Note: I'm not updating this right now, but I do like the idea and am working on software to make publishing snippets like this easier for me (just offline content generation from a template).


How can you accept social supression
This weak state of mind in our time
I demand release from hypocrisy
I'd rather die than be held down, forced down

"The phone and cable monopolies, who control almost all Internet access, want the power to choose who gets access to high-speed lanes and whose content gets seen first and fastest," Schmidt wrote. "Creativity, innovation and a free and open marketplace are all at stake in this fight." [BBC article]

Comcast said in a statement that "we fully share the attorney general's concern with the need to combat illegal use of the Internet for child pornography, terrorism and other illegal activities. We applaud the attorney general's initiative in convening an internal task force on this issue and look forward to continuing to cooperate with him and the FBI."

The copyright industry today likes to present the problem as if internet were just a way for so-called "consumers" to get so-called "content", and that we now just got to have "a reasonable distribution" of money between ISP's and content industry. But we must never fall in that trap, and we can avoid it by refusing to talk about "content" altogether. Instead, we talk about internet as communication.

Therefore, it is totally wrong to regard our role as to represent "consumer interests". On the contrary, it's all about escaping the forceful division of humanity into the two groups "producers" and "consumers" that copyrights produces in different ways.

"His position is that he thinks people ought to have the freedom to lead their private lives," White House spokesman Tony Snow said. "He also does not believe that that means that you have to redefine the institution of marriage. He believes the institution of marriage is between a man and a woman."

"If the article had come out and was, 'What a bad thing,' ... we wouldn't have run it," Lemieux said. " ... I told the drama students, 'It wasn't about ratting you out. It was about showing the cool tradition.'"

In a victory for the Bush administration, justices said the 20-million public employees do not have free-speech protections for what they say as part of their jobs.

Last modified: Thu Jul 20 12:00:54 EDT 2006