Where Chester Lives - Fissure

Ah...HERE'S My Soapbox

nospam@example.com (Coy Thorp) — Sun, 21 Jan 2007 14:06:08 -0700

So, I got an email from a friend who actually reads my blog (I'm shocked, I tell you. SHOCKED). Anywho, he asked if I was one of those guys who thinks that America is run by big corporations.

The short answer is.................no.

But if you wanted the short answer you would stop reading, wouldn't you?

I think the "running of America" is alot more complicated than that. I think that there are factors that I don't know about, and many factors that I know about, but am not cognisant (that's a great word!) of their weight. In other words, I could be completely wrong, and I am most definitely not 100% right .

But being wrong has never stopped me from having an opinion. And yes, I do have one of those...

I think there is one group of people that have more to do with the laws that are passed and with how things happen in this country than any other, and it isn't the voting public. It is lobbyists.

Lobbyists, from my viewpoint, can be split into three major groups of representation, and they are: 1 - Big Corporations/Conglomerates, 2 - Labor Unions, and 3 - Special Interest Groups.

So, do I think big stinking corporations run the country? No...but I DO think that their lobbyists have been influencing congressional votes and lawmaking in their favor for many years. The DMCA is the perfect example of just such a law. Current copyright law favors the big guy, not the innovator. The patent system is, dare I say, flawed. And it favors the big fish, not the little one. I could go on, but those are the really glaring examples.

And you cannot convince me that unions are the working individual's voice. They are not. I KNOW that this is a gross generalization...and I think that Walmart workers would have a better wage and benefits package if they were unionized. I am not discounting the good that unions have accomplished...but when I see a union spend incredible amounts of money, money that they extract via the required dues, on agendas that benefit the union structure and not the workers themselves, it makes me a little bit ill. I don't think the Teamsters had that in mind when they began. Or the teachers' union. Or the nurses' union.

And special interest groups are just that: dedicated to their specialized interest. It doesn't matter which side of the red/blue debate you are on, there are just as many aarp lobbyists as there are civil rights lobbyists. Again, I am not against equality for all...I wouldn't be much of a Christian if I were. I am also not against helping our nation's elderly, or our nation's poor, or the equal workplace rights that belong to every person...I could go on, but that's pointless. There is no doubt in my mind that, for every cause, there equals a group of people in an office in Washington that is getting paid to further that cause.

And every cause has it's fair share of idiots. Like the knuckleheads who want to stop spending money on the Iraq war now, regardless of how that might impact the currently assigned troops. See? That's just not thinking clearly...I don't think the US should continue to oversee a civil war, but I do think that every available nickel be spent wisely in protecting the people over there stuck in a bad job, in a no-win situation, just trying to make it until tomorrow.

So, what's the answer? Again, I could be completely wrong on all of this...and in fifteen years, I may look back at this and call myself a fool. I'm not sure of the answer. I would like to see a government that works to promote public interest, not corporate interest. I would like to see unions that spend their money actively seeking to make better workplaces and enforcing fair labor practices, not focused on some political agenda that has no bearing on that worker's ability to earn a fair wage. I would like to see the good guys win, and the bad guys go down. I would like to see mutual respect, and people exercise their ability to listen.

Not everyone is going to agree with me, and I'm not going to agree with everyone. But I am going to be nice to you, regardless of how you feel about me. And I am going to stand firm on those things that are at my core. There is some kind of fallacy out there that has said, "You cannot be uncompromising in your beliefs and be caring at the same time."

If you believe that, then you never read the story of the woman at the well.

Has Anyone Seen My Soapbox?

nospam@example.com (Coy Thorp) — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:55:00 -0700

Before I begin, I need to wave to Anne. Hi Anne! *waves*

Okay, that's out of the way...

This article sparked a conversation this week with a close friend of mine. It is a conversation we have had before, but I might as well make it public. Well, sort of public anyway. In the faint, misty hopes that someone will actually have a COMMENT.

So, I sent him the above link (you really need to read the article first), and here is his response:

I am honest so I buy my copyrighted material. Once I buy a song or movie, I want to be able to watch it on whatever device I want. The current “piracy prevention” practices prevent this (except if I buy a CD I can rip it to whatever form I want, which is why I still buy CD’s). In my case with movies “piracy prevention” hurts me (the honest guy).
When I was younger I would borrow albums all the time. If I liked them, I would buy them and transfer them to tape because that is how I could get the best sound and make it portable. Plus there was some “cool” factor associated with owning the album (a
real store bought item). Though there were some albums that I would copy and never buy. I suppose it is the same way today, the high quality rips are hard to find on torrent sites (I don’t know I have never really tried looking). So I might see myself using the torrent sites to download songs to see if I like them, but then purchase a higher quality copy if I want to keep it. I dunno though what if I wasn’t into the high quality music? I bet it is cool now for kids (especially ones with out strong ethics) to get as much music for free as you can. That can’t be a good thing for the industry. Bottom line is, I think there is a problem with free music and movies being available. However, the current tactics are not working.
Another problem is that the content industry is not owning up to the fact that the delivery method is changed. They used to sell content AND media (album art, CD’s, Video Tapes). The media was (effective) in some ways to help to deter piracy. Who wanted the movie taped off of TV, if you liked the movie you bought the tape (better quality and packaging). However, media is gone. The content companies sell ONLY content
now. Unfortunately that content is easily distributed, cheaply stored, and easy for everyone to get. A first in the history of the world. This problem has never been faced before. Think about a gallon bucket of wall board mud. It costs $8 or so at Home Depot. I’d bet that 70% or more of the cost of that mud is tied up in delivery and handling costs (since it is really heavy). You are paying for the gas and space on the truck it took to get it to you, not for the value of the mud.
The solution? I dunno. Piracy is bad. It hurts the industry. However, the current prevention tactics are not working and are hurting the good guy. The question is: If the content industry opens the doors (removes all piracy prevention) would there be enough “honest” people still buying content to support the industry? People say the way to test this is to drop the prices and take off all piracy protection. I hope someone tries this. Another solution is to only release the content in controlled environments (only show movies on film at theaters). I doubt this would generate enough income.
I also wish there was a way to “upgrade” my content to better quality without paying full price. I own movie “A” on VCR tape. I want DVD quality. So instead of buying a DVD, I buy an “upgrade” at a lower cost than a full DVD. Yea right on this ever happening, but if they could build that feature into their new distribution model, I think people would be much quicker to embrace a new format and would be much more willing to spend a bit more money. If you could do this digitally all the better, no waste of packaging (other than some old HDDs). Again, good luck on this ever happening.

It is a mess. However, for now, I will keep buying my CDs and waffling on when to start buying my next collection of movies on HD DVD or BLU RAY and in the mean time still buy DVDs. Sigh.

Wow. That was a wordy response. Here was my reply.

All very true…but there is one other point that, I believe, the author missed.

The weavers and button-makers were allowed to get away with this because of the system of government in which they existed. They were members of guilds that wielded a lot of political power and wealth, wealth that the monarchy required in order to fund its agendas/lifestyle. In short, an imperialistic monarchy that benefited the privileged few.

I think the RIAA and MPAA get away with this for the VERY SAME REASON. America is not a democracy…it is barely a republic. We have elected officials, sure, but those guys do the same things that the last guys did…everyone has their pet projects that they want funded, and their campaigns to think about, and they get there money from corporate conglomerates. our nation isn’t about individual freedoms anymore…it’s about the imposition of government will on ourselves and
others. and our government benefits the privileged few. those few being the corporations and the wealthy that pay to keep the status quo alive.

I’m not being anarchist, or socialist. I would like to see a return to the original American
dream…the dream that benefits the individual, and the innovator. And massive corporations are forced to produce a product that is in their customer’s best interest, or they die because someone else has invented a better mousetrap.

To sum up: Piracy is bad, regardless of who owns the content or how much the artist makes or doesn't make from the sell of that content. I do not agree with DRM or the current methods employed to control content, but that doesn't give me the right to steal it. I used to use that philosophical argument to justify downloading music on a pretty large scale. I don't do that anymore. For the price of a CD, you can download unlimited songs from napster.com, or rhapsody.com, or emusic.com...you get the picture. it isn't lossless audio, but it suits my purposes just fine...with the exception of allowing me the portability between devices that I require. There are also labels out there that don't buy into the RIAA mafia, like magnatune.com. You have to be willing to listen to something that isn't "popular," but I stopped caring about popularity a LONG TIME AGO.

I'm just waiting for someone to make a better button...A button that I can use in the way I deem fit for my expenditure.

Ok, here goes...

nospam@example.com (Coy Thorp) — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 09:10:02 -0700

This is atrocious.

For those that are concerned, I am not going to turn this into a political blog. I have definite views on the political environment, views that I am willing to discuss openly with anyone, but I strive not to force my opinion on anyone else. I have very close friends on all sides of the spectrum, and I see valid points made in all sorts of arguments. Having said that, I want to spend a little bit of time venting, if you will. If I can't vent in my own blog, well...the terrorists have won.

Government, regardless of who is in charge, sometimes goes too far.

One basic human right that I regard as being most precious is the right to have a private conversation. Let me be clear on this. Just because I want a conversation with a friend to be private doesn't mean I am, at the very same time, being subversive. The current fear-mongering spirit in government is equating privacy with subversiveness. One by one, our constitutionally guaranteed liberties are being eaten away in the name of temporary security. Little by little, our government starts to emulate the very systems which we are currently at war against.

To provide further clarity: The government should be allowed to open mail and tap phones. WITH JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT. There is a reason we have an executive, legislative, and judicial branch, and that reason is to provide checks and balances.

This has NOTHING to do with being a patriot, or a Republican, or a Democrat, or a Christian conservative, or a social liberal, or a terrorist. This has EVERYTHING to do with being a citizen in a free country.

The founding fathers rebelled and fought for the cause of personal and national liberty. In some cases, they died for it. In the most long-lasting and honorable cases, they lived their entire lives for it. We do them great dishonor when we take that away from ourselves.

I am not a conspiracy theorist (that ascribes too much organization ability to the federal government). I am not a Republican. I am not a Democrat, either. I do not identify myself with political parties, as, like many of the nations founders, I find political parties loathsome. They force you to ascribe to the whole doctrine of the party, or to not ascribe to anything. I continue to exercise my rights as a citizen to vote, to speak, and, most importantly, to listen.

I dearly want this to change. I want to maintain my personal liberties. I want the freedom to hold conversations with friends within the privacy of my phone conversations and letters without unwarranted eavesdropping.

I do realize that I am not a target. I am a white male of European descent, naturally born here. I didn't choose that, but that is where God placed me. I am fully aware that the system is weighted in my favor, and it saddens me. I know that I cannot empathize with someone of Arabic descent who is also an American. Or someone of Asian descent. Or African descent. Or aboriginal to this land. You get the idea. However, I don't think that I should be silent because of my advantages. It is specifically because of my advantages that I should speak up. I have a voice, I need to use it.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin