rwmtest

At the end of June I joined a twitter thread started by George Soros where he referenced a short podcast essay he made about rethinking debt.   Inheritance is also a key part of systemic racism, allowing those whose wealth was gained off the (often whipped) backs of others to be perpetuated intergenerationally. So much of failed economic policy is tied to counterproductive cultural entitlements. — Russell McOrmond (@russellmcormond) June 30, 2020   While the thread was short, it touched upon some interesting ideas I wanted to expand upon. Read outside your echo chamber One person suggested that my comment came from within an echo chamber. In fact, what I wrote is what it sounds like when someone of European descent (ancestors primarily indigenous to Ireland) finally exits the Eurocentric echo chamber. Persons of European descent often imply that economic discussions are linear thinking between the theories of two Europeans: Scottish Adam Smith (Capitalism, 1700's) and German ...

Canadian born science fiction author Cory Doctorow writes many excellent articles which try to wake people up to the real technology debates we should be having, recently discussing self-driving cars .  He makes the appropriate link to what I call "dishonest relationship misinformation" (DRM), which some incorrectly call Digital Rights Management due to a confusion on how technology works (they believe it is the interests of copyright holders being protected, when it is the rights of technology owners being revoked). I always like to extend the discussion beyond questions about whether owners should be treated as threats to asking why we can't move away from these unethical questions to making the obvious ethical choice.  We never need to treat owners in an unethical (even if temporarily legally protected) way if we clarified who owns what. If a vehicle is owned by a taxi company or municipal transportation authority, it is obvious that its passengers should not be legal...

I've been asked over the last decade how my activism will change once Canadian legislation that includes Paracopyright passes. Will my activism be finished, and will I admit "defeat" if a bill abrogates the government's responsibility to protect IT property rights ? At one level this could be a question about whether I will honour the law, which isn't really a fair question. Conservative MP Lee Richardson ( Calgary Centre ) suggests my honouring the law is optional , saying "If a digital lock is broken for personal use, it is not realistic that the creator would choose to file a law suit against the consumer, due to legal fees and time involved." I suspect the fact one of my early submissions to the government in 2001 involved documenting my circumvention of a TPM for an otherwise lawful purpose suggests that I will continue to do the same. The more important answer is to state that our activism can not discontinue, and any passage of legislation i...

I was asked on twitter to explain why DRM is bad.  Given I have spent more than a decade talking about this topic, you would think there is a simple twitter-length answer: but there isn't. Whether you believe the acronym expands to Digital Rights Management, Digital Restrictions Management , or Dishonest Relationship Misinformation , it doesn't define a specific technology or technique.  The acronym is used to refer to non-controversial technologies such as databases describing content and eCommerce websites, to highly controversial things such as digital locks which lock out the owners of what is locked. We can't entirely avoid using confusing terms, as people will immediately say "Aren't you talking about DRM" when you want to speak about specific harmful activities.  It is very useful to be clear whenever the time is available. When some people are concerned about DRM they are concerned about the inability to loan electronic books, or to...