I read all of the Stop Online Pirating Act (SOPA) bill. The wording is redundant in many places and I believe that it is intentionally misleading.
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/112%20HR%203261.pdf
Simply put:
If a website/server has copyrighted anything on it and the copyright owner(s) complain then the Attorney General has authority to force restrictions on the site.
If the site is within the US, they can just shut it down.
If the site is foreign then; ISPs have to block the domain names, search engines (google, yahoo, ect) have to remove it from search results, payment providers (paypal, visa, mastercard, ect) have to stop all transactions to and from the site, and advertisers have to stop advertising on the site and/or advertising for the site.
These restrictions have to be implemented within 5 days of receipt of notice.
Once the site has been notified of restriction, they can then appeal their case. This is a no warnings system. They screw up once and they are off the internet until they fix it or convince them that no wrong doing was done.
Example of domestic site:
Sony Music Entertainment says that Youtube has videos of songs from Sony Music Entertainment and if the Attorney General authorizes it, Youtube will receive notice. They will then have 5 days to remove ALL the content and prove as such. During these 5 days, some advertisers and payment services may have already began severing ties. Since Youtube is owned by Google, a domestic company, the domain and search engine restrictions would not have gone into effect since Google would have gotten a cease and desist letter demanding that Youtube be fixed or removed.
This is a simple scenario, but is likely to happen. The sites in question would have to much to loose and they would just fix the "issue". Thus censoring the internet.
Example of foreign site:
guardian.co.uk is a European site that hosts news videos. They also have music videos posted on their site and a couple are from Edwyn Collins. Edwyn Collins is a European recording artist, but some of his music is part of Epic Records, a company that is part of Sony Music Entertainment. Sony Music Entertainment files a complaint and the US Attorney General agrees. The owner of guardian.co.uk is sent a notice and the restrictions must take place within 5 days. Before guardian.co.uk would even have a chance to correct this, US ISPs will have blocked the domain from resolving to the IP address (77.91.249.30), US based companies will have stopped advertising on the site, and Google will have stopped people in the US from seeing it as a result on a search. This will not hurt guardian.co.uk enough to bring it down, as most of its traffic is from Europe. The only thing it will accomplish is keeping people from the US from seeing the site. Chances are, the owner of guardian.co.uk will be upset by this and will not even attempt to appeal the case. Even if an appeal is made, it may take months to reverse the restrictions and that is even after the US Attorney General decided that they could.
This scenario is complex, but is very likely to happen that way. This site wouldn't loose much, so they will likely continue doing what they are. They may attempt an appeal and may get it. Until then, the site will be censored from the US.
Another example of a foreign site:
This site is blatantly offering torrent downloads of copyrighted material. thepiratebay.org, housed in Stockholm, Sweden. Multiple US copyright owners can file suit and restrictions would be placed. The site domain would be blocked and Google searches would come up blank. The IP address of the server (194.71.107.15) would still remain accessible. The torrents on the site are not files stored on the site, so the torrents would still be shared and reshared. Thepiratebay would still be online and people would still be pirating using the torrents and trackers hosted on the site. The owners of thepiratebay wouldn't care and wouldn't file an appeal or attempt to correct their site.
This scenario is relatively simple and will be one of the many that happen exactly like it. These types of sites don't care one bit. The restrictions placed won't even stop people from within the US. The site is only accessed as a database for files stored on other people's computers. These sites will not make appeals and will not even be effected by it.
So in conclusion SOPA is another lame attempt by corporations to line their wallets more, by making it harder to get their stuff free. The only companies this will hurt is US based web companies that rely on user generated content. Youtube, Facebook, Google, and even smaller sites like Deviantart will be censored and thus loose traffic. So Sony, Warner Bros, Disney, and other Hollywood based companies will get a small amount of extra money from those few who don't want to have to go around these restrictions and the internet will die out.
Contact your congressmen and express your hatred of this act and express why they should vote against it and other bills like it.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
http://www.house.gov/representatives/
Information from this blog will be attached in an email to all my local congressmen, including Republican Representative Lee Terry. Terry is a co-sponsor of this bill, I hope this changes.
Do something, or loose the internet as we know it.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Idiot Resistance
"Designers and engineers strive to make newer and better idiot proof things, the universe strives to make newer and better idiots."
I've heard this said before and I whole heartedly agree. Though I do not believe that there is a such thing as "idiot proof." I prefer to say that things are "idiot resistant."Back to the point. Having things being idiot resistant means that those using it don't have to think to use it. This not only pertains to new electronic devices, but even to the internet itself. With everything going idiot resistant and making getting information easier, people's brains don't get as much exercise as they should.
I find that things would be better if things weren't so idiot resistant. The simplicity of things makes idiots think that things are easier, until they try to do something they shouldn't. Basically the level of typical intelligence gives just enough knowledge to mess things up. It used to be where if someone didn't know what they were doing, they wouldn't do it.
Alot of employers are making the jobs easier and easier to do. They think that if they make things idiot resistant then they won't have any problems. What employers used to do was just not hire idiots. I'm not going to go into this to heavily, since all I really have to say is that I work at Walmart.
Automotive manufactures are also growing bad at this practice. This started back with anti-lock brakes, a simple safety feature that is now taken for granted. Call me old fashioned, but I don't need a computer to tell me when my brakes should be applied. The new "safety" add-ons that also seem to these issues is traction control, TPMS, back up cameras, automatic braking, and blind spot/lane monitoring systems. The worst of those is in fact the last one. Having a radar system to tell you that you have someone next to you, to stop you automatically, or notify you that you are drifting from your lane is simple laziness. If you need that, then you are dangerous on the road.
Anyway, the point is that making things idiot resistant only makes it easier for idiots to resist learning.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Inverse Intelligence Theory
Anyone that has dealt with lesser intelligent beings, knows of the effects of long term exposure. This is the first time where anyone has bothered to express it as a theory.
Having first hand experience in this, from working at Walmart, I found a way to express this effect in a scientific way. The amount of time spent with each effecting body, will take a negative effect on your intelligence quotient. These effecting body, from now on referred to as "stupids," can take many different forms.
The first form of stupid is the most well known and effective, the individual. These are people who consistently say/do stupid things. The individual can have two different effects, the area effect and the instant effect.
The area effect of an individual is simply put as that the individual acts as a intelligence black hole. Just being present makes everything around them stupider.
The instant effect of an individual is that an individual can instantly wipe out everything smart in the area with one simple stupid action or statement.
The second form of stupid is a equally effective one, the area. This is much like the individual's area effect, but it doesn't require the individual. Some places are just so dumb that being there effects you. Walmart is my area of effectiveness.
The third and most prominent online is the idea. This is like the individual's instant effect only because you can't be around it. Online the idea effect is most observed on the image board sites, such as 4chan, simply thinking about something that is said can effect you.
Now that we have covered the different types of effects, I need to cover the theory. The theory is similar to a worm hole theory, but it is expressed in a temporary way. The stupids drain intelligence, but it doesn't to into them, it vanishes.
In order to return to normal you need twice the amount of time away from stupids then you spent being effected by them. Though taking part in a actual intelligent conversation for that amount of time with double the speed of recovery.
The effect is expressed in this formula:
L = P / (t x .25s)
L is the loss
P is your principal intelligence
t is time, expressed in hours
s is the amount of stupids (per area effect or per 3 instant effects/ hour)
For example, say the principle IQ of the subject is 140. He spends 8 hours at Walmart working with one stupid individual who says/does an average of 4 stupid things per hour. His manager comes back 4 times during the day and says one stupid thing and he deals with 12 stupid customers over the course of the day.
Lets deal with the instant effects first. 12 customers added to the 4 managers gives you 16 over the day, 8 hours gives you an average of 2 stupids per hour. Add that to the 4 from the one stupid coworker and you get 6 per hour. When plugging this into the equation, you would divide that by 3. So you have an equational effect of 2 on top of the area effect of the individual and the area, which gives you 4.
The equation as an example:
L = 140 / (8 x .25 x 4)
L = 140 / 8
L = 17.5
This example is a real life example of my daily work life. The principal is estimated, because I've never had a formal IQ test. If that as an example is accurite, then I temporarily loose about 12% of my intelligence by the end of the day.
And people wonder why I hate my job. ;)
Having first hand experience in this, from working at Walmart, I found a way to express this effect in a scientific way. The amount of time spent with each effecting body, will take a negative effect on your intelligence quotient. These effecting body, from now on referred to as "stupids," can take many different forms.
The first form of stupid is the most well known and effective, the individual. These are people who consistently say/do stupid things. The individual can have two different effects, the area effect and the instant effect.
The area effect of an individual is simply put as that the individual acts as a intelligence black hole. Just being present makes everything around them stupider.
The instant effect of an individual is that an individual can instantly wipe out everything smart in the area with one simple stupid action or statement.
The second form of stupid is a equally effective one, the area. This is much like the individual's area effect, but it doesn't require the individual. Some places are just so dumb that being there effects you. Walmart is my area of effectiveness.
The third and most prominent online is the idea. This is like the individual's instant effect only because you can't be around it. Online the idea effect is most observed on the image board sites, such as 4chan, simply thinking about something that is said can effect you.
Now that we have covered the different types of effects, I need to cover the theory. The theory is similar to a worm hole theory, but it is expressed in a temporary way. The stupids drain intelligence, but it doesn't to into them, it vanishes.
In order to return to normal you need twice the amount of time away from stupids then you spent being effected by them. Though taking part in a actual intelligent conversation for that amount of time with double the speed of recovery.
The effect is expressed in this formula:
L = P / (t x .25s)
L is the loss
P is your principal intelligence
t is time, expressed in hours
s is the amount of stupids (per area effect or per 3 instant effects/ hour)
For example, say the principle IQ of the subject is 140. He spends 8 hours at Walmart working with one stupid individual who says/does an average of 4 stupid things per hour. His manager comes back 4 times during the day and says one stupid thing and he deals with 12 stupid customers over the course of the day.
Lets deal with the instant effects first. 12 customers added to the 4 managers gives you 16 over the day, 8 hours gives you an average of 2 stupids per hour. Add that to the 4 from the one stupid coworker and you get 6 per hour. When plugging this into the equation, you would divide that by 3. So you have an equational effect of 2 on top of the area effect of the individual and the area, which gives you 4.
The equation as an example:
L = 140 / (8 x .25 x 4)
L = 140 / 8
L = 17.5
This example is a real life example of my daily work life. The principal is estimated, because I've never had a formal IQ test. If that as an example is accurite, then I temporarily loose about 12% of my intelligence by the end of the day.
And people wonder why I hate my job. ;)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)