Upholding laws must not be about attacking the tools and methods used to break laws, but instead used to punish actual criminal acts.
The entertainment industry has been flailing about, attacking a huge number of targets. It's gotten to the point that law enforcement branches have been created and international treaties signed. People have been extradited .. to be charged for something that's not illegal in their country.
There are some serious issues with crafting laws which go after methods, because those same laws can be abused in other circumstances, for other methods.
This was a piece I had rattling around in my head for some time. It gets weak at the end, and has no real flow to it, but it's interesting enough in places that I thought I'd clean it up and publish it. Enjoy my dark sarcasm!
In a mass-market scenario, the larger the population the higher the chance for one or more free software projects to appear.
Since software can, in theory, be inherited by additional programmers and indefinitely updated, even the smallest chance for a free software project to be created becomes an inevitability over time. This means that even a niche market scenario can have competition from free software.
A crowd of hobbyists will have more time and expertise for a general-purpose piece of software than a development house can bring to bear. Simply put, they can do it better.
It goes without saying that cheaper, better and more supported free software will eventually out-compete proprietary equivalents, displacing established businesses and markets.
How can this problem be addressed?
[I suppose I could have elaborated somewhat, but I'm just not feeling it]
The past has a tendency to oppress the future.
The weight of past efforts puts unwarranted value on their topics.
Incomplete activities can be seen as an investment and are given importance. This bias exists even though we have limited time, and we view our current/future actions against a return on investment (RoI).
It is a little true that there is some investment in the past. An overall understanding of the goals can be seen as an advantage compared with un-pursued new activities.
One's hobby needs to be the processing of past works; reviewing them for value and either identifying them as needing to be done or throwing them away. Otherwise the amount of ideas generated will become overwhelming.
Don't be chained to nostalgia or that tradition-of-self, filled with the regrets of things not completed "yet".
A response to Notch's How piracy works.
This was probably written up a little while after his blog entry.
After a brief debate where a vocal majority was ignored, a new law was passed which forces all pregnancy-capable girls to become expectant mothers.
Shortly after being passed, significant backlash had the law amended to allow a child's parent or guardian to elect for artificial insemination. The Catholic church has since moderated its support for this new law.
The pope was unavailable for comment, but a vocal devotee was quoted as saying
This isn't quite God's will, but it's will have to do for now.
This was an aborted piece I had sitting around, so I thought I'd post it up. It doesn't have a complete arc of an idea, but it's readable.
One of the common responses to people getting pissy about software is "It's Open Source, change it yourself" or "Open Source is about choice, find an alternative".
These are ignorant and insulting responses.
Andrew Mellen is a consultant, speaker and author who helps remove "stuff" from people's lives.
I watched a couple of videos of him speaking. He's entertaining, and has some interesting things to say and ways to get his ideas across. Not a lot of what he says is new to me, but there are some nice angles which made it worth my time to re-watch them and take notes.
These are my notes and thoughts.
It's rude to stand on someone's toes.
Personal space is a basic right. This is not too different from freedom from chains.
Each of us asserts our basic right for our personal space, just as each of us owns our own body. Having the that ownership threatened will bring strong reactions. Like this one.
[I'll write on abortion at some point.]
Walking down the street, how would you feel to have someone follow you? Or stand in your way intentionally? Or push you? Or hit you? You can see the impact someone else can have on you.
The reverse is true. You should see the impact you have on other people. How would someone else feel if you followed them, stood in their way, pushed the or hit them? They would feel the same way you would feel.
Since Radar magazine doesn't have it anymore (archive.org archive), and Scroogle isn't showing it, here is the short story which inspired Scroogle:
This short story was published in the October 2007 issue of Radar magazine. This story is copyrighted Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States (CC-BY-NC-SA) There is also a list of translations of this story. I don't know how many of those links are still good. Use archive.org if something's gone missing.