I haven’t written in this blog in a while because I started a new job as a search analyst about a month ago, and as you can imagine, that’s been taking up quite a bit of my time. Recently, however, I had an experience that has inspired me to write this post. I’ll get in to the details of the experience in a moment, but (as is my wont), I want to briefly go over some theory that relates directly to what I’m getting at first.
- “They’re all crooks…”
- “Liberals just want…”
- “Conservatives are…”
- “It’s just common sense!”
- “Hello, my name is Richard Dawkins”
- “South Park is really good satire”
- “That’s what they want you to believe.”
- “Do you know the truth about Scientology?”
- “Government meddling”
- “Atlas Shrugged”
- “The Second Amendment” (without acknowledging “a well-organized militia…”)
- “States’ rights”
- “(political opponent) is a LIAR!”
- Lame, capitalized puns (“BUllSHit”, “TAXachussetts”)
I’ve been unable to dedicate time to this blog lately, but I want to direct people’s attention to this TED talk. Within his topic, the speaker presents a lot of interesting, relevant points about the internet and society. But his argument about the difference between intended and actual consequences of action is fascinating. In my mind, when combined with the fact that humans simply are not rational, it sets a framework for arguing against unlimited free choice and libertarianism. But that’s a complicated issue that I can’t address right now. So I’m hoping that you guys will add your thoughts in the comments.
Tags: DRM, information, intellectual property, legal
Discussing Digital Rights Management (DRM) in the comments of a previous post, I started thinking about information, knowledge, and intellectual property. The distinctions between the three are very important in our digital age, and I wanted to define them for myselves. The point of doing so is to begin to develop a framework of thinking about digital media, property, and ownership in the post-iPod age.
While it may be more logical to start from the ground up before explaining my conclusions, I want to come out with full disclosure and say that my purpose in this is to argue in favor of DRM (at least in principle). My views stand in stark opposition to a loosely-defined set of ideas commonly found on various parts of the internet, notably on TechDirt.
Most succinctly, I take the view that information and knowledge are not the same.