Tom tgrom.automail at nuegia.net
Sat Sep 5 22:47:50 BST 2020
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020 15:32:10 +0200cblte <cblte at envs.net> wrote:
Am 04.09.20 um 23:46 schrieb Peter Deal:
Hello Geminauts,
This is my first post here but I have been lurking for awhile.
The thread about archiving led me just now to read about the Right
to be Forgotten for the first time. It’s not something that I’ve
ever heard anyone talk about in Canada, didn’t realize it was an
active controversy in Europe. It raises interesting questions - is
it possible to take information off the internet? Is it effectively
gone for most people when you remove it from Google? What is more
important - the value of the public in knowing what happened, or
the value to the individual in getting on with his life after
making a mistake?
For Gemini protocol, I feel like if it becomes important enough to
people, an archive is likely to be created whether we want it or
not. There’s probably some value in the community itself
proactively creating a sanctioned archive itself that respects
creators’ reasonable desires to have their content taken offline on
demand.
Regards,
Peter
Hello Everyone,
the right to be forgotten is something we here in Germany are
discussing for quite some time. There is a semigood wikipedia article
about it here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten
Personally I think, if you put it up online visible to everyone,
there is a chance, that someone will take your content and save it.
Either for himself or for others. You can not protect that other than
handing out passwords to people who want to read your content. But
then it makes not much sense to put it up and online. Then you could
also send it via email.
I personally like the idea of an internet archive. Respecting the
copyright. But if you give your copyright away by posting something
unter a CC licencse or similiar, then you give away your content
which could then be archived.
-- Carsten
I strongly disagree. In the beginning of the web it was largely OpenContent as described here: http://www.opencontent.org/ . All work isderivative work. People who make actual websites, not scrape togetherrandom half-broken crap from stack overflow and wordpress pluginssurfed the web, saw something they liked, looked at the source andadded it to their own site.
Copyright, or more specifically Intellectual property is a completelybroken system and one that does not apply to cyberspace. All it servesto do is prop up broken business models, justify censorship and spywarein the name of saving reality a few reality tv shows.
The fundamental difference between meatspace and cyberspace is thatcopying something is free in cyberspace. It takes effort to reproduce aphysical book. It does not cost anything at all to copy a digital bookor other digital work.
Intellectual Property law works on creating artificial scarcity. Aneconomy based on artificial scarcity is not a sustainable one. Norshould we be designing technical specifications around something asflimsy as that.
I would highly encourage you to watch Cory Doctorow's speech "Thecoming war on general computation" as he explores these ideas in depth.http://mirror.fem-net.de/CCC/28C3/mp4-h264-HQ/28c3-4848-en-the_coming_war_on_general_computation_h264.mp4
Any attempts to incorporate copyright into technical systems ultimatelyleads to rootkits and malware. aka 'trusted computing/DRM'. Asengineers please try to understand the full ramifications of this. Wealready live in an age where all post 9/11 CPUs manufactured by Intelcome with mandatory backdoors/hardware spyware implants you can't turnoff called Intel Management Engine. They implement a DRM called PAVP(Protected Audio Video Path). It's wired directly into your onboardIntel network interface and has hypervisor level access to all systemmemory.
There are other ways to financially back projects. We live in the ageof self-publishing. A giant printing press is no longer required to getyour word out. The backing of a giant publishing corporation is nolonger required. We live in an age where individuals, not groups arethe primary producers of artistic goods. The thing we want toincentive is the creation of these goods not the reproduction ofalready existing goods. As the initial production is the costly part.This is where business models like Patreon comes in. Now I'm not sayingPatreon themselves are good, but the business model here is that ofother individuals who like some content are able to directly fund thecreation of more of said content. No matter how niche that content maybe.
-- ________________________________________ / The other day I... uh, no, that wasn't \| me. || |\ -- Steven Wright / ---------------------------------------- \ \ /\ /\ //\\_//\\ ____ \_ _/ / / / * * \ /^^^] \_\O/_/ [ ] / \_ [ / \ \_ / / [ [ / \/ _/ _[ [ \ /_/