Hi Ctalker,
paragraph
As technology becomes ever more deeply embedded in everyday life and the
experienced economies, it can no longer see design as a front-end tool,
nor social and cultural issues as a sphere that has to mold itself
around new technologies.
Unless we find new ways of scripting new forms of solidarities with
digital technology, it seems like we can envisage two roads that both
lead to less dialogue, less communication, less innovation, less
business opportunities, less sustainable options. The one focuses on
control in a fundamentally flux wireless environment. The other focuses
on hiding the technological complexity behind ever more simple user
friendly interfaces. In both cases there is no learning by citizens on
how to function within such a system, thereby, opening up all kinds of
breakdown scenarios.
The new evolution in computing; sensors, rfid, pervasive computing
requires, as it interfaces with citizens on very superficial levels of
agency – as it wants the intelligence 'running in the background' – a
very stable society, quite calm and sterile. Any change in the
background, in the axioms that make up the environment has tremendous
consequences on the level of agency of citizens. They become helpless
very soon, as they have no clue how to operate what is 'running in the
background', let alone fix things if they go wrong. As such, ambient
intelligence/The Internet of Things presumes a totalizing,
anti-democratic logic.
Bricolabs says that in a democracy the content, software and hardware
should be open to play with, improve on, add value to, make money from,
as this will benefit all people, no just a few. Therefore all these
measures that still cling to IP and originality are wrong, as in the
network there is no more originality, just building on each other. It is
not interesting to know who did what first. Boring! We urge the BRIC
countries to not go the 19th century way of making a few people rich,
cripple devices and build huge systems in order to control what is
uncontrollable. If the BRIC countries choose the way of open content,
software and hardware then we need new businessmodels for the networked
world. The future lies in that direction, not in kowtowing to US
companies and a logic that stems from colonial times.
--
ok brazil bricos please hack this paragraph :)
greetings, rob
Çtalker schreef:
> Terrific!
> I beg you to write it, as my written english (as the spoken) would be
> a nut vessel in this atlantic storm argument.
>
> HugÇ!
>
> Rob van Kranenburg escreveu:
>> Hi,
>>
>> maybe we could put this out too, say bricolabs fully support this FSF
>> press release and add one more paragraph on open source hardware, and
>> metareciclagem?
>>
>> greetings! Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> Ian Lawrence schreef:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> >From FSF Latin America List
>>>
>>>
>>>> (Moçada, por que a gente tá tão parado e não está se mobilizando contra
>>>> o projeto do Azeredo?)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Anyhow, here's a draft press release. It would probably be wise to
>>> publish it on Monday, so we don't have much time to polish it further
>>> and translate it. Nevertheless, comments (and hopefully board
>>> approval) are welcome.
>>>
>>> I'll probably work on translating it to Portuguese after getting some
>>> sleep. Help in translating it to Portuguese and Spanish are
>>> definitely welcome.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>
>>>
>>> == Stop authoriterrorism.net.br
>>>
>>> Brazil, July 7, 2008---Pressure from banks against on-line fraud,
>>> already covered by existing law, is being used as excuse to push
>>> through major threats to society. Puppets in the Brazilian Senate are
>>> about to approve a bill supported by banking and copyright profiteers
>>> in detriment of freedom and privacy of the people they were elected to
>>> serve and represent. Bill 89/2003 criminalizes day-to-day Internet
>>> activities, and it is likely to be voted in the Senate this week.
>>> <br/>http://fsfla.org/svnwiki/blogs/lxo/2008-07-05-surpresa,-sou-contra
>>> (in Portuguese)
>>>
>>> The bill introduces on-line surveillance, demanding networking service
>>> providers to record customers' every on-line activity, and to share
>>> with authorities logs and received reports of possibly-illicit
>>> activities. The wording is so broad that providers may be heftily
>>> fined if they fail to retain, for at least 3 years, a copy of every
>>> packet that crosses its network. Even more serious than the costs and
>>> risks, imposed on service providers, is the danger to users' privacy,
>>> ensuring the possibility of retroactive wiretapping of every VoIP
>>> phone call, every e-mail or instant message sent or received, every
>>> visited web-page and every on-line transaction.
>>>
>>> It further establishes jail time for such broad activities as
>>> unauthorized access to computer systems, networks, and data stored in
>>> them. In spite of being justified and promoted by banks on the
>>> grounds of stopping criminals from obtaining, selling or destroying
>>> information through fraud or exploitation of vulnerabilities, it is
>>> worded so broadly that it can be easily abused by suppliers of
>>> electronic equipment (computers such as servers, desktops, laptops,
>>> video games, cell phones, digital cameras, media players and
>>> recorders, etc) and of digitally-encoded information (text, audio,
>>> video, software, etc).
>>>
>>> Abuses may range from legal threats to actual jail time for people who
>>> unlock video games or cell phones to install software not approved by
>>> the supplier; who work around deliberate defects in media players or
>>> recorders to gain access to songs or movies stored in them; who use
>>> copyrighted works in ways that do not infringe on copyrights, but that
>>> authoriterrorists would like to outlaw.
>>> <br/>http://defectivebydesign.org/
>>> <br/>http://drm.info/
>>>
>>> Authoriterrorism is the practice of (i) mislabeling as property a
>>> limited monopoly granted by society to get, after an originally short
>>> period of deprivation, more creative works available for all to enjoy
>>> and build upon; (ii) promoting the extension of the monopoly and other
>>> authoritarian laws that grant authoriterrorists technical and legal
>>> means to steal from society the fulfillment of the goal of copyrights;
>>> (iii) using these technical and legal measures and scare tactics to
>>> stop people from using works in ways that fall outside the scope or
>>> the period of the monopoly; (iv) brainwashing people so they believe
>>> they don't and shouldn't have the right to use works in these ways,
>>> that it would somehow harm authors (as if authoriterrorists didn't),
>>> and that it is the moral equivalent of invading ships, stealing the
>>> cargo and enslaving or murdering the tripulation.
>>> <br/>http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml
>>> <br/>http://fsfla.org/svnwiki/blogs/lxo/2008-07-02-against-DRM-law-in-Canada
>>> <br/>http://fsfla.org/svnwiki/blogs/lxo/pub/PIFAQ (in Portuguese)
>>>
>>> But just think for a moment about who is invading our homes, building
>>> spies and policemen into our electronic equipment; tying our hands,
>>> and putting on blinds and gags on us through this same equipment,
>>> stealing through force our fair use rights and the public domain;
>>> enslaving us by ensuring we can only do what they want us to do, and
>>> killing our wish to fight for our rights by fooling us into feeling
>>> guilty. Who are the real pirates, and who is really being harmed?
>>>
>>> Bills that would give even more power to the powerful authoritarian
>>> intermediaries, that exploit authors and terrorize society, appear to
>>> not be in short supply these days. Rushing them to approval, avoiding
>>> public debate, is a common trait for such bills that harm the society.
>>> <br/>http://www.defectivebydesign.org/fight-the-canadian-dmca
>>> <br/>http://www.digitalmajority.org/forum/t-72379/european-parliament-rushes-towards-soviet-internet
>>> <br/>http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=1117
>>>
>>> Representatives in democratic governments ought to remember what
>>> democracy stands for, that the law in a democratic state is supposed
>>> to benefit society, and resist the pressure and the lobbying to grant
>>> any authoriterrorist even more power over the people they represent.
>>>
>>> Fraud, blackmail, violation of privacy and of trade secrets are
>>> already crimes, regardless of whether they're perpetrated on-line, and
>>> they haven't prevented Brazilian banks from making huge and growing
>>> profits.
>>>
>>> Permanent on-line surveillance is too much of a privacy threat to be
>>> regarded as a potential solution for these crimes, rather than a
>>> problem on its own, and there is no doubt that the availability of all
>>> this information will be abused by authoriterrorists as well.
>>>
>>> We beg for help in bringing this urgent issue to the public's
>>> attention, lifting the apparent gag order upon the national press, and
>>> bringing to public shame any representative who sells out and votes
>>> into law this anti-democratic weapon of mass criminalization.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
>>> Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
>>> FSFLA Board Member ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
>>> Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discusion mailing list
>>> Discusion@???
>>> http://www.fsfla.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discusion
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Brico mailing list
>> Brico@???
>> http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/brico
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Brico mailing list
> Brico@???
> http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/brico
>
_______________________________________________
Brico mailing list
Brico@???
http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/brico
