Off By One

So where am I at?

Oh, this isn’t going to be a “life story” sort of post. It’s more of a corny way of saying “Here’s what I’ve been up to over the last week.”

Char and I have been doing well, thanks for asking.

I’ve seen some pretty funny theatre in the last 24 hours, and a well-written play not too long before. The former is, of course, Die Nasty, and the latter is a Stuart Lemoine piece called The Velvet Shock. The play was enjoyable. A bit dark in humour, which I like, and with a hint of a happy, romantic ending. And a talented cast, bolstered in no small part by a skilled (and attractive!) supporting actress in the role of the niece.

I’ve come to a conclusion that, practically speaking, there is one thing that irks me more than anything else when dealing with friends. I don’t mind if plans change, and someone can’t do something with me that was planned. That’s cool. But in this age of mobile and ubiquitous communication, for christ’s sake, call me. Just dial a damned number and say “Sorry, Chris, I can’t make it to [thing].” Is it that bloody hard?

Grrr…

I just realized that the above complaint was the blog post that had been tickling about my head for the last day and a half. Glad to get that out of my system.

So, no big plans, really. I think I’m going to investigate writing my first serious OS X program, to do some bookkeeping and synchronization of my pair of ITunes libraries. Just metadata, I think, but you never know… I might get ambitious.

I’m getting a bit fed up with all of the people who don’t understand the concept of freedom of speech.

Yes, it’s going to be one of those posts.

There’s a couple of interesting incidents out in the wilds (I hesitate to say “hinterlands”, but mainly because I don’t think that way of Austria, and I don’t want to lump them in with the rest of the places at issue) of the world. You may have heard of them. There’s the (by now) infamous incident with the Danish editorial cartoons causing riots and bloodshed… Oh, sorry, no. Just to be clear, that bloodshed? Those riots? The threats? Those are the works of madmen, not cartoonists. I leave it as an exercise to the reader to differentiate the two.

Anyway… Back on track… There’s the cartoons, and then there’s this twit over in Austria, deliberately flouting their laws against Holocaust denial to promulgate bald-faced lies about the occurrence of the Nazi extermination of some large number of Jews.

So… What’s the most common refrain? Well, on one hand we have people who are all for freedom of speech, and then on the other hand we have people who are all for freedom of speech.

What the fuck, you ask?

Well, see, that last group “believe in free speech, but…”

Beware of anyone who prefaces a statement with that line. They probably don’t have your best interests at heart, and they’re a liar, to boot.

Here’s the skinny, and I know that this comes as no news to most of those that read here, but nonetheless: Free Speech means (and, in fact, rests firmly upon and is rendered meaningless without) the right to say things that terrify, disgust, demean, insult, and verbally violate all that you hold dear. The more offensive an utterance is, the more important it is that the speaker be free to say it, without fear of violence or of censorship. That isn’t to say that they should be immune to censure — that’s how mind-blowingly stupid pronouncements like “Auschwitz’s Crematorium Two, the site of half a million deaths, is ‘a mere legend’” should be greeted. Ridicule is another good response. As is simply ignoring the speaker. But silencing your critics is… well, there’s a couple of interesting 20^th century events that might be informative on the subject. I leave that, too, as an exercise for the reader.

In short, freedom of speech is not just freedom to agree with the people who have more guns.

(I just sent in this letter to the editor) Regarding “Web superhighway likely to be toll road” (Jan 30):

There are two issues in connection with this issue that I would like to address. First, and most visible to all subscribers of the ISP services, is that — despite their claims to the contrary — companies like Shaw and Rogers lie to their customers when asked about the use of software that specifically restricts the speed of certain types of traffic (“Traffic shaping” software). From personal experience, I can tell you that this leads to frustration from the side of the customer, especially when I’m experiencing service delays with my competing VOIP service. This is a major issue, since Shaw is competing with Vonage for VOIP services, but Shaw is in a position to severely, and adversely, affect the quality of Vonage VOIP, something that is currently affecting me.

Secondly, the issue of network cost. The claim from Shaw, Telus, and Rogers is that their users are getting something for free, which is patently absurd. We PAY for the service that they provide, which is not e-mail and web, but is in fact a connection to the internet, which may include those services, as well as others, such as VOIP or streaming video to name two. The ISPs, if they want to get into the business of selecting which content providers should be permitted, should stop claiming to sell “unlimited” internet access.

Update

Nope, no luck. It’d have been great to be published, but it appears that I’m not witty enough. Bummer.

So, I’ve been thinking.

I’m watching the software piracy world being shaken up repeatedly by increasingly successful interventions in both distribution and production by the authorities of various nations, usually acting in the name of private, for-profit industry groups.

I’m seeing an ever-increasing degree of technical control exercised over the viewing and distribution of electronic media.

I’ve seen my ISP decide that they should clamp down on my use of the internet connection I’m paying for, and like others in the same business space, lie to me about what they’re doing.

It’s getting so that I’m going to have to start paying for everything.

And, to be honest, I’m pretty okay with that. Well, except for the traffic shaping shit from Shaw.

The thing of it is, I’m about to be in a position from which I can afford to pay for my software. Across the board. It’s kind of nice, actually. As discussed previously on this blog, I approve of software developers’ rights to charge for their creations, and have always had ethical issues with the means by which I have acquired them. Soon, that’ll be in the past. It’s already begun, in the sense that I’m starting to pay for the little shareware utilities that I use, and I foresee doing so in greater quantities as time passes. Couple that with increased reliance on Free/Open Source software, and I have realized that — at the moment — my computer at home is almost completely clean of illegitimate software. It’s a nice feeling.

The title of this post is a bit misleading — I’m not really being forced into ethical behaviour, here. It just so happens that concurrent with my own push to be more upstanding, the sources of my content are leaving me no other choice. It’s a valid statement, that ethical behaviour is meaningless without the option of behaving unethically. But I made my choice before it became impossible, and I feel that it makes me a better person.

There is something fundamentally fucked up about the idea of going out — in Edmonton — and playing disc golf on December 28th. This is not natural. It is, however, kind of nice.

So, the season of … well, whatever the season is of, to you … is come and mostly gone. Family was saw, presents sent and presented. I think that the Go board I got from Simon, along w/ the Calvin and Hobbes collection from Char are pretty much the standouts of the lot. Thanks, though, to all for the neato things. I hope my own gifts were appreciated as well. Surprisingly, the whole “giving” part of all of this is the best for me. Don’t get me wrong; I love getting stuff, too, but there’s something just fun about picking just the right gift for people.

In other news, it seems that work is not going to call me in over the week. This is bleeding great, as it means I can, um, work on some work-related programming

Ye gods, I’ve got strange ideas of “fun.”

For those who are into politics: Vote Conservative, damn it. Green is an acceptable second choice. Contemptible actions such as A) voting Liberal because you’re blind, deaf, and just plain dumb, therefore missing the rampant corruption, dishonesty, and arrogance of the last twelve years, or B) voting Liberal ‘strategically’, because Stephen Harper is just soo-o-o scary will result in… well, you getting the government you deserve. The problem is, if you do that, I get the government you deserve, too, and I deserve a better one. So get your shit together!

This rant brought to you by procrastination.

Found on the net: The Search for Net Neutrality

Meaning, of course, that we’re still looking for it. It seems, and I’ve run into this issue myself over the last few months, that our wonderful ISP overlords have decided to quietly engage strict controls on the nature of the content that we will be allowed to get over their wires… You know, the ones you pay to use?

Read the article. And, if anyone knows of any way to derail this — legislative action, consumer agitation — I’d love to know. I’m not interested in ineffective protests or street marches — this is the internet, not Vietnam. But I’d like to make some kind of difference, here.

This has also been discussed on /., which should surprise nobody.

I’d think that it would have become easier, with time. I just bloody hate travelling. Every minute I have to spend in a car between the place from which I depart and that at which I arrive is a little piece of hell, even with people I like.

Bah.

Still, the destination itself was nice. I had a good time seeing parts of the family I’ve avoided assiduously for some time now, for reasons that have … decreased in significance (and severity) with time. All in all, it was a pleasant time. Now, I have to work on little sleep on stupid configuration bugs and hassles with finicky PEBKAC errors.

Buggery.

Oh… (update at around 8:30 PM)

I really could have done without the fire alarm the second I walked in the door, delaying my much needed coffee by about 30 minutes.

I want to second Char’s mention of the Green Party of Canada’s petition to be included in national debates. Political discourse in this country needs to include all of the parties that are in the running, even if they are just nascent entities on the political stage.

How are voters supposed to make informed choices, if all of the reasonable alternatives — plus the NDP — aren’t allowed to present their platforms?

The Green Party is the first party I’ve seen that has ever given me reason to re-examine my fairly hard-line conservative bent. They’re basically the other side of the coin, for me; where the Conservative party satisfies my sense of fiscal and civil responsibility, the Green Party emphasizes a fair number of intellectual property and personal freedom policies that I support, as well. It makes it a hard choice, and even more so because I live in one of the two ridings in Alberta that elects a Liberal, which brings my own personal distaste for strategic voting to the fore.

Let’s just say I’m not 100% certain to vote Conservative this time around.

“I believe in the rights of the individual.”

Beware of people claiming this, as it is often followed by a statement supporting the restriction of those rights. This time is no different.

I believe in the rights of the individual.

But I am starting to wonder about the domains in which those rights are exercised. Is it supportive of individual rights to permit corporate entities the same rights as actual people?

This comes about from reading a book on privacy issues — Database Nation — which enumerates a lot of abuses of the increasingly-connected and documented world we have created for ourselves. Now, I know I’m not the first person to read a book like that and say “Oh noes! How can I hide my porn habit now?!” but I do see some truth in his statements about how the right to privacy might be protected.

The problem is, I don’t necessarily accept that there is a right to privacy, per se.

Anyway, assuming that there is, I’m not sure who is less qualified to protect it — private industry, where they can make money for selling and abusing the information that they are supposed to protect, or government, repository of all things personal, with a vested interest (lately, especially) in making sure that we all conform to standards of behaviour that may or may not be driven by religions that we don’t all share.

It’s ucky.

Anyway, Char complained about a lack of posting, so I figured I’d polish off this draft. So there.

Well, it’s more noise, more erosion…

This “travesty of legal action”:http://www.canada.com/windsor/windsorstar/news/story.html?id=906ecfe4-1adc-45e2-998d-cb5c96f01fb2 (also referenced “here”:http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Canada/2005/08/20/1180942-sun.html, “here”:http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/soundoff/story.html?id=1f0563cf-c372-4224-a917-5a3f27e0455b, “here”:http://www.canada.com/technology/story.html?id=360edf23-b247-4f51-af14-45ced083696a, and “here”:http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050819/COTLER17/TPNational/Canada) is… well, it’s pretty nasty.

Read it. And then marvel at the vast silence in the media (after a possible two or three days of notice) on the subject. And marvel further at the staggering indifference of the population at large to this.

This class of stupidity makes me sad.