In the words of James Martin:
“A naive view from the past is that technology gives us mastery of nature. A more appropriate view is that it has given us a depleted planet and an artificial world increasingly dependent on technology. Advanced technology puts us in need of even more advanced technology. Rather than being masters, we are being swept away in the rapidly accellerating floodwaters of our own technology.”
Or, if you prefer, in the words of Covenant (Hardware Requiem):
“We went too far, we can’t turn back
We built too high, we can’t get down
We are the slaves of our servants
In the shadow of our ambitions”
I feel that integrity and freedom of speech is often discussed as if they were hypothetical issues. As if all the terror laws since 9/11 don’t actually have any implications for the integrity of the good people of the world.
There are new laws allowing to store positions of mobile phones, putting surveillance cameras everywhere, tapping phones and so on. And every time there’s a new law we hear the same arguments. It is “naive” to think we can catch any terrorists or criminals without it. Some proponents don’t have a problem admitting that it has been, and can be, used for the wrong purposes, but still say that the new law will only be used against criminals.
I think anyone that ever opened up a history book should know better. They might be right that it will only be used against criminals, but what’s criminal tomorrow? And why the hell do these people think be put up laws to protect peoples integrity in the first place? What happens if the economy goes crashing into the ground and another Hitler enters the stage? Can’t happen? Yeah, you’re right, I’m just being naive about this…
The Leopard is on the loose, and among the new features is … parental control! Congratulations all you parents, now you can easily prevent your children from using the computer after bedtime and from viewing such inappropriate content as Wikipedia profanity. Not only that – you can now ‘keep an eye’ on what websites your children are viewing or what they are chatting about.
Yes, you heard it right! Now you can set up your own Chinese censorship/surveillance system in the comfort of your own home. With the Great Firewall of Apple, you’ll be the dictator you always dreamed of becoming, watching your offspring’s every move.
“Enable parental controls for any account and create a safe environment for your child to work, play, and communicate on the Mac.”
I don’t think Apple should be blamed for putting such a function in Leopard, but I really think that parents should think twice about this. First of all – children need some space of their own. You can’t be watching their every move. And trust me, there will be other situations far more dangerous than in front of the computer screen. Secondly – your responsibility to your children starts way before that. You can’t just put them in front of the computer and wait for it to raise them for you.
Technology can help solve a lot of problems, but it can also help us not solving them. Parents – don’t outsource parenting to a machine!
Recently, there was some news on linux.com about the Canadian Greens supporting free software in their election platform. I’m not surprised. Greens in general are very supportive towards free software, even the ones that don’t really use much of it themselves (like the Swedish Greens).
But still, while greens are typically not much better at using free software that the average joe, I’d say they are more supportive and curious about it. How come? What is it about green ideology that says free software is a good idea? Environmentalism? Liberalism? Global solidarity?
The greens often claims that the main dividing line in politics is not the (somewhat outdated) left to right scale. Instead, they say the real divide is between large and small scale solutions; mono culture vs. diversity. And for the greens diversity is not only about the ecosystem, but also about social security, education, democracy and economics. And dare I say – technology.
And when you think about it – what makes the Internet as an architecture stable is the same thing that makes our ecosystem stable. Mono cultures may be more effective, but they are also extremely much more vulnerable. That goes for ICT as well as growing crops; similarity brings vulnerability and diversity brings stability. And the same goes for software. Everyone using the same software, owned by Microsoft, is just as bad as every farmer using the same seed corn, owned by Monsanto. And even if there are a couple of Monsantos or Microsofts out there, surely it’s better if the farmers or computer users can control their own seed corn/software, resulting in more variation.
Free Software is very much about diversity and about stability. Non-free Software is about mono culture and vulnerability. That should make free software an obvious choice for green parties all over the world. Next stop – Global Greens Congress in São Paulo, 2008? The step is not all that long, they’ve already got some credibility from running Drupal on their website!
In the words of James Martin:
