Universal evolutionary reset

Today I came across a lecture online dealing with education and the challenges in that area of society. I aim to return to a much deeper exploration of that and other similar lectures in a piece I want to write on the subject at a later point. 

What I found in this lecture was a tiny bit where the point was brought up that humanity is so self-centered when we talk of saving the planet. George Carlin once made the joke that the earth most probably will outlive humanity. Bar some great spacial odyssey, where we escape the planet because of some impending threat like the extinction of vital biodiversity or a comet on course to strike earth, I think he may be right. Humanity will most likely stay on its home planet for as long as it lives. We may spread to other habitable planets, but unless earth is no longer welcoming for us, I see no reason why we would not stay here at least to keep it flagged.

And then a confliction notion entered the thought process. I was almost always a firm believer that the universe is statistically too big for the coincidence of intelligent life to only happen once. But since earth has only been around for some 4 billion years and the universe as a whole is over 14 billion years old, that leaves about ten billion years of room for some other planet in some other solar system in some other galaxy to sprout intelligent life before earth did. And again; if that happened once chances are it will have happened more than once.

Now. If the homo sapiens species is about 50,000 years old, that means it took us that time to go from being universally unimpactful to being able to scan almost the edges of the universe. Since technology improves exponentially for humanity I will allow myself to attribute the same to any alien species that live or may have lived.

This implies that over the course of lets just say 14 billion years, a ridiculously out-of-scope period of just 50,000 years would have to occur somewhere in that timeline to evolve a living primate species into a spacially capable species. Lets be generous and add another 100 years on top of that and just imagine what our species would be able to do and impact within the universe. Then try 1,000. Then try another 50,000. In the grand timeline of 14 billion years you can fit 280,000 sequential timelines of 50,000 years, and I'm just asking for 2 for this experiment.

So now we are getting to where the meat is in this discussion. By now we should agree on the probability that other intelligent life could have lived and travelled space somewhere. With what NASA can do right now, I have trouble believing that adding another 50,000 years to that development would not have found something else out there.

However, no one has contacted us, let alone visited, if we are to believe public record. And I am not interested in that debate right now, so lets just assume this is true.

This could mean that if another civilised culture has existed. It may have died out again. It may have evolved, it may have travelled space. It may have even settled on more than one planet. Perhaps even more than one solar system. Perhaps this culture has broken the barrier of intergalactic travel. And then the final addition; perhaps multiple cultures have done this.

With this possibility comes the question of why these cultures may choose either to not visit or contact us or whether other reasons apply. Could a possible reason be that such cultures have existed but no longer do? If so, could this reveal something about the evolutionary cycle of life?

Could it be that the cycle of life is to look for the most robust food chain before advancing past the possibility of self-termination? A food chain that does not let its highest link advance so far beyond the second highest that its pride becomes its downfall. This gets to my point. If the reality is that other intelligent life has or does live, then the lack of contact may be due to the fact that it is a universal fact that all evolution resets.

Perhaps the debate of how and why to save a planet is a universal one. One that has been had before. And has been lost before.

Market impact

Michael Sandel is hosted by TED to give the following talk concerning market influence and impact on civic life.

This talk describes how an increasing number of the aspects of life are marketized, meaning they are being evaluated for their monetary weight and then private interests can purchase advantages in those aspects. He gives a couple of examples, which need no repetition by me, and these should be news to most people. They exemplify how a certain distortion is introduced by this take over. What Michael is trying to convey here, amongst other things, is the question of whether or not this change has impact on motivation in a positive sense.

Now I did a piece on motivation almost two years ago analysing the idea superficially and making some minor connections to other issues. But I think a relevant answer backed by scientific studies to the question posed above, is the one supplied by Daniel Pink in this lecture:

It is clearly stated that the findings seem to indicate that monetary rewards seem to give a sugary rush to completing simple and mechanical tasks, whereas the exact same rewards inhibt critical thinking in creative tasks.

So when Michael Sandel asks the question whether a monetary reward for reading a book is a good idea, science seems to counter-propose whether we think reading a book is related to mechanical or creative thinking. If we simply think it is about turning pages and memorising knowledge, then we are branding the reader a vessel for the knowledge of others, not an individual with creative abilities to process ideas and improve upon them.

And as Michael rightly points out - we do not know the long term effects on the motivation towards reading, if curiosity gets replaced by monetary goals as the motivator for reading and absorbing perspectives.

My guess would be: The sooner in life we introduce money as life support to people, the sooner we motivate them to stop thinking creatively and start thinking mechanically.

Universal Basic Income

So I found this clip about work and the merit of it in contemporary society.

It seems to be the point of this idea to create awareness of the complication introduced into production and consumption, when we politically moralise the debate about who deserves what and when based upon individual contribution to the whole. Rather than rearranging society in accordance with current technical capability to ensure the highest possible rate of production, we would rather limit the possibilities to ensure that anyone who can, and even some who cannot, experience the feeling that they therefore should contribute in order to receive.

If you are as regular a reader on this blog as my posting habits would allow then you should be aware of the fact that I am a firm believe in basic human rights including a roof along with sufficient nutrition for every single human being on this planet. It should never ever be considered a luxury to be able to sustain life along with mental and physical health no matter the contribution to society.

As a transitional tool away from monetary exchange and economic pressure all together into a true economy with equilibrium and steady state systemic structure as the goal, I do think this universal income idea has some merit. A bridge obviously has to exist from our current ecocidal and asocial ostracising patterns into a much more humane paradigm, where human beings are recognised as such rather than the label “consumer”.

A day in the life

Trapped. Queued. Shopping... Looking at a plastic basket full of imported groceries, I find myself contemplating how fast I could escape this situation should I want to. I wonder if the sun is shining outside, and in about five minutes time, when I have paid for my temporary solutions, I will find out if it does.

But then I sat up. I was in bed. Nightmares always make me rather groggy when I wake up, so it takes a short while before I distinguish this moment from the last in the string of conscious experiences. The sun was indeed shining outside, and I feel it now warming my hair ever so gently as I bend down again resting on the elbows. I know what comes next, but the delicate grace of the consuming familiarity has to be overpowered, before I can get up and do what must be done.

Going to the bathroom for a quick leak, and I will have my breakfast afterwards. Some progressively charming people would refer to it as “a cheap golden spa with the doctor”. Reviewing the numbers popping up on the mirror as I wash my hands, I find that my recent diet has been a bit too sugar-heavy, so instead of just leaving, I tab the recommended meal touch pad.

Jumping into a pair of nano-fabric shorts and a t-shirt I feel the short chill, before I venture into the garden outside. The sun shine really is lovely today. Like a never ending and never beginning kiss on the cheek from the love of your life. But after dwelling on such a rather poetic notion for a short while, my stomach lets out a brief growl shoving me back on track. So I sign in with a finger print on the pad next to the hydroponics, and upon recognising that I asked for a recommended meal, lights beneath the artificial soil quickly appear, highlighting the necessary fruits and vegetables for my breakfast. I sheathe my hands into the gardening gloves on the desk and take to gather the components.

I must say I do not care much for the compliments I get from my kitchen, just because I went with the suggested meal to balance my vitamin intake, but I guess some concessions have to be made, if it helps other people be motivated towards a better a diet. I could just tell my kitchen to stop giving me those messages, but I like to be reminded of my own attitude. And of course there is the added bonus that fewer and fewer people have to see doctors now. I reckon medicine will easily transition into a focus on preventative treatment and health maintenance in my life time given where we are now.

Leaving the house I greet the neighbour coming home. She has apparently already been out and about on one of the new city roamers. These vehicles never seize to amaze me. Plated with a photovoltaic shell, just like almost every road is now, they run entirely on sun light, but the interesting part is that this has completely vamped society, and I think this is why people get up so early in the morning now, even though there is no labour left to do. These bikes never stay stationary for longer periods of time, and yet they have a fascinating break down rate of close to zero.

So when she gets out, I jump in and articulate my destination to the receiver. When I get to the university, I quickly traverse the stairs in anticipation of the study group I have been preparing for all week. “Applied Teraforming” has become my new hobby, and I hope to one day become sufficiently knowledgeable on the subject to teach it myself. Although most classes are now taught by the students themselves on a rotation basis, it is suggested that one takes a number of classes on a specific subject, prior to leaving the student roster and entering the the student-teacher roster.

Regarding “Applied Teraforming” I tend to day dream about a production team of developers and programmers working with me to realise my dream of a computer game, that tasks players with cultivating the best possible environment on a given planet, drawing raw data and calculating impacts made by player decisions from the global database. In turn this could become applied teraforming, if the record setting players' designs would be submitted back into the database for engineers and ecologists to review as possible schemes for real space exploration. But that is just my personal goal, and if it is to be, then I am sure I will eventually find the people I need for such a team to start working.

Later this week I did sign up for another study group called “Beyond exchange”, but I am actually considering not going. The people are very nice, but I do sometimes feel that I spent a bit too much time on that subject before Liberation, so I am not sure I would learn much from a thorough analysis into the socialisation process concerned with human interaction and that stuff. It just always seemed like a given to me that it would obviously work out in the end, even if we did not have anything left to threaten each other with.

However, I do see the merit in the course, because we certainly did not evolve past the exchange based culture as soon as we technically could have. And if I do go, it will be to explore how the transition seems to be going based on recent findings. Most of the previous advocates of exchange came around after strife and famine were ended, but some still cling to the idea that humans are categorically egoistical, and the only reason we are currently functional in a cooperative society is because it benefits ourselves the most. I guess they could be right. But then again, the results speak for themselves. All the psychiatrists either chose another education or shipped off to the Americas to work with transitional conflicts over there, simply because the need here fell like never before a few years after Liberation.

What amuses me greatly is when I get back home and do my exercises before dinner. I was always one of those lazy kids who were never properly motivated by the physical socio-dynamics, but now that I can track my progress on a bar that slowly builds towards the next level, I find myself working out almost every day. It is purely recreational though, but I do not see why that would be a bad thing. The results are that my ulcerative colitis is kept in check, and my body has never been healthier. To think I was pretty much addicted to junk food and computer games before Liberation. Now I feel in shape, and not because I have to impress anyone but myself.

So for dinner tonight I believe I will treat myself to a soy burger with a quinoa bun and a relish of kale and pees. Afterwards I try to stay motivated towards a short session of meditation. After training for a while I can tell it helps me stay curious and open minded, but when there is no bar tracking how well I do it just gets a bit too intangible sometimes.

So have a nice evening friends. I will see you in class for “Steady-state patterning”.

Private economy

For a while now I have been drawn to writing another blog post. This time I sought to relate it to why my inspiration had been missing for quite a few months now. Through various issues I discovered that I was suffering from some symptoms of stress. My imagination was stiffled, making it hard to focus on doing what I had to do. Now my life is by no means stressful in comparison to normality, however, I because I have gone through so many different perspectives on how to earn my daily bread, I am beginning to tire. Fear of never finding a commercial passion, or actually just any type of passion, threatens my survival and this is stressful.

Whether good or bad I am extremely poor at subscribing to temporary solutions. If I know that a job or an education will not be relevant or interesting to me at a later point, I feel like quitting and that feeling can sometimes take hold of whatever chance it had of growing. Now I have no doubt that this is somehow related to classical psychological issues of fear causing people to quit. I could most likely read up on it and discover that I am quite similar to other people who have experienced this issue and have solved it somehow. Either on their own or therapeutically, but this is where a major complication arises.

Because I am a firm believer that this capitalistic monetarily based system is unsustainable I instantly discredit such psychological findings as they seem relevant only to the people interested in conforming to this system. I see this as one of many symptoms that the system is trying to do patch work on its short comings rather than self-examining to discover the unrecoverable situation and initiate a proper solution. Personally I have no interest in conforming, which is why it is so hard for me, as it seems to cost bits and pieces of my integrity every time I do. I find myself saying one thing and doing another.

This economic terrorism is so subtle that it seems ridiculous to even call it that. But that is what it is. Perhaps I will return to this issue at a later point. I should.

Integrity

About a month ago I came up with the idea that I wanted to show my girlfriend a clip from a movie that I would like to discuss with her. In spirit of Black March I completely forgot about it until last night, where I dug up the clip on YouTube. The clip is from the majorly provocative feature called Brüno.

Even if you have watched the movie, you may not remember it as I did. I actually saw the movie in the cinema with my brothers and my cousin. It was quite a movie that we were in no way prepared for, but I suppose that was the idea. What stuck with me, aside from one other very disturbing display of the male body, was this clip of how extremely devoid of integrity the people interviewed seem to be.

I cannot guarantee that they are not actors and this is not a setup, but what I can guarantee is that it would then be very inspired by actual events taking place on an every day basis in the entertainment industry. If you have seen The Greatest Movie Ever Sold you would most likely agree.

But without further ado I bring to you the modern parents with stars in their eyes.

I hope I did not cause any heart problems when the answer ”yes” was given to the question ”can your child handle lit phosphorous?”.

Kony 2012

I thought I would make a post about Kony 2012, considering that it is all over the internet anyway. First I should point out that I have not seen the movie. The reason for this is that I feel no need to watch a documentary about child abuse. I have read a bit on the subject, however, and I thought I would provide you readers with some extra perspectives on this documentary. Mainly because when we are done discussing how important it is to assist children in need, we should consider what ruthless powers might exploit such good will. If that was the last thing on your mind, then you are indeed setting yourself up for quite a lot of surprises as we approach the end of fossil fuels.

According to this article Uganda recently proclaimed itself as en route to becoming an oil producer, with commercial production having begun in 2009. If this does not make any bells ring, we should just leave the subject there. If it does, however, then we should explore what kind of message the movie is attempting to send.

If you believe the following interview to be anything remotely related to the state of these affairs, then perhaps there is more to this motivational documentary than meets the eye. I would argue against being a conspiracy theorist, but I'll just let the words military intervention linger here.

Next up is this personal point brought up by a young woman claiming to be from Uganda herself with relatively regular visits. While she obviuosly has not studied this matter intently, I do think it might be interesting to note that if she is speaking the truth, then Kony is indeed not the subject of daily discussions in the homes of Uganda.

UPDATE: I also stumbled across this article which certainly lays into this documentary in a very rough way. I thought I should provide it in case you like the more theory-based approaches.

1st of March

Yesterday was the 1^st of March. This kicks off the event Black March set in motion by big players and discussed earlier in these posts Black March and MoreBlack March. And I must admit that I did not think of it. I was reminded by a friend that this is the time to make a stand against mainstream media.

Rather than describing how I think this action relates to active protest against Hollywood, I will take quite a different route with this post. I am going to post a short review of the latest product from Hollywood I was unfortunate enough to support with a fraction of my purchasing power.

The movie Safe House, starring such renowned actors as Ryan Reynolds and Denzel Washington, was a dissappointment to me in several ways. To retain some sort of self-respect I will hide behind the excuse that recently I frequent the movies with my younger brother more than I do so with any one else. This limits the amount of inspiried independantly produced movies I get to see on the big screen. But back to the movie Safe House.

The main critique I have of this piece of so-called entertainment is that while this movie fits in the genre of action, the action scenes portrayed were so poorly realized that I drew several loud sighs and probably even rolled my eyes a few times. The camera was shaking for every action scene with no exception. In addition to this the plot was weak and unexplored. The characters also felt too weakly developed to engage the audience properly.

These and many other reasons should solidify how easy it will be to go through with Black March and refuse to support these underachieving industries claiming to profess themselves at understanding and providing entertainment.

Solace

In this post a link between different ideas and perspectives on social evolution will be attempted. It is my hope that the reader will discover resonance with at least a fraction of this train of thought.

Kicking it off with this profoundly well adjusted comment on the spirit of the age we have Jiddu Krishnamurtis combination of social observation, implication and aspiration. Packed into a single sentence he manages to describe the how invalid the aeon old idea that one should strive to be well adjusted to whatever context one exists in, when the context is indeed "profoundly sick", which also sets up the following aspirations.

1. To end any adjustment to an unsustainable context. As Marthin Luther King Jr. put it: "[...] There are some things in our social system that I'm proud to be maladjusted to, and I call upon you to be maladjusted to." - source
2. To push for a change of the context.

Admitted, the second aspiration is my own addition, and it cannot rhetorically be extracted from the quote in the first picture. If you frequent this blog, however, you will know that I have sourced several scientific studies and findings indicating that we humans are socially dependant beings. Because of this it becomes the internal motivation for survival and personal improvement to improve socially. Either through a betterment of personal standing or through betterment of society, depending on the culture the individual is raised in.

Accepting this it should be obvious that maladjustment is positive only so long as the maladjusted individual nurtures hope that the social context may change for the better. To break away from a norm is to feel isolated until a sense of commonality with others is again obtained. This solace seeking is natural for gregarious animals and, as we can now agree upon, quite needed.

Everyone's favorite inventor Leonardo Da Vinci has even coined a perfect phrase for this darker side of norm-breaking inception.

Imagine being the smartest person in the world. It must be lonely there at the top. A very important realisation to acknowledge is that to be at the very top requires disregard for a wide variety of norms. The conformity to norms is a compromise. Social security in exchange for the ability to grow in whichever direction the personality would otherwise.

So do you try and inspire people to join you at the peak, or do you leave the peak and join into the community of a mountain village at a lower altitude?

This is in no way an implication of any peak position held by myself or any of the people referenced. It is simply an extreme metaphor meant to paint an obvious picture of the dilemma which keeps most people from breaking significant norms, due to the severance from social relevance associated with such a transformation of the identity.

News

Here Jason Read, with a Ph.D. in Philosophy, comments on the conservative notion of face value in society.

Dr. Read seems to think that the book is not to be judged by its cover. That the classes of society are not only what the media portray them as. Please remember that the media, from where you might have had your view on this matter skewed, are institutions that obviously do not act against the interest of their owners or share holders. And it should be obvious to most people that such owners or share holders portray not in the slightest the lower classes of society.

You see the news is not just the news. It is not everything that you need to know about a given situation that is relatively new. It is a perspective. Brought forth by the interest to sell it to you. You have to inspect news and information as you would a car being sold to you. Make sure that the model is not suitable for you because of how the salesman pitches it, but because it is what you need it for. A car is a vehicle for transportation. The news is your way of relating to contemporary society. That makes it vastly more important to inspect thoroughly when it is being sold to you.

For a broader perspective on matters somewhat related to my points, you can take a look at Dr. Read's lecture "The Social Individual" here:

Iran

Currently government officials from major power holders have been meeting in Israel to debate the future of the situation in the Middle East. Not the Afghan-Iraq war, but the recent public announcement by Israel stating that they are considering removing their status of neutrality and attacking Iran. This would be absolutely devastating for any chance of recovery in the Middle East.

Unfortunately I have not read and understood nearly enough to fully comment on this, but I can appreciate the need to relate in some way, so I will direct you towards more resourceful commentary.

A brief overview is given by Peter Joseph after his recent trip to Israel here.

The full lecture he mentions having given can be reviewed here.

Mass Media

The society of today is very proud of labelling itself the age of information. With this label it somehow draws the parallel that the inhabitants of the modern world are well informed. Why else would it be the age of information?

What it does not label itself as, although that is probably just as fitting is the age of mass neurosis and stress related diseases. Rates of illness are off the chart compared to earlier, and that is not just because fancier methods of diagnosis are now available. No it is because the tomorrow of yesterday is today. And with this leap into the future, with all the proud noise equipment people now find themselves armed with, this species has managed to create an atmosphere of constant attention seeking.

The act of seeking attention was formerly reserved by organic species, but now the more inanimate of our fellow planetary residents have joined in to this game of depriving others of their focus. Dramatic as it may appear when written down like that, is is no further from the truth than the very related fact that humans are now outnumbered by their electronic creations.

The pivotal point to make is if a correlation exists between the boom in electronic devices available and the boom in illnesses, and that has proven more difficult than someone uneducated in this field of sociology such as myself could master. The reason that I bring this up is simply to note this idea and see if it resonates on some level with any of the readers on this blog.

Another reason that I bring this up is the picture that I shared in my last post depicting quite strongly the un-individualization of the modern audience for television.

Take 1 minute and 56 seconds out of your life and prove me wrong in this: Howard Beale can paint this picture quite nicely.

And I can only say that I find myself the victim of this culture he describes. I too am guilty of succumbing to the media available to me. I frequent blogs, watch shows online, listen to podcasts and converse with friends about the newest games available.

All very much to the detriment of my creativity, as the recent lack of consistency in my posting is evidence of. And I do not believe myself to be alone in this situation.

More Black March

Yesterday I wrote a post on the Black March. Today I wish to add to that post a few ideas and benefits I see besides the main points raised on the offical site.

First and foremost there is the spiritual liberation to gain from joining in this very accessible type of activism. You do not need to leave the comforts of your home, in fact you can pretty much do just fine with supporting this movement from your couch. If you become restless easily, then all you need is a trip to your local library to arm yourself with a good book or several. If you have a family, you could introduce a game night once, twice or more times a week where you borrow a game from friends or family members (most people know a collector of such things) and just play a fun board or card game with the people you love but spend too little time talking to, because of the attention seeking television.

Secondly there is the liberation of value orientation to be won. What I mean by this is that entering into this challenge, if you are the type to consider it as such to live without this influx of ordinary entertainment, may just give you more control over what type of stimuli you depend on to remain entertained and relaxed in your spare time. It could free up some space in your imagination for thinking of new things and new activities for you to enjoy, rather than the same old same old.

Finally your electric bill will be substantially lower!

So do your imagination a favor and consider this break from the repititous realm of normality. Like a muscle it needs practise and I can promise you it gets none of that from your regular entertainment feed.

Black March

Coming up is the event called Black March. With support from major players in the open source community like Mozilla, Black March will constitute a strike against the mainstream media in the US. The foundation for this action is to temporarily boy cut the big guns in the entertainment industry, so they will notice a month-long loss in revenue and reconsider how easily swayed their subjects are to their rule. SOPA, PIPA and to a larger extent ACTA have all proven that these players need to be kept in check or they will do away with liberties we have become accustomed to.

Instead of side tracking into another debate on piracy (read this post instead) I will go on with this Black March concept.

To join the Black March you simply need to stay away from the cinema and away from mainstream media channels on your television. Depending on the support for this idea, the goal is to create a black hole in their quarterly margins where they get lower support, lower earnings and a lower amount of costumer data to work with. All of this sounds great to me, and it should sound great to you too if you are concerned with your freedom of expression and opposed to be viewed solely as a consumer.

Check out the official site for Black March here for more information and a direct plan.

Now. I brought this up not only to try and get my readers interested in also supporting this activism, but also to highlight a very important side-effect such activism would have.

Consider how much mainstream media you consume in a month. Most of us visit the cinema regularly, some purchase movies instead of renting them and the vast majority spend most of their evenings in front of a television being spoon-fed what the media produces. Disney, Fox and ABC are right there in your home with you every day, and they are dying to tell you what's new. What's hot, what's not, what should you wear, how should you talk, how should you think and what should you laugh at. It is all orchestrated quite perfectly and my proof of this is how absolutely docile normal people are when it comes to taking actual action and a stand against what is clearly wrong.

Feudalism

Before feudalism society was built and made by slaves. Now instead of a history lesson on that shift, I'll just move ahead to the point. Feudalism is economic slavery. Your survival was contigent upon what you were able to yield from your land. Does that sound at all familiar?

What you need to do to make economic slavery, which can in some cases be much more devious than physical slavery, seem appealing is to sell it off as an idea of liberation. Physically you are shackled no longer so go and prosper!

The age old residue of this is something that has shaped into an understanding of some ideal of independance. An ideal that is unrealistic for a species that is socially dependant almost from the moment of conception. Still it is considered to provide motivation for live improvement for people to understand themselves as responsible and self-providing.


The issues of this make themselves abundantly known in societies such as western culture where this independance ideal has gone way too far. There is no humility anywhere anymore. As soon as you reach voting age in your country you are legally considered old enough to be a part of the group in society aiming to be self-sufficient. And through the century old process that has made this ideal emerge and take hold we have completely lost sight of the fact that this has no natural basis.


Anthropologists would point out that tribal cultures show no signs of this striving towards self-sufficiency. They understand the interdependance of their culture and work to further the tribe as a whole rather than themselves as individuals. For each of them to try and accrue more riches than their neighbours would be sociocidal (the act of a person which adversely impacts upon a society or culture to a negative degree).

I did a highly relevant post to this topic called Meritocracy in which Allain De Botton details how it has a very negative reaction in society that everyone is responsible for their own position, when there is a sense of total equality socially. It was much easier to deal with not being the king of your country in the times of old, but it is near devastating for teenagers to get dropped off a pop star program today, because it is made to feel achievable.


So what does this advanced stage of feudalism we live in really entail for us?

Piracy

The hot topic of january certainly has been piracy. No less than three bills, SOPA PIPA and ACTA, have been discussed in order to further combat piracy. You may recall the Pirate Bay trial of 2009 and 2010. The case was appealed twice and in 2012 the supreme court in Sweden will provide a response.

The point brought forth by the defense lawyer is applicable as a general idea of why file sharing should be completely legal. It is no different than producing cars that can drive faster than the speed limit, he says. I would then start comparing that to owning a gun and other non-sense like that, but I am sure you got the point.

What is relevant to this blog is to discuss is how piracy can been understood. Obviously it can be stealing. But it has other facets to it as well. Socially it is an expression that consumers want easier access. Whether this means cheaper, completely for free, without the hassle of getting physical copies or whatever else we certainly do not know at this point. It is, however, obvious that these could be issues that made piracy so prevalent in the first place.

Regarding whether pirates are thieves you have to step outside the traditional mindset for a second to fully grasp the situation. This author agrees that stealing something physically is quite different from copying something digitally accessible. Certainly something can be said for the fact that the copy right owner may have been deprived of some income had his legal property not been copied. He may have. He probably has to some extent. But is the extent as vast as the expanded exposure his work recieved? And is that not a relevant question?

You have to remember that the entertainment industry (which holds the majority of complaints towards piracy) is more interested in keeping their produce solely for paying costumers, than they are in promoting their subjects, the artists that actually create the expressions the industry is profiting from. This means that if the industry gets to earn x amount of dollars on a product with a 0% piracy rate, that is more interesting for them than to earn x amount of dollars on the same product with a 50% piracy rate. In essense they want to fence down their work, because they see the pirates also as potential costumers, so what they want is for pirates to stop pirating and start spending money instead.
Again it is of no interest to achieve the possibly massive exposure that free file sharing can offer for the work of the artists. What is interesting is to earn as much money as possible.

I doubt they expect piracy rates to completely convert into paying costumers, but even if one pirate is turned (or discouraged through increasingly tougher regulations) then it is a win for the share holders expecting bigger turn outs.

Not only is this greed socially offensive on multiple levels it is also directly harmful. Just like the Pirate Bay regular people are being made an example of by the twisting of the legal system which is extremely toxic. It may function as an immediate detergent, but just as when you bring the millitary into another country to fight a war, you may win it in a couple of weeks, but you will have your work cut out for you with the uprisings your transgrassion will spark.

A final point that I will make is that you should consider that piracy rates far exceed what is possibly consumable, both economically but also in simple human life. The sea of content available is simply too vast. And quite a lot of that content is of medium and lower quality. Probably the majority of the content. Artists are not all Van Goghs, and a lot of them would be stretching it calling themselves artists in the first place. So in this world of currency drains I can certainly see the logic in the consumer crowd moving away from traditional patterns of purchase towards more egoistic ones. It makes perfect sense that as soon as technology arose to offer deliverance from wrongful purchases, in this time when wrongful purchases could be among the most prevalent, people starting utilising this tool to avoid disappointment.
A lot more could be said on this part of the discussion, but I will leave it here and we can discuss the issue of boredom and entertainment another time.

Also, this post will most likely be used to vault off into another post outlining an alternative system based on access rather than ownership, but since that will take some effort to piece together it might not be the subsequent one.

You

Today I stumbled upon the lecture on the perception of the self. To achieve some of the social changes discussed on this blog it could very well be needed to shift more towards this understanding of ourselves.

The idea is to look at ourselves not as entities in and of themselves, but as processes and collections. In this sense we all become interchangable, which is highly relevant to any social change. Indeed, understanding society as interchangable is probably the only thing that ever has changed our societies. The problem then is that we currently understand ourselves as these rigid entities that already have been shaped. We believe we mature into hardened shells. As grown ups we could not start changing our lives too roughly or we might be faced with a loss of identity, something none of us wish for.

We could potentially start bringing about some very needed change, were we to fully grasp this philosophy of chaos. Because it is chaotic, and that is what frightens us. There is no order other than what we introduce to the mess of the universe. But percieving that as either good or bad is up to the individual.

We are what we are shaped as, but unlike the other species on this blue planet of ours, we have been invited to join into the process of this shaping. Disregarding this is as irresponsible as over-feeding half the world while starving the other half.

Economic Globalisation

Yesterdays piece on ACTA came with a comparison between the European Union and the United States. I would be unfit to furter that comparison and try to argue in political terms how alike these two unions are starting to become, but I do find it interesting to keep watching from the side lines and see what the next moves by these players will be.

Perhaps David Rovics can lighten the mood a bit with his satirical take on the similarities.



It should be clear to everyone that the east is rising to compete with the west globally, and soon the super power status will be shared, and in turn handed over. To whom is a good question. Many say China looking at their enormous growth rates. But these people often only look at numbers. Numbers that their government is responsible for, but that overlook gaping holes in their society. Some would argue that they are creating a bubble economy much greater than ours by building without respect for what their population can afford. By keeping the machines building homes and roads running you can create a sense of growth that looks good enough on paper.

That issue is again not dissimilar from what we experienced closer to home with our own bubble. What is interesting, however, is to look at how people percieve this economic breakdown. Some start swallowing apocalyptic stories, some throw their hands up before their eyes and again some try to argue for rewinding the system to a prior state.

To me it is obvious that none of those perceptions will bring us anywhere. There is only one way and that is forward. We can change direction, but the relatively docile part of history where Europe went almost without war during the past 60 years, is over. We chose to join the wave of globalism.

The hidden warfare of today is economic warfare. Nation states are trying their best to stay afloat, and when resourceful enough they also try and acrue more for themselves. They join alligiances and trade unions to benefit from the increasingly expanding amount of transactions going on in the world today, but they all do it to try and bring more riches home. A game that was much more physical and bound by the resources supplied by nature before we had paper money, gigantic oil tankers, air planes, derivate trades etc.

Just remember one thing. The situation is actually quite simple. No matter what these politicians and game players tell you, the situation really is simple. They do not see it, but the world of today is turning around one question: How to distribute the wealth nature has for us?

Most people still believe that money is the way to go. That politics is the way to go. That democracy is the way to go. But what do these institutions bring in a world where we are at a tipping point now where we can actually automate more sectors of society than what is applicable economically due to job losses? They seek to be the glue holding it all together on moral grounds. They argue and argue and argue away with symbolism and morale, but refuse to look at how far science has taken our potential.

This is fear. Fear of a tomorrow different from today. Because today is calculable, today is marketable and today is comprehendable. So by spreading this irrational fear to the public, they succeed in holding on to their power, because now everyone else is afraid of tomorrow as well. And if we are not, Hollywood can always be invested in to produce another horrifying post-apocalyptic vision of what the world would be like without government.

You might think that was a silly remark, but just try and talk to people about what is possible to automate in society and they will immidiately draw upon the illusion of knowledge they believe to have yielded from movies such as Terminator or i-Robot. This is standard psychology. They have to keep reminding the public that this process of moving into the future is dangerous, or they might just start wishing/voting/acting for it to happen.

ACTA

With the death of SOPA becoming a reality you might think it is over. The fight was won and democracy prevailed, expelling this evil dictatorial tool of opression. That is unfortunately not the case.

Behind the scenes the European Union has been cooking up something equally as toxic as SOPA. It is called ACTA and is thoroughly explained in this following introduction.



It would appear that it is quite important to keep repelling these waves of attempts to circumvent digital freedom. The issue here is more than just data protection, it has something quite abstract embedded within. The internet is irrespective of borders and it should be. These ridiculous attempts to seize control of the internet are nothing less than the objectification of a global freedom to communicate and share.

And as an object laws must be applied to regulate.

Meritocracy

A few days ago I was inspired by a quite decent lecture by Alain de Botton on atheism. Due to exams, however, I have not been home a lot and so the past two days I skipped my routine with writing at least a small piece every day.

The lecture I am refering to is the following one.



He does put out some interesting ideas. It is nothing new to be inspired by perspectives that will not be adopted by oneself. It is quite intelligent in fact, to enable further understanding of a subject, which in this case is life and thereby quite substantial, by a way of discovering the insights others might have had on the subject.

The point that struck me the most in this lecture is definitely the one about infantilisation. The idea that many religious texts refer to humans as children of God (or whatever other concept they believe in) is quite profound if you only look at postmodernism. Because we spend just about all our lives trying not to be children. Even when we are. It is simply not a part of life that has any value, since this hyper-individualism we have entered into has taken over.

Everyone has to assume responsibility for their own lives and this is where I will begin talking about the meritocracy. Unlike a democracy a meritocracy is defined as a society where actions speak the loudest. You gain merit for your output and this in turn gives you the ability to choose where you want to be. This means that there are no social boundaries installed at all, and as such any one can achieve anything. 

To the postmodern person this should sound like the apex of democracy. The peak of the mountain. Where we want to be. It is everything we strive for and everything we hope for, because it is just and righteous for everyone to have equal opportunity. By the sweat of our brow and so on.

However, this is where we should allow ourselves some inspiration from the lecture by Mr. Botton. He treats the issue with respect and acknowledges the fact that most religions enter into this infantilisation of human beings because they recognise something very basic about our nature, and this is what faith normally capitalises on. We do not understand everything. And the implications of not understanding everything are quite important when it comes to how we comprehend life and the purpose of it.

In a meritocracy such as we aspire to currently, and somewhat already have achieved (social mobility statistics prove that we are not there yet), there is a rather significant issue of responsibility. Since everything is attributed through merit, everything is your own doing. So sitting in the street begging for money becomes your own doing. You have engineered this situation yourself by not getting and education and a well paid job. On the flip side of this you have the implication that the millionare and the billionaire deserved what they earned. It was won through the merit of their investments or work.

So when we do not fully comprehend the situation and the rules of the great societal chess game, we get bumped into and shoved out of the way by the people who understand enough of it to start making their social climb a reality. This is all very individualising.

This is also the time for the final point, and I will bring back Mr. Botton to make it for me. Two years prior to the talk on atheism he gave another lecture, this time on the cause and value of the meritocracy. He outlines specifically the point about responsibility and sense of self-value as an issue for this social construct. Because after all in a meritocracy you have only yourself to blaim for not being Bill Gates. This is why so many books have been written on just accepting yourself. The merry-go-round of society tells you a completely different story and shoves in your face the demotivating motivational mantra: "Climb, climb, climb!"