Hollywood Must Be Destroyed

[Triple Zero]

Okay. I really should read it again, then

[Triple Zero]

YCombinator, the startup venture capital corp behind HackerNews also got the idea Hollywood must be destroyed:

YCombinator--Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood (discussion thread)

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/y-combinator-goes-on-the-offensive-against-hollywood

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

YCombinator, the startup venture capital corp behind HackerNews also got the idea Hollywood must be destroyed:

YCombinator--Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood (discussion thread)

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/y-combinator-goes-on-the-offensive-against-hollywood

Perfect!

"Such ridiculous, destructive bills should never even pass committee review," Mr. Arment wrote. The real problem, he added, is "the MPAA's buying power in Congress," a reference to the Motion Picture Association of America. "This is a campaign finance problem."

[Triple Zero]

There's somebody in that discussion thread whining about how it's not fair because he knows people in the industry and they're good people and apparently there's loads of "creative people" that are waiting tables (waiting for their "big break") but they are protected by the Hollywood scene and they would all lose their income if YC ends up destroying Hollywood.

Or something.

[Cain]

Yeah, maybe one day they'll be asked to help write the script adaptation for Wolverine XVII: This Time It's the Honest Truth about his Mysterious Past!

[kingyak]

YCombinator, the startup venture capital corp behind HackerNews also got the idea Hollywood must be destroyed:

YCombinator--Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood (discussion thread)

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/y-combinator-goes-on-the-offensive-against-hollywood

I think the "fund alternatives" plan is a lot more viable than the "expect creators to work for free" plan. I hope I'm not being to controversial.

[Cain]

Sure, but that means spending money....YOU FASCIST STOOGE OF HOLLYWOOD!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

There's somebody in that discussion thread whining about how it's not fair because he knows people in the industry and they're good people and apparently there's loads of "creative people" that are waiting tables (waiting for their "big break") but they are protected by the Hollywood scene and they would all lose their income if YC ends up destroying Hollywood.

Or something.

Wait... somebody thinks that stimulating competition is "not fair"? 

[Kai]

On the other hand, the NSA is developing cyber-warfare centres across the USA with a large enough capacity to store half of all the information on the internet, Facebook already has 1800 pages worth of information on you and Google are letting the government read your emails via a purpose built backdoor.

People getting all worked up about SOPA from a civil liberties POV are missing the point: that ship already sailed.  Total Information Awareness has been the name of the game since 2003. Wake up and smell the retroactive FISA immunity bill.  They're spying on the Quakers, so they're sure as fuck spying on you.  If you're worried about this being used to squash internal dissent, you're missing the fact the President can just send a a Predator drone or JSOC hitsquad around your place to blow your brains out - all perfectly legally.

I'm all for kicking megacorps in the teeth and pissing on their wheaties, but lets not build this up into anything it's not.

But Cain, we're the GOOD people, he would never ever ever do something like that to us! These little things we do to get around copyright protections and watch season 243 of The Wire is so much more important than indefinite detainment and murder which will never affect us directly. We're (otherwise) Good Americans! The only thing we have to hide is our Pirate Bay torrents!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I am going to say it again; these bills are not about piracy. They are about giving the big five control of content on the internet. They are about controlling information, because without accurate and accessible information, there is no democracy, and they are about controlling communication, because without accessible communication, there is no organized dissent.

There is actually a lot at stake here, because the big five already control broadcast and print media. They tell Americans what America thinks, and Americans sit in our BIPs and rail against the injustice and the stupidity of all those other Americans, and believe that we are too small to do anything. With people increasingly turning to the Internet for information, the existence of unbiased and accurate information online is becoming a threat, and the corporate powers-that-be want to nail a board over that hole.

[Kai]

I am going to say it again; these bills are not about piracy. They are about giving the big five control of content on the internet. They are about controlling information, because without accurate and accessible information, there is no democracy, and they are about controlling communication, because without accessible communication, there is no organized dissent.

There is actually a lot at stake here, because the big five already control broadcast and print media. They tell Americans what America thinks, and Americans sit in our BIPs and rail against the injustice and the stupidity of all those other Americans, and believe that we are too small to do anything. With people increasingly turning to the Internet for information, the existence of unbiased and accurate information online is becoming a threat, and the corporate powers-that-be want to nail a board over that hole.

The problem is in thinking that they [the corporate powers] don't already control the Internet, or they [the government] can't simply take down websites as they please. Even without SOPA, I think we will see more of what happened to Megaupload.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I am going to say it again; these bills are not about piracy. They are about giving the big five control of content on the internet. They are about controlling information, because without accurate and accessible information, there is no democracy, and they are about controlling communication, because without accessible communication, there is no organized dissent.

There is actually a lot at stake here, because the big five already control broadcast and print media. They tell Americans what America thinks, and Americans sit in our BIPs and rail against the injustice and the stupidity of all those other Americans, and believe that we are too small to do anything. With people increasingly turning to the Internet for information, the existence of unbiased and accurate information online is becoming a threat, and the corporate powers-that-be want to nail a board over that hole.

The problem is in thinking that they [the corporate powers] don't already control the Internet, or they [the government] can't simply take down websites as they please. Even without SOPA, I think we will see more of what happened to Megaupload.

Nonsense. The internet is increasingly dominated by big media, but it is far from controlled by it at this point. I strongly disagree with this "all is already lost" perspective. The relative freedom of the internet compared with, for instance, television broadcasting, is what allowed highly popular websites to protest SOPA and PIPA. It is what allowed the growth of the Occupy movement.

Yes, the government can and will shut down websites more or less at will, but the only reason we know about the backlash against the shutdown of Megaupload is because of the relative independence of internet information, and the only chance of preventing a Big Media takeover is to continue to use the freedom of the internet to spread information and dissent. The government will do Big Corp's bidding until and unless it fears the people.

[Kai]

I am going to say it again; these bills are not about piracy. They are about giving the big five control of content on the internet. They are about controlling information, because without accurate and accessible information, there is no democracy, and they are about controlling communication, because without accessible communication, there is no organized dissent.

There is actually a lot at stake here, because the big five already control broadcast and print media. They tell Americans what America thinks, and Americans sit in our BIPs and rail against the injustice and the stupidity of all those other Americans, and believe that we are too small to do anything. With people increasingly turning to the Internet for information, the existence of unbiased and accurate information online is becoming a threat, and the corporate powers-that-be want to nail a board over that hole.

The problem is in thinking that they [the corporate powers] don't already control the Internet, or they [the government] can't simply take down websites as they please. Even without SOPA, I think we will see more of what happened to Megaupload.

Nonsense. The internet is increasingly dominated by big media, but it is far from controlled by it at this point. I strongly disagree with this "all is already lost" perspective. The relative freedom of the internet compared with, for instance, television broadcasting, is what allowed highly popular websites to protest SOPA and PIPA. It is what allowed the growth of the Occupy movement.

Yes, the government can and will shut down websites more or less at will, but the only reason we know about the backlash against the shutdown of Megaupload is because of the relative independence of internet information, and the only chance of preventing a Big Media takeover is to continue to use the freedom of the internet to spread information and dissent. The government will do Big Corp's bidding until and unless it fears the people.

You are right. 25 years ago, the only way we would know about a non-local event would be through one of a few newspapers, or one of a few television networks. Any information from outside one's social circle was heavily filtered. Perhaps I forget this because I was 10 when I first used the Internet.

Was there any way for the average person to fact check recent events before the Internet?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I am going to say it again; these bills are not about piracy. They are about giving the big five control of content on the internet. They are about controlling information, because without accurate and accessible information, there is no democracy, and they are about controlling communication, because without accessible communication, there is no organized dissent.

There is actually a lot at stake here, because the big five already control broadcast and print media. They tell Americans what America thinks, and Americans sit in our BIPs and rail against the injustice and the stupidity of all those other Americans, and believe that we are too small to do anything. With people increasingly turning to the Internet for information, the existence of unbiased and accurate information online is becoming a threat, and the corporate powers-that-be want to nail a board over that hole.

The problem is in thinking that they [the corporate powers] don't already control the Internet, or they [the government] can't simply take down websites as they please. Even without SOPA, I think we will see more of what happened to Megaupload.

Nonsense. The internet is increasingly dominated by big media, but it is far from controlled by it at this point. I strongly disagree with this "all is already lost" perspective. The relative freedom of the internet compared with, for instance, television broadcasting, is what allowed highly popular websites to protest SOPA and PIPA. It is what allowed the growth of the Occupy movement.

Yes, the government can and will shut down websites more or less at will, but the only reason we know about the backlash against the shutdown of Megaupload is because of the relative independence of internet information, and the only chance of preventing a Big Media takeover is to continue to use the freedom of the internet to spread information and dissent. The government will do Big Corp's bidding until and unless it fears the people.

You are right. 25 years ago, the only way we would know about a non-local event would be through one of a few newspapers, or one of a few television networks. Any information from outside one's social circle was heavily filtered. Perhaps I forget this because I was 10 when I first used the Internet.

Was there any way for the average person to fact check recent events before the Internet?

25 years ago, the media situation wasn't quite as dire as it is now. You could cross-reference different newspapers, and they would be actually owned by different companies and have reporters who did more than regurgitate the AP report.

[Cain]

Yes.  Journalism and books.

One of my favourite political writers, Jonathan Schwarz, often uses books and interviews to great effect.  For example:

http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/001494.html

There's almost no new information in George Tenet's book. But he does come up with an internal CIA email that I don't think has ever been published. It was sent on August 30, 2001 from one CIA analyst to another assigned as a liaison to the FBI. It's about the FBI's failure to ask for a warrant to search the belongings of Zacarias Moussaoui:

Please excuse my obvious frustration in this case. I am highly concerned that this is not paid the amount of attention it deserves. I do not want to be responsible when they [sic] surface again as members [sic] of a suicide terrorist op...I want an answer from a named FBI group chief for the record on these questions...several of which I have been asking since a week and a half ago. It is critical that a paper trail be established and clear. If this guy is let go, two years from now he will be talking to a control tower while aiming a 747 at the White House.

Or as Condoleezza Rice put it: "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would...try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile."

In fairness to Rice, though, the planes hijacked on 9/11 weren't 747s. Advantage: Condoleezza!

Obviously a level of critical thinking is also required, and the process is much slower, but you eventually got there.