Hi everyone!
Now, firstly, I have changed my plans to systematically talk about each episode of The Big Questions, because they might easily not be about something that I want to talk about. I will carry on mentioning it in my posts, but I'm not going to systematically discuss everything they talk about, because I have better things to do on here.
My last post was about Richard O'Dwyer, and since then, it has come to my attention that we are living in a world that is becoming worryingly overcome by censorship. Last week, Wikipedia was down in protest against SOPA and PIPA (two things which I really can't be bothered to explain about, but would basically ruin everyone's use of the Internet, and also threaten our right to share information. Look it up if you haven't heard of it, but most people have). The popular video-sharing sites, MegaUpload and MegaVideo, have been closed down and replaced with a snazzy but depressing FBI logo. YouTube are taking things down, and who knows where it could lead next? Blogger, perhaps? I hope no one closes my blog, I have some pretty important stuff on here!
Anyway, hopefully this will only be a temporary thing - after all, if MegaVideo and the other things don't come back, someone will probably create something similar once the fuss has died down) but here is George's Official Advice for Guarding Yourself Against Censorship on the Internet and Worldwide (GOAGYACIW) (Well, the feds would probably like me to phrase it like that anyway):
1. Be a scavenger. If you can't find the video you want, or the information you need, go through every single link... even if it doesn't look like it will lead to anything. That is how I found MegaVideo in the first place. It feels kind of like scratching and scrabbling through the Net. The feds are like a fire - no matter how powerful they are, there is always something left behind.
2. Create a domino effect with what you find. A domino effect is when something happens, which triggers something else, which triggers another event, like dominos leaning against each other and ultimately knocking themselves over. When you find something... find out who made it, who they are associated with, and you might find something else... and something else, and something else...
3. Write a blog, or something similar. I've been writing this blog for quite a while now, and it is so rewarding. If anyone wants to read my opinions, they can just click on a link and see what I have to say. Writing all your opinions publicly also makes them more clear in your own mind, and makes it easier to justify them to yourself.
4. Stand up in the face of authority. There are some people who feel that just because someone has socially more power than them (like the Government, the police or the FBI) then that means that they have to do it. I want to emphasise that it is fine to challenge, or say no, to someone who is trying to intimidate you into doing what they want. Why should they have more power over your life than you? With a few very obvious exceptions (like murderers and people like that), there is no reason why one human being should have that kind of power over another human being's life. Rosa Parks challenged authority when she refused to give up her seat on the bus, and she is remembered as a hero. In this day and age, if someone does the equivalent of that, they are criticised and condemned.
5. The fundamental answer to the question 'What can one person do about censorship?' is 'Team up with someone else!' The overall answer is: make friends. It is difficult for one person to make a difference entirely on their own. Even this blog is inspired by ideas which I have taken from other people, like Laurie Penny and Jody McIntyre and the other people I have commended on here. The thing is, everyone has ideals, but it is only when people choose to share them with each other that something wonderful can occur when everyone's ideas and information is pooled. I have some wonderful friends who I talk to and learn things from, and I would not be the person that I am without them. So the overall answer to guard yourself from censorship, whether on the Internet or not, is: Talk to people! After all, they can't control what you say... yet.
Anyway, I'm not sure this post is quite as good as some of my previous ones, but hopefully someone will see where I am coming from here. America has too much power over the rest of the world, and I will sit here and tell the world about it from my living room in Bristol, because that is what I do.
I will leave you with a comedy sketch, which has a vague connection to what I have been talking about. It's not very practical, but it is about standing up to authority - and I would love to treat the police like that! Watch the girl's hat as well:
See you on the next blog!
Tuesday, 24 January 2012
Saturday, 14 January 2012
Richard O'Dwyer
Hi everyone
Now, I know I said I was going to write something each week for The Big Questions, but I might not do one for tomorrow's episode, because it's all about spiritual stuff and I'm not really into that. I might still write about it when it's on, but there's no certainty I will be bothered with it.
I'm going to talk about a man named Richard O'Dwyer, who has been in the news a lot recently. Like the founders of Google, Yahoo, Megavideo and many other websites, he set up a website containing links to other websites, most of which contained copyrighted television material. The USA have decided that they want to punish him for it, and for some reason, our Government is actually going along with this. They are currently planning to extradite him to the United States, which Judge Quentin Purdy has ruled in favour of. He is still appealing, so hopefully he can get out of this.
There are many reasons why I think this is blatantly ridiculous, so I'll try to bullet point them:
1. This contravenes freedom of expression. There are many people who want to post something online - myself included - and something that we should be really proud of in this country is that we don't censor people, because that's just not what we do. I'm sorry if some companies are being breached in terms of copyright, but that's life, and if they really want to prevent it, there are better ways than this.
2. The potential penalty is way out of proportion. If someone does something illegal to this extent, you fine them - you don't ship them off to another continent and give them up to 10 years jail time in a foreign nation, a child can see how pathetic that is.
3. Richard hasn't actually done anything wrong. He set up a website, that people posted some links on to other websites. Boo hoo. Extradite him, and you might as well extradite the people who created Google. But those people have more money than he does.
4. Richard is British, and these crimes happened in the UK. There may be occasions where it is necessary to work with another country in order to capture a criminal, but that treaty is supposed to be there to protect the innocent and tackle crimes where people are actually at risk. If there is going to be a criminal trial - and I don't think there should be anyway - there is absolutely no need to subject Richard to the stress and humiliation of having it happen in the USA, when this actually doesn't have anything to do with them at all. We are not America's puppets, we are the UK and we shouldn't feel the need to jump when America snaps its fingers.
5. The USA doesn't care about Richard at all, all they are interested in is showing him off as being this big pantomime villain and making an example of him, which is NOT FAIR UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
There, I managed five. I think that sums it up.
Anyway, I found a petition against him being extradited, which I think everyone should sign. This isn't just about Richard, it is about our rights to have freedom of expression on the Internet. If this goes ahead, anyone could be next. Here is the link:
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stop-extradition-fair-uk-trial-for-richard-o-dwyer.html
And finally, you may notice that throughout this blog, I referred to Richard not by his surname, as most articles do, but by his first name. The reason for this is that I like to make these things a bit more personal. When referring to someone by their surname, it becomes easy to think of them as a unit, but by using a first name, you remind yourself that here is a real person, and any one of us could be in his shoes. So please sign this petition and do your bit to help a man who is in a very unfair situation at the moment.
See you soon, blogsters! (Ooh, I think I just created a word then!)
Now, I know I said I was going to write something each week for The Big Questions, but I might not do one for tomorrow's episode, because it's all about spiritual stuff and I'm not really into that. I might still write about it when it's on, but there's no certainty I will be bothered with it.
I'm going to talk about a man named Richard O'Dwyer, who has been in the news a lot recently. Like the founders of Google, Yahoo, Megavideo and many other websites, he set up a website containing links to other websites, most of which contained copyrighted television material. The USA have decided that they want to punish him for it, and for some reason, our Government is actually going along with this. They are currently planning to extradite him to the United States, which Judge Quentin Purdy has ruled in favour of. He is still appealing, so hopefully he can get out of this.
There are many reasons why I think this is blatantly ridiculous, so I'll try to bullet point them:
1. This contravenes freedom of expression. There are many people who want to post something online - myself included - and something that we should be really proud of in this country is that we don't censor people, because that's just not what we do. I'm sorry if some companies are being breached in terms of copyright, but that's life, and if they really want to prevent it, there are better ways than this.
2. The potential penalty is way out of proportion. If someone does something illegal to this extent, you fine them - you don't ship them off to another continent and give them up to 10 years jail time in a foreign nation, a child can see how pathetic that is.
3. Richard hasn't actually done anything wrong. He set up a website, that people posted some links on to other websites. Boo hoo. Extradite him, and you might as well extradite the people who created Google. But those people have more money than he does.
4. Richard is British, and these crimes happened in the UK. There may be occasions where it is necessary to work with another country in order to capture a criminal, but that treaty is supposed to be there to protect the innocent and tackle crimes where people are actually at risk. If there is going to be a criminal trial - and I don't think there should be anyway - there is absolutely no need to subject Richard to the stress and humiliation of having it happen in the USA, when this actually doesn't have anything to do with them at all. We are not America's puppets, we are the UK and we shouldn't feel the need to jump when America snaps its fingers.
5. The USA doesn't care about Richard at all, all they are interested in is showing him off as being this big pantomime villain and making an example of him, which is NOT FAIR UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
There, I managed five. I think that sums it up.
Anyway, I found a petition against him being extradited, which I think everyone should sign. This isn't just about Richard, it is about our rights to have freedom of expression on the Internet. If this goes ahead, anyone could be next. Here is the link:
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stop-extradition-fair-uk-trial-for-richard-o-dwyer.html
And finally, you may notice that throughout this blog, I referred to Richard not by his surname, as most articles do, but by his first name. The reason for this is that I like to make these things a bit more personal. When referring to someone by their surname, it becomes easy to think of them as a unit, but by using a first name, you remind yourself that here is a real person, and any one of us could be in his shoes. So please sign this petition and do your bit to help a man who is in a very unfair situation at the moment.
See you soon, blogsters! (Ooh, I think I just created a word then!)
Sunday, 8 January 2012
The Big Questions episode 1
Hello! I am so sorry that I haven't blogged in such a bloody long time. Almost a month! Seriously though, I had tons on... and then all of a sudden it was Christmas and New Year etc, and you know how it goes... and everyone knows how pathetic I am at keeping this blog up to date anyway!
So. I am going to be talking about episodes of The Big Questions, which you may or may not know is a faith and ethics show that is broadcast on Sunday mornings. Every week they have one political debate, one moral debate and one religion debate, and I am going to give my views on the debates on this blog. This week they were discussing:
1. Did Mrs Thatcher make Britain better?
2. Should the terminally ill have the right to die?
3. Has the time come to repent?
With Margaret Thatcher, I wasn't actually born at the time she was in power, so I really can't have a fair opinion of her. There are so many arguments supporting what she did, and so many arguments against, that without being around during that era I think it's impossible to say really. One thing I will say though is, whether or not you support her politics, she managed to go into office and completely revolutionise the country, which is a very impressive thing to do, especially as she was the first woman prime minister. With what I have heard about her, I am probably more against her politics, but I have to give credit to her for being as strong as she was really. I think what the bloke said about the future showing whether or not she really had a positive effect on Britain is correct. And by the way, I really can't wait to see that new film about her that has Meryl Streep in it!
I think the decision on the terminally ill having the right to die can only be made by the terminally ill. If it is made by someone else, how can they possibly have an opinion? What the lady said about her husband was very moving, and I think that if someone in that situation wants to die, they will do it, like he did, by going to Dignitas in Switzerland. Obviously this is going to be a very stressful and traumatic ordeal, so if they are going to do it anyway, why not offer it here? I do, however, agree with what one person said about this not necessarily being the best time to do it though - Cameron (or Ca-MORON as I call him) has put the country into chaos, and doing it now might mean that people were pressured into doing it - which obviously isn't the way. I think people need a lot more choice in this kind of situation - ministers may think that they know best for the country, but the fact of the matter is that they are not in that situation for themselves, and so are not qualified to judge what other people should be able to do.
As for repenting, I never will! I don't think anything will happen on the 21st December 2012, but if it does, I don't think it will be as literal as that bloke thought. If anything does happen, I think it will be more like we all realise something about ourselves, and can mean a fresh start for everyone. I also find Kate Smurthwaite quite funny, because for everything she says, I either wholly agree with it or fundamentally disagree.
By the way, 21 December is the day that the legislation about more equal women's and men's car insurance comes in, so it will certainly be the end of the world for some women!
Here is the iPlayer link to this week's edition of The Big Questions
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b019jh9x/The_Big_Questions_Series_5_Episode_1/
So. I am going to be talking about episodes of The Big Questions, which you may or may not know is a faith and ethics show that is broadcast on Sunday mornings. Every week they have one political debate, one moral debate and one religion debate, and I am going to give my views on the debates on this blog. This week they were discussing:
1. Did Mrs Thatcher make Britain better?
2. Should the terminally ill have the right to die?
3. Has the time come to repent?
With Margaret Thatcher, I wasn't actually born at the time she was in power, so I really can't have a fair opinion of her. There are so many arguments supporting what she did, and so many arguments against, that without being around during that era I think it's impossible to say really. One thing I will say though is, whether or not you support her politics, she managed to go into office and completely revolutionise the country, which is a very impressive thing to do, especially as she was the first woman prime minister. With what I have heard about her, I am probably more against her politics, but I have to give credit to her for being as strong as she was really. I think what the bloke said about the future showing whether or not she really had a positive effect on Britain is correct. And by the way, I really can't wait to see that new film about her that has Meryl Streep in it!
I think the decision on the terminally ill having the right to die can only be made by the terminally ill. If it is made by someone else, how can they possibly have an opinion? What the lady said about her husband was very moving, and I think that if someone in that situation wants to die, they will do it, like he did, by going to Dignitas in Switzerland. Obviously this is going to be a very stressful and traumatic ordeal, so if they are going to do it anyway, why not offer it here? I do, however, agree with what one person said about this not necessarily being the best time to do it though - Cameron (or Ca-MORON as I call him) has put the country into chaos, and doing it now might mean that people were pressured into doing it - which obviously isn't the way. I think people need a lot more choice in this kind of situation - ministers may think that they know best for the country, but the fact of the matter is that they are not in that situation for themselves, and so are not qualified to judge what other people should be able to do.
As for repenting, I never will! I don't think anything will happen on the 21st December 2012, but if it does, I don't think it will be as literal as that bloke thought. If anything does happen, I think it will be more like we all realise something about ourselves, and can mean a fresh start for everyone. I also find Kate Smurthwaite quite funny, because for everything she says, I either wholly agree with it or fundamentally disagree.
By the way, 21 December is the day that the legislation about more equal women's and men's car insurance comes in, so it will certainly be the end of the world for some women!
Here is the iPlayer link to this week's edition of The Big Questions
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b019jh9x/The_Big_Questions_Series_5_Episode_1/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)