this crap now, who's to say a simple video chat wouldn't be spied on?
+Jeff Jarvis Great Post.
What always gets me is that when governments decide that "we have to make X illegal on the internet" Where X is something already illegal with laws covering it.
So they want to pass laws making it double illegal?
Of course in the process they do things that break the internet for everyone in order to fix a problem that there is already a solution for. Makes a person want to bang their head against a Wall.
+Jeff Jarvis So some how among all of Human creation the Internet doesn't need regulation? Wow.
I find it utterly hilarious that the same people who thought it was fine for the government to tell the Catholic Church what to do are whining now about the government coming in to regulate the internet. Seriously, why are any of you surprised? I said a couple of weeks ago to all those Catholic bashers that the government will come for you next... karma is a b$tch.
Life is so ironic. When I tried to watch the video (from Germany) I get only notice on black screen: "Unfortunately, this video is no available in Germany because it may contain music for which GEMA has not granted the respective music rights". The industry wants even more comment.
Plain and simple, leave me alone okay!!!!
Control is what authority does--including the Catholic church.
Ah yes David, but you can choose to leave the Catholic church if you don't agree with them. The government controlling the internet is different. There was a time when the government was controlled by the governed... it's not like that anymore.
On what Dave Said, you really think we have control in the US, the Republic is probably even more corrupted then most Dictatorships today. At that, all goverments are the same, their point is not to Govern the People, but to become rich. Greed, and each of is a pawn, my point is, ignore what they do, because they will do it one way or another, we think we have power, but we don't. instead of focusing on the goverment, focus on the house, and the church, The real reason Rome fell was not because of Barbarians and Economic issues, but those are the effects. the real reason was that they fell away from their roots. They brought Sexual, Violence, and corruption in their homes, and the government fell apart with the home. The core of America used to be our faith, whydid most of us come to the US, for religious freedom and because of persecution. It's time for us to change. Any Christans on here, it's starts with you and me, then our families, then the world around us. In truth, the best way to change the world is letting God do it!
Control is needed only when self control fails.
'Dieses Video ist in Deutschland leider nicht verfügbar, da es möglicherweise Musik enthält, für die die erforderlichen Musikrechte von der Geam nicht eingeräumt wurden.'
You hit the nail on the head, they want control. They don't want anything more powerful than themselves.
Many people just don't know a good thing when they see it. Free speech is what we have and it is once again being taken away from us so the next country will be some undiscovered Island in the Pacific Ocean where free speech is the word of the day. When will big brother know that we are watching him. Just as he is realy listening to us..................
The web is imperfect yet puts a lot of power in the hands of people, rather than institutions. I consider it the greatest invention of mankind.

We shouldn't be too confident in our power to protect it though. Attempts to regulate it will be continuous, and they will be played in a way that we morally agree with the regulation. We shouldn't fall in that trap. Despite the imperfections, the internet as it is now, open anonymous and free, is of greater value than the downsides it also has or the profit incentive of a few private individuals.

We already lost some ground. I believe in some countries you can get financial penalties that will bankrupt you for life or shut you down from the internet for life, just for downloading some "illegal" content.
True freedom is in the freedom to serve others. If our hands are tied, how can we serve. Therefore, we must be as free as possible, even with taking the risk of that freedom being abused. This is one case where we need to keep the baby with the bathwater.
Greg, No matter what government is in place, it works if God is in it, so therefore it will not matter what they do as long God is not taken out and we are not opposing Israel. Those two right now are our problems, we have taken God out of the Government and out of the home.
Funny how many people has God spoken to directly? You say trust God but watch all others, what about the men interpreting the word of God? Should they too not be watched?

I say let God judge all day, I am here to treat the next man like a human.
Blair, God is true Freedom, we are more free in the world no matter what if we are following Gods laws and the Lords commandments.
Not viewable in Germany, because the video "might" contain music for which GEMA has not provided the necessary rights.
Since Al Gore invented the internet, why not let him make the rules?
Perry, your Job in the world as a man or women of the World is to take care of human kind in till your heart is soft enough to except the Lord into your heart. I pray that it happens, however, if you want freedom for man kind, it's not a wrong thing, but it's the wrong path to the wanted result.
The governments are beholden (at least in the US) to the corporate taskmasters. The vast ocean of free information and services that the Internet represents is probably the biggest challenge to traditional business models that's ever happened. So, under cover of social or quasi-military justifications, they're looking to turn off the free flow of information.

+Joey Schantz The last time I counted, the typical theocracy was usually an unpleasant place to live. I'd like a counter-example to, say, Afghanistan under the Taliban, or Iran.
Brian, If every person believed in the same god, even if they had diffrent polictal beleifes, every man and women would have some thing in commen other then being human, and they would have common the most powerful thing in the Universe. At that, Muslim religion is a bad example because they have gotten along. It's their own fault.
They just want to keep us all believing that everything they say or do is accurate and true. The internet gives us access to true truth and they can't continue to treat us like sheep.
Dave, that was a effect that lead to another effect, not the all starts with one cause, falling away from God. The thing that holds people together when they disagree about every thing else.
+Joey Schantz This will obviously go nowhere, but the very idea that any heterogenous group of people will form an identical conception of God is ... unrealistic, to use a nice word. Worse, it would cause philosophical stagnation in hte name of ideology. Look at the progress of science before the Renaissance - since a single idology held sway about the way the universe "Truly Was", no attempt was made to explore it, since the revelations might prove heretical.

People being of different minds about everything is a strength, not a weakness. The idea of a Single Religion is chilling, to say the least.
Brian, Devon,

Okay, let's think about how the world would have created with a High Deity of the Universe. It's just came out of no where? There is no way with out God, or a god that the Universe in it's complexity that could have came from a explosion, or big bang, or out of no where.
Okay so even if we all agreed we were created by a "God" why does it have to be your "God". I truthfully don't expect you to answer that question, least not reasonably.
and why would one religion be a problem? it's simply because there would be more so called "Bible pushers" telling you your wrong, as simple as that, you don't want to change your life, but let's be honest, If you wont try to change, it's worse then any Government or corp. power taking away you rights, because you are causing others to fall down the same path as you, cause people to suffer like you....
Where is the "freedom given by God" to the rights of gays to marry? Out of curiosity.
Net neutrality is regulation. I ask your question again, is the 'net not working?
This is why Perry, because all other Religions have not proved to be truthful. There has been men in India that have converted to Christianity because literally their legs grew back after they lost them. Peoples lives have been changes because of God, from the beginning to now. What has Buddhism done, peace, they have failed, what has Hinduism done, self torture and a cast system that puts down human kind? What has Muslim religion done? War, war, and war, constantly unstable Government, war between not just nations, but between cities. About all other religions; similar results.
I think we need a constitutional amendment that enshrines the end-to-end connection model as a logical extension to the first amendment.
Matt P
no, the internet isn't broken, but its not perfect either. with cyber-bullying and various types of cyber-predators, scam artists, and rogue hacker groups out there it has its problems. nigeria alone should receive some serious smackdown for the sh*t they pull.

i don't want the govt to come in a 'regulate' the internet. but a few tweaks here and there regarding internet protocol are apparently in order and need to be implemented or eventually this is going to all blow up in our faces. when that happens some gestapo govt group will step in and you can say goodbye to so called internet freedom.
I'm done with this shtick, I don't know why I bothered. I can't respect a man that can't acknowledge the weaknesses in his own camp. Of course a full on believer isn't allowed that luxury so I don't even blame you. I sure wish my Christian buddy from when I served could grow his leg back, guess he doesn't believe enough.
wow good job on being an ignorate jerk i know alot of muslims their not all bad moron
why are people talking about gay marriage and religion on a post about our freedom and rights on the net?
The Internet IS broken! The potential for regulation and censorship MEANS it's broken. And it's broken in a way that can't be slowly fixed, we have to start over and structure it fundamentally differently. We can't have centralized hubs and networks under the control of corporations and governments, we need something more like a mesh network.
This administration has already violated the first amendment and they have the support of many Americans... why would they stop trying to gain more control/power now? "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and State."
Thomas Jefferson, letter to a Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association, Connecticut, January 1, 1802
Because Julius is not the cause, simple as that Dave.
In response to those who point out that Net Neutrality is regulation, I have to agree. Net Neutrality is regulation that prevents companies from acting as the regulators over internet traffic. There are companies who have stated their intention of regulating internet traffic that crosses their networks. Some might argue that those network links are theirs, so why not allow companies to do as they wish, but it only takes one link in the path to break the system. They chose to join the collective effort that is the network, they cannot be permitted to become de-facto (and un-elected) government over what the internet is and what it will become.
My point is it starts in the home, from the home to the world, and if the people in the Government are REAL strong Christians, then the government will do the things God wants them to do. Therefore there seperation of the Church and State are not needed.
Prophet Moses (Peach be upon him) was born before Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him), then how how Judaism becomes the base of Christian religion? should not that be other way around?
+Joey Schantz I can see arguing with you is like smashing ones head against a brick wall. Do you actually understand any of your schpeal or are you spouting some memorised internal script pounded into you by your pastor?
Thanks for your clarity and for continuing to sound the alarm.
Dave, about this, gay men and women have proved to have a average of over 100 sex partners in a year; A YEAR. You know they die young of, Suicide and STDs. The straight men and women die young from heart attacks and strokes the most, along with drugs, drinking cancer, ect. So, 43% not looking as good any more, does it?
Maybe people think it's broken because there are those that get hurt. There are those who misuse it and have an unfair advantage. Creative destruction is great if you are benefiting from it. but, I have no idea how any laws will be created to truly regulate it (similar to enforcing copyright laws for the little guy) It's too unwieldy and unpredictable and those who wish to do harm will do so, regardless of laws. I often wonder with our the reliance on the internet, what happens if there is major Carrington event? I believe in beautiful destinations some things get lost looking at a computer monitor: Despite all of this I have embraced change even if I don't particularly like it.
+Joey Schantz 43% of gay and lesbian people die young? ROTFLMAO 50% of people die young and the other 50% die old, who could have predicted that?
Just to reply to you joey, thats statement is completely wrong. I don't know where you heard that, but its actually kind of rude to make such a false stereotype. I'm not trying to be mean, but thats just wrong of you to say those things. And I'm not trying to argue either.
Hasib, because Judaism was started back from Adam and Eve, it grew as time went on to when the 10 commandments formed. Jesus used the Old Testament (or the next of God that were there at the time, because the Bible was not complete yet) as a foundation of his ministry, he then added the Laws to Love his neighbor as himself. When he died, he became our savoir of this world. Therefore it's not the other way around.
Without regulation the internet could not exist as a tool for free trade. All those things like Amazon and the iStore go right out the window when you take the current regulation away from the net.

That said, I think we would benefit greatly from focusing more of our global efforts on education. People simply don't understand how to use the internet. Education is going to be the key to removing the FUD that plagues the web.
Jeremy, the Study was done not even by a church, but a Government paid Study, covered up because of Gay rights.

Matt, I have done my own studies, thank you

Dave, that's really sad you have that view, that's Stamina, it's a sick addiction to sex, no matter who their having sex with. This addiction does not just ruin their life, but as from you just said proves yet again that it brings other people down the wrong path.
God Bless you :P God bless you and your sarcasm Hahaha :P
First of all, I know many gay and lesbians, and none of them had more than 4 relationships in their lifetime. Second, stick away from conspiracy theories. Third, this is an inappropriately place to have an argument about such. So no more false stereotypes, please lol.
Government just needs to control every aspect of people's lives, it's a disease!
Jeremy, hate to say you just wrong, but your just wrong, numbers are speaking, and you get down to it, every thing in money is a conspiracy one way or another. Period. another thing, your one person knowing a few people, do you know every person in the world? No.... and last, there is no so called "appropriate place" to have a argument like this. You get right down to it, you don't wanna hear any of it, that's why your dissing this argument, not because it's wrong, this is some thing that every one deals with one way or another. So if you don't talk about it and deal with it now, when will you? It's not the people that is the problem, it's the sin. God is not down on sex, but hes down on pain... God created sex, he wants you to have sex in marriage between a man and a women. No sex out of marriage, no sex before, no porn, no gay marriage, it's so you can live your life the way God meant it to be, which will be better then our plan because we don't have the full picture, but he does.
Joey Schantz, you sound like a complete moron and have no idea what you're talking about. Way to stereotype and generalize a whole segment of our population. Please stop making the world a far more stupid place to live in.
Love your post Jeff Jarvis and you are so right. Free Net forever for all!!!
Hey Joey Schantz when you have 100% proof of your God get back to me or even better he will know my mobile / cell get him to give me a call until then chill and await the day of The Rapture (sorry date delayed due to mixed / confused messages)
Andrew, I know what I am talking about, when people can't come up with reasons to act the way they do they go to insults to cover it up. Simon, no one knows the date of his coming, not even the son. Part of faith is going into some thing with out or little proof, if we knew what he was going to do, would we worship him, no. Man is always on a quest to know what he can not. I do not say that I don't have my own problems, but I go to the Lord for forgiveness, making me as white as snow.
Those Brits in their school Americans like the Limey Pop Music!!! Will school uniforms ever come to the US?
Brunon, their kinda creepy if you ask me lol
but yet again, no one asked me :P
Jeff, you are spot on, the federal government fears the enormous amount of freedom the internet affords the public. Information flowing without big brother's hand firmly on that spigot to regulate that flow is anathema to big government!

The internet offers virtually endless opportunities to everyone and it scares the heck out of our would-be net police. They have enough control over our lives now, we must keep the net a public forum where we can truly exercise our God-given 1st amendment rights!

The feds are terrified of the exchange of so many ideas, that reach so many people, so fast, there is no doubt that given half a chance they will turn that spigot right off, and we will have to get their permission to access that free-flowing pipeline that is the internet.
Keep it real yeah, excellent music vids too!
I can see both the benefits of net police and the drawbacks but it seems the drawbacks outweigh the benefits. Also who polices the police.
You're really good at these king of speech ordeals. Are you a public speaker? If not, you should! I bet you'd be great! (Love the song btw, it's one of my faves actually!)
+Tim Roberts Anonymous saying that they will shut down the internet might be that crisis or invented crisis to allow the Government to step in.
I go to teach class and come back and there are more than 100 comments. Sorry I haven't been joining in. And now I have to commute home....
The people attempting to regulate the internet obviously aren't attempting to "fix the internet" or "make the internet better" but protect their interests on the internet, even if it breaks it or makes the internet worse... so how is the fact that the internet works for what the vast majority of people want out of the internet relevant to the interests of those for whom it does not work? What argument have you made? You've made no argument at all.

Those people still ought to have their actual rights protected, even if it comes at the expense of the internet being 'disrupted'. Actual rights as opposed to the non-right to have the current state of the internet not be tampered with. Rights >>> non-rights. Yay.
Am I the only one that finds it ironic that when you go and click the video that it says, "This video contains content from EMI. It is restricted from playback on certain sites." If you read the 2nd line in this post, it says, "The internet’s not broken." Ahh, irony at its finest!
haven't seen the video might watch it but from the cover looks BORING! But you cant judge a book by its cover,right?
Had "The Wall-Pink Floyd" movie forever...still a lot 2 B learned from it. "_) Thanx +Jeff Jarvis 4 share. LL aka5050 lvnv
Handyman slogan for sure- "If it ain't broke-don't fix it // if it breaks-fix it then correctly." #50/50 "_)
paul do u see this vedio,one of the matter is recalling our hindi miss
.......Love this Jeff.....Singing along to the words you provided was great. The government's ears should be ringing as we all sing about them, in unison, like one big internet choir.
The wall was a real great movie, especially Roger waters with all his lyrics. 
The brick in the wall is my favorit song ever wooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!
Nice one! I LOVE Pink Floyd! Video's a bit creepy though...
What you wrote is great but, the video's message is horrible.
It ain't broke-so keep your f***ING hands off!
This latest/biggest regulation push by various governments is the logical progression down the thought path for many that top-down control by rulers/government is necessary for social order, whether in person or online. But in this day of rapid (and very often real-time) electronic communication (voice/text and often video) with almost anyone across the state/province/country/continent and/or around the world, the situation for evaluation is whether rulers/governments are truly needed at all. For those willing to "chew" on the ideas, I recommend: "Social Meta-Needs: A New Basis for Optimal Interaction" -
Note: This treatise with its many links to technical terms is NOT a breezy quick read - a warning for those looking for and used to soundbites with which to walk away, thinking that such bromides are really foundational and meaningful as a solution to serious social problems. If the solution to this very longstanding problem were so simple, it would already have been much earlier discovered. Instead, the twin-framework implementations of the Social Meta-Needs theory - The Natural Social Contract and Social Preferencing - are envisioned as full replacements for entire existing governmental structures and mechanisms, which in the US alone require thousands of volumes and many millions (?billions? trillions?) of words enabling tens of thousands of lawyers to charge handsomely to serve as "gatekeepers" for the common folk.
I love posts about outrages against the government about web censorship. It always make me feel that choices i have made in the past and friends i have lost due to those actions were not in vain. These post remind me that there still is hope in people amd we all haven't completely gone crazy
+Michael Huskey both of those examples are up to the person involved, not the government. If I, as an artist, don't want my work stolen, it's up to me to implement measures to prevent that, such as watermarks... But it's also time to look at the business models that lead to art being stolen. Most of the time, the art-stealing argument is regarding music and/or tv/movies- where the artists receive very little of the exorbitant prices charged by distribution agencies. That's been shown time and time again- Sony, bmg, etc etc take the lion's share, while starving artist keeps starving.

My house, my responsibility to lock it down. If I do that properly, my stuff doesn't get stolen. It's not up to the government to lock my house down for me, is it? And, if my house does get broken into, I seek assistance from the gov'ts executive arm- the police. Do I want police in my house all the time? Fuck no.

Re: porn, again, it's up to me to educate myself in methods to stop my kids (if I had any) from getting to it, and educating them on why. Do I want all access taken away? Do I want all the porn gone? No way. And that's what we're talking about.

Say SOPIPA gets in (yes, I know it's not that, but I joined the two words to act as a catchall for acts like that). All it takes is the right conservative tool who's good friends with the right judge to present some crazy figures (see the 'gay people all have 100 six partners a year' up the page), and, OH GOD THINK OF THE CHILDREN GAY PORN IS ILLEGAL NOW!!! ONEONEONE. Then, if you're suspected of looking at, or having looked at, said porn- or any porn (remember that people can be friends or enemies outside their jobs), and ALL your activities and actions on the Internet are turned over. Watched the video at the top of the page? Copyright violation. $50,000aud fine. Talked about copying cd's? You're fucked. Swore in a post in a public forum?

See where it goes?
have done it only today en i will never anymore,our net,i will never influance others.annetprincess
‎" I'm selfish, impatient and a little
insecure. I make mistakes,
I am out of control and at times
hard to handle.
But if you can't handle me at my
worst, then you sure as hell don't
deserve me at my best. "
Govt getting it wrong... again... - Seems Legit
As wonderful as the net is, it currently provides a massive conduit for competitive and hostile nations to discover and acquire U.S. trade secrets. Sure, we can blame the victims for not developing comprehensive protective infrastructure and mandating rigorous training across huge workforces to counter a foreseeable threat. But many would argue that border protection is the role of government, and note that today's public IP network has some damaging design flaws.
"The people" have never had such power before, and it is frightening the ones who have "the power".

If one person has one vote, and the people rise up their voices, we upset the status quo.
Add a comment...