Monthly Archives: January 2012

Goog-roots and the (lack of) Free Kim Dotcom Movement

Posted on by
Reply

The FBI shut down the file sharing website MegaUpload last week, and arrested 4 people, including founder/COO, Kim Dotcom.  With the exception of the ineffectual cyber attacks by “Anonymous” on Universal, the MPAA and the DOJ, there seems to been very little anxiety expressed by the shut down of MegaUpload. The digital locker service was charged with a criminal conspiracy of illegally distributing copyrighted material.

Why haven’t the newly empowered netizen activists cried out at this abuse of government?  After all isn’t this the type of “abuse” they were so worried about with SOPA just a day before?  After complaints from copyright holders, the US government decided not only shut down a website, but have jack-booted feds arrest non-us citizens in a foreign country.  This seems like exactly the chilling scenario everyone was screaming that SOPA would cause, and that would censor the internet, and ruin the webtopia that is the world wide webs.

But for some reason, my Facebook is not flooded with status updates saying “Stop the Government Takeover of the Internet.” I haven’t seen one tweet saying “Free Kim Dotcom. Free the Internet.” Nor a plea from Jimmy Wales on MegaUpload’s behalf.

Especially after their victory lap, I’d have thought these newly empowered freedom fighters would flex their social media muscles.  But they didn’t.

Why?

Google doesn’t care.

SOPA and PIPA had been debated for the last year.  It was being revised and hashed out in committees, but the only people who seemed to say much about it were the usual small group of internet journalists, and even most of them really didn’t take a side until last week.  But last week Google and Wikipedia decided to take a stand. Their “blackout” and fear mongering got over 8 million people to email their congressman saying NO to SOPA.

Impressive, but a little scary if you consider the motives.  For better or worse, Google and Wikipedia traffic in a lot of illegally copyrighted material.  They know it, and if they had to put even more resources to reduce the amount of copyright infringement, it would cost money.  Why should Google spend more money to curb piracy when they can say “it’s not our responsibility.”  Of course, that doesn’t have the same ring as “End Piracy, Not Liberty.”

What if FOX and CNN decided to not broadcast their regular programs for an entire day, but instead showed stated that “The Government” was trying to take over the airwaves, and urged you to write your congressman. Then other networks joined in solidarity. I’m sure congress would get at least 8 million calls, but FOX and the other networks would also be called on their lack of objectivity, and most people would see the nets craven self-interests.

But the “enlightened” Google get a free pass.

It’s too bad, because it would be great it we did have a “super-power” who used their might to fight for social justice.  But Google isn’t interested in social justice, just the bottom line.

Advertisement

Standing On My SOPA Box

Posted on by
Reply

My job is in the music industry, and I have been working with independent musicians for 20 years. So naturally I was very interested in the recent hoopla over The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). If I’ve learned anything from the anti-SOPA movement, it’s that most “netizen activists” are either willfully blind or out and out hypocrites.

For the most part they nod and say that piracy is “bad” and “something needs to be done,” but when there is a law that might actually have the ability to curb piracy, they call it “draconian.” I think I’ve heard that term a hundred times.  Do any of them know anything about Draco?  As far as I know, there is nothing in the SOPA bill suggesting that copyright violators be sold into slavery.

They say SOPA will cause sites to self-censor the Internet, yet the same breath demand boycotts against companies that support SOPA. So censorship is ok, as long as its censoring the things you don’t like.

They say that the government should not have the power to decide what you can or cannot see, yet Google does that every time you search, basing your query returns on past searched and demographics. “In Google We Trust,” I guess.

They say that you can’t trust a bill that is sponsored by the big bad music and film industry. It’s big business against those mom and pops worth over half a trillion dollars (Google, Yahoo, Twitter and AOL.)

But then you usually get to the heart of the matter, people like getting music and movies for free.  They like that you can use someone else’s intellectual property anyway you want, whether it’s giving away an MP3 of your favorite song, or making a “mash-up” of the most recent internet meme using someone else’s creation. The truth is almost everyone has downloaded an illegal song or movie at one time.  You might feel a little bad about it, but you will come up with all the standard rationalizations:

“Most music sucks anyway”

“They charge too much.”

“I spent all this money in the past so I’m entitled to a freebie.”

“It’s too complicated to buy.”

“It’s unavailable legally, so I had to steal it.”

“Big companies are ripping off the artists anyway.”

SOPA and PIPA are not perfect bills, and a lot of the issues could be fixed by spelling out clear definitions of theft and modify the penalties. Maybe they can be modified and address people’s concerns but the knee-jerk opposition to it shows that internet companies and people themselves really don’t want to curb piracy and copyright infringement. The real reason people are so opposed to this legislation (other than the overstated claim of censorship ginned up by Google and Wikipedia) is that they like the internet being a lawless place, where all it takes is a little cognitive dissonance and a click of a mouse and you can have all your movies and music for free.

N.B.- For me this is not a thought experiment or playing devils advocate in a debate game. This is my livelihood. It was my parent’s livelihood. Intellectual property and copyright laws puts a roof over my head and feeds my children.  So please spare me the B.S. about the industry using outmoded business models and need to find a new paradigm to generate revenue.  Doublespeak like that is cold comfort after the Visigoths have sacked the village.


Ho Hos, Ring Dings, Ding Dongs, Lend Me Your Creamy Filling.

Posted on by
Reply

I Come to Bury Twinkie the Kid, Not to Praise Him.

With the the announcement of Hostess filing for bankruptcy, a lot of people have been reminiscing about Twinkies. The truth is, I was never a big fan of the cream filled spongecake (and frankly, Twinkie the Kid creeped me out, he seemed like a molester) but the with possible demise of Hostess, I will miss the the Hostess lemon pie, and the little powdered donuts.

Hostess lemon pie filling had the color and consistency of Vaseline, but a perfect sweet and sour balance, at least to the discerning tastebuds of a ten-year-old.

I recently tried a Hostess lemon pie again for the first time in over 20 years. It had the same semi- circle cardboard crust, covered in a thin layer of dried icing that resembled eczema more than sugar. But other than being slightly smaller, it looked as I remembered it. Just as it was when ate these after elementary school, the first bite was always a let down, mostly tasteless crust. But once I got to the filling, the lemon petroleum jelly really took me back. In my mind’s-tongue, I recalled them not being as sweet and the 2012 version, this may be just in my memory, but more likely an byproduct of hostess switching to high fructose corn syrup.

I next tried the little powdered donuts, Donettes, the tube of tiny white fluffy donuts, that never went stale. The powdered sugar was so fine, that inhaling while eating always produced a coughing jag, and always left enough powder on your face to make you look like an 80’s stockbroker.

The new donuts were definitely smaller that the ones of yore, but they were just as artificially fluffy as I remember, and just as dry, so much so that once I finished my coughing jag, I needed to chug a Fresca to wash it down.

As much as I like to wax nostalgic, I have to say I’m glad these tasty yet toxic near foods are not nearly as pervasive today. I don’t want my kids eating these things. And the fact that most parents would never even consider putting Ring Dings, Ding Dongs, or King Dons in their kid’s lunch today, something that was pervasive when I was a kid, I see as a real sign of progress.

Barrio Closing? Park Slope’s Restaurant Bermuda Triangle?

Posted on by
Reply

One of my favorite local restaurants seems to be in limbo.  The windows of Barrio have been papered up for the last week.  Rumor is it’s closing, and although some say that they are just “renovating” it seems odd.  If they were renovating you’d think they would have something about it on the door (which they do not.)

Well, I hope they are renovating, they may not be El Buli, but they were a good standby with solid margaritas and a great staff.

What is with that corner?  Restaurants open, seem to be doing fine, then disappear overnight.  Barrio seemed to do a decent business and now might be gone. Catty-corner, Sette, recently shut their doors after 5 years. And I don’t know how long Cheeburger, Cheeburger is going to last with 200+ burger places within 5 blocks, but that location has been at least 6 places in the last 10 years.

I hope Barrio fares better than the USS Cyclops. If not, hopefully they’ll make an “In Search Of” episode about the corner of 7th Avenue and 3rd Street.