Rupert Murdoch Pwned By Techdirt

Pwn (pronounced “p-own”)

- verb
to be owned, to have your rear kicked,  to be destroyed in a spectacularly manner.

Origin
The is word common among gamers, geeks, and nerds.

Related Forms
Pwned, Pwn3d, and Pwnage

Usage
“Did you see that? I just pwned your ass!”

After crazy Uncle Rupert (Murdoch) claimed that he was contemplating hiding all of his news sites from Google and other news aggregation services (Rupert Murdoch Threatens Seppuku), the Internet was all a-buzz. While everyone was writing about how epicly stupid the idea was, Mike Masnick of Techdirt did some research.

Masnick realized that many of Murdoch’s own sites “parasited” content in exactly the same manner that he endlessly complains about with Google and Microsoft. Prestige sites like The Wall Street Journal and Fox News “steal” stories from blogs, other sources, and even Techdirt itself. Many of Murdoch’s most successful web properties “steal” stories, or have searches powered by Google that allow users to search the broader Internet within a News Corp branded user experience (Techdirt – the original post is worth reading).

Boom head-shot!

Mr. Murdoch, you’ve just been pwned.

Happy Belated Birthday Firefox

I missed my favorite browser, Mozilla Firefox’s fifth birthday by one day. I hope it forgives me.

Firefox isn’t perfect, but what is? I’ve been using it for probably 4.5 years because it’s open source, it has tons of fun plug-ins, it doesn’t share my user-data, and it is generally stable (although it certainly has it’s quirks and problems).

Firefox is a model of what the Internet should be, not what media moguls, record producers, and other proponents of dying business models want to make it.

Rupert Murdoch Threatens Seppuku

Seppuku – a ritualized disemboweling that originated among the Japanese Samauri.

Rupert Murdoch, the media mogul chairman and majority shareholder of News Corp (The Wall Street Journal, Fox News, and pile of other news outlets) wants to force his business model back into relevance. According to this recent interview, he wants to put pay-walls up around most of his content, sue fair-use into oblivion, and make his sites invisible to search engines like Google (mUmBRELLA).

I was going to write a full response to Mr. Murdoch’s ideas, but Perry de Havilland of Samizdata really hit the nail on the head:

“Not only will people not be motivated to pay Rupert Murdoch for content if they cannot find it via google, they will not even be aware of the content Murdoch is hiding from them. In short, Murdoch will become completely irreverent irrelevant on-line almost overnight and I am not sure why he thinks all too many people will care one way or the other. This is a bit like threatening someone that if they do not give him their money, Murdoch will cut his own throat. Er, sure Rupert, whatever. I suspect folks at the Guardian (who may not be my favourites ideologically but they certainly ‘get’ the internet better than most) and elsewhere can hardly believe their good luck (From Samizdata Murdoch’s suicide threat).”

Rupert, Rupert, Rupert, Rupert… your plan will fall to pieces if a single online news outlet keeps their content free. No one with half a brain will pay for it. Your best years are behind you. Long behind you.

Ruperts words made me think of a line from last night’s Mad Men Season Finale when Don snapped at his fellow partner Bert Cooper saying, ”And you old men love building golden tombs and sealing the rest of us in with you.” Mr. Murdoch is an old, rich, proud man, the people who will suffer from his decisions are his employees, and their families.

“No Doubt” & Courtney Love Need to Stop Suing Activision

“No Doubt” is suing Band Hero (and Guitar Hero) maker Activision over their appearance in the game (GameSpy).

Allegedly, the band’s contract with Activision dictates that the band member’s avatars can only be used on their own songs, but they are fully playable characters in the game. This means that players can appear as say, Gwen Stefani on any song in the game.

Apparently this is damaging to the members of “No Doubt.”

Someone screwed up badly, and only time will tell who it was. Either…

1. “No Doubt’s” lawyers dropped the ball or…
2. Activision breached their contract.

I don’t know how it actually went down, but either way, this is pathetic.

At the end of the day, I don’t see how the members of “No Doubt” are actually damaged and deserving of financial reward on account of this, but I’m sure their lawyers would be happy to explain why I’m wrong. By the same token, Activision needs to get their shit together and make sure that the artists that they put in their games understand, and are happy with their role within it, as the very same thing happened with Guitar Hero 5, and their use of Kurt Cobain.

Speaking of the late Mr. Cobain…

Cobain’s wife Courtney Love complained that the ability for players to use Cobain on any song in the game, including a lot of pop and electro-crap that he probably would hate was damaging to his legacy. Normally I would agree. Cobain was a revolutionary figure in music, popular culture, hell, culture in general. Having him play a song like “Play That Funky Music” is degrading. Then I saw this commercial for Nicktoons that is set to Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit” (Sorry, I can’t embed this one, but it’s worth watching).*

I’m sure that the same lawyer who approved the deal with Activision over Cobain’s appearance along with the song “Smells Like Teen Spirit” in Guitar Hero 5, had to approve the deal with Nicktoons as well. I can’t imagine that Cobain would have liked that commercial.

So, “No Doubt” & Courtney Love, let’s cut this shit out. Everyone got paid and these games introduce the music of “No Doubt” and Nirvana to a younger generation. Everyone is making money, and that’s all that you folks really want at this point.

* That commercial really does break my heart.

Happy Guy Fawkes Day

“People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.” ~V

Teaching History is Tough

A few days ago I had an in-depth discussion about why so many people seemed to hate history as a child.

I love history, I loved it as a child, throughout grade school, it was one of my majors in college, and I continue to study history on my own as an adult. So, why did I like it where so many others didn’t?

I think it might be because I learned it outside of the classroom.

History is incredibly tough to teach because it is a subject without limit. Take for example early Cold War history.  The Cold War lasted from 1945 – 1991. I spent countless hours in a number of different courses studying that 46 year war… but even within that short span of time,  the overwhelming majority of my study hours were on the Eisenhower and Kennedy years (roughly 11 years). Within that, my primary focus was on the Cuban Missile Crisis, which lasted a whopping 13 days… I spent far more time studying the Crisis than it lasted.

Adlai Stevenson kicks ass on the floor of the UN during the Cuban Missile Crisis... my favorite moment in world history.

I know Cold War history, really know the Eisenhower and Kennedy years, and I could talk for days about the Cuban Missile Crisis. My other area of focus was on early Constitutional history (another 50 years or so). I could talk your ear off about the genius of the Founding Fathers.

Basically, after studying history for four years and spending a ton of time reading on my own, I have mastery of the Cold War, early Constitutional history, the history of the guitar in the Western world, and the history of the comic book industry. If I were to teach history, those are the areas that I truly be able to speak about with authority (and two of them are might narrow niches).

However, all I would need to teach high school history is a teaching license. This is the case for all history teachers. The topics are so incredibly broad, the wealth of material on any given subject, so deep. No one can master it all. No one can be passionate about all of it. What happens are tremendous gaps in the classroom.

Math, science, English, languages all have rules, and well-defined curriculum. History is so insanely ill-defined… and that’s before you look at the differences in interpretation of events. As a general rule, I don’t think high school history even attempts to analyze the fact that historians don’t agree on a universal history. The past really isn’t clear.

The best path to enjoying history is to find a topic or era that you like, and read on your own. Everything has history, companies, industries, musical instruments and movie genres. The comic book industry’s history overlaps with the history of the organized crime, and the contraceptives industry, as well as Jewish-American and WWII history, in a beautiful web of intrigue and chance.

History isn’t just about the old white guys on our money (although I find most of them very interesting). When I get passionate about something I learn it’s history, music, videogames, the Constitution, or nuclear deterrence. I don’t think it’s possible to understand and fully appreciate anything in life without learning where it came from, and how it evolved over time.

History teachers have it tough. No one will find all of world history interesting (even the most devoted history student), and there is no way that each teacher can have a thorough understanding of all of the classroom material, sometimes they will have to phone it in.

~ syndicated by TheGeekWhisperer.com

“Did You Know?” Crazy Tech Stats

These videos are wonderful. They do an incredible job of putting our world into perspective:

Re-posted from the Local Wisdom Blog (the company I work for).

Michael Moore the Limousine Leninist

Let’s not beat around the bush… Michael Moore is a hypocritical, corpulent piece of crap.

As a rule, when I disagree with a person, I don’t like to ridicule them, I attack the substance of their ideas. When I call Mikey a bulky bowel movement I am not doing it for the purpose of mocking his weight, I do it because it goes directly to the heart of hypocrisy.

This fat, rich man has thrived in our capitalist system. He came from a humble family in Flint, Michigan and amassed a fortune. He sends his daughter to a private school, and earns millions of dollars as a movie-maker. Capitalism served him well. In our system he has prospered and reaped the benefits of his wealth… And there is nothing wrong with that. Nothing at all.

I can’t stand the guy, and I disagree with damn near everything he says. However, he makes a product that people are willing to buy, even if that product is based on partial truths and deception, he uncovered a demand, and like any good capitalist, he fulfills it.

So why the hell is he making a movie that calls for the destruction of the system that has afforded him the opportunity to thrive? I don’t really know. What I do know is that he has no viable suggestions for a better system. He calls for more “democracy” in our economy. It’s a sweet idea, and a great use of a word that no one likes to disagree with, but I have yet to see him suggest how that would work. Plus, what if the people decide on governing the economy in a way that Michael Moore finds distasteful? Many of us still like our right to keep and bear arms? I for one see it as a necessary freedom.We all know how Mikey feels on the subject.

Like an immigrant who made it to this country and now wishes to deny admission to new immigrants; the “this is my country, now get the hell out” mentality… Moore struck big, climbed to the top, and wants to torch the ladders. No one else may strive for greatness. Capitalism works, the United States works because there is an incentive to strive for more.

In any non-capitalist system, no man could grow as rotund as Michael Moore. He clearly eats more than his fare share… And that’s OK. He earned his money, he can spend it as he pleases. However, in the socialist utopia he imagines is possible, he would be a few hundred pounds lighter, his child would go to public school with the rest of the peasants, and there is a good chance he wouldn’t have the freedom of speech that his trade is built on.

Do Michael Moore a favor and don’t see his movie. So many people are hoping to make money off of it, and that is clearly wrong in Mikey’s eyes.

If you are still reading and want to see how half-baked his ideas are, watch his interview with Wolf Blitzer. Mikey spent all of this time making an anti-capitalism film and can’t articulate a semi-intelligent argument against the system, or propose a better alternative (Part one is all you need to watch, but I’m providing part two as well).

Can anyone tell me why he is wearing a hat for my school? As far as I know, he never had anything to do with Rutgers.

If you want to read more on Mikey’s hypocrisy, check out Michael Wilson’s work.

Finally, to give credit where it is due, the phrase “Limousine Leninist” came from commenter pst314 on the brilliant political blog Samizdata.

Sorry for the off-topic post. Mikey’s been ticking me off for a long time.

FCC Win

Today the FCC proposed a number of net neutrality guidelines that most notably include prohibiting broadband providers from “discriminating against content or applications, and mandate transparent network management” (Engadget).

It’s nice to see a government agency leaning towards personal freedom.

Of course, this isn’t law or policy and there is a good chance there will be any number of loopholes for broadband providers to exploit.

It reminds me of a bit from Lewis Black’s stand-up routine about Enron. He said something along these lines:

“If you have a company, and you can’t explain in one sentence… what it does. It’s illegal.”

This may seem incredibly simplistic, but what’s wrong with using this language?

“It is not permissible for a broadband provider to discriminate against content or applications. Discriminating against content or applications will result in the following penalties…”

Why do we have to make this so complicated that it will be ineffective?

On 9/12, the Greatest Man in History Died

On September 12th, 1009, Norman Borlaug died at the age of 95. When I call him the “greatest man in history,” I write completely free of sarcasm, hyperbole, or cynicism. I honestly hold Mr. Borlaug in higher regard than any person who has ever lived.

Why is he the “greatest man in history?”

A few years ago an episode of Penn & Teller’s Bullshit discussed bio-engineered food. Mr. Borlaug was the father of the Green Revolution; an agricultural revolution whereby science and technology were used to increase crop yield, and fight famine (not to be confused with the Green Movement which is notorious for cherry-picking science). From Mexico, to India, the Philippines, and Africa, Mr. Borlaug helped poor people in undeveloped countries feed themselves. Estimates put the number of people saved, and subsequently sustained by Mr. Borlaug’s work at over one billion people (it’s probably more, and over time that number will continue to increase).

Penn & Teller declared Mr. Borlaug “the greatest man in history.” Since seeing the episode, I read a lot about Mr. Borlaug and only became more impressed. Prior to his death I had gone to great lengths to try and name another person who was arguably “better” than Mr. Borlaug. I still can’t. One billion plus lives is an unimaginably high standard to set, and he didn’t do it from some swank home in the States. He lived with the people he was helping. He experienced the suffering firsthand, and did something about it. Not only that, he worked into his 90’s, constantly striving to save more people, and alleviate human suffering. To my knowledge, there has never been another person who has had the intelligence, ingenuity, compassion, and drive to help so tirelessly on such an enormous scale.

Unfortunately groups like PETA have demonized Mr. Borlaug, and there are many unfounded articles circulating that make him out to be something terrible. I could rage on those groups all night, but I will save that for another post… another day… those people will still be around tomorrow. Today is a day of mourning. We lost one of the great ones.

Therefore I feel that the aforementioned guiding principle must be modified to read: If you desire peace, cultivate justice, but at the same time cultivate the fields to produce more bread; otherwise there will be no peace.

Norman Borlaug

Science Debunks the 9/11 Conspiracy Crazies

Every 9/11, the conspiracy crazies come out to rant about myriad alternate realities they are living in.

I’m all for open, rational debate, but in my experience, these people are neither open, nor rational. I would link to some of them, but I don’t want to give them any attention (Giving a conspiracy nut attention is like getting a gremlin wet).

What I will do, is direct you to a wonderful article from Popular Mechanics that explains the science behind the World Trade Center collapse. It contains grounded arguments like:

Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn’t need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength — and that required exposure to much less heat. “I have never seen melted steel in a building fire,” says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. “But I’ve seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks.”

“Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F,” notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. “And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent.” NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

It may not be as sexy as George W. Bush having the CIA blow the buildings up with thermite… but then again, thermite is pretty cool. On the other hand, that that boring metallurgy stuff has fact to back it up.

In a world filled with ambiguity and half-truths, this is one event where witness accounts, government intelligence, the terrorist organization responsible, and science all come to the same conclusion. Let it be.

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report

Internet Down in Manhattan *UPDATED

I’m receiving unconfirmed reports that fiber-optic communications (Internet and the like) are down across Manhattan.

I will update with new information as it becomes available.

Update 4:06pm

My source, an IT tech who wishes to remain anonymous says:

A construction company did work in a restricted zone. They messed up royally and cut right through the biggest fiber optic nodes in Manhattan. It will be down for at least another eight hours… probably wont be fully repaired til tomorrow afternoon.

Thoughts on the Bill to Give the President Emergency Control Over the Internet

There is a bill in the Senate that, in short, would grant the President of the United States the power to attempt to control the Internet in the event of an emergency. You can read all about it on cnet.

I’ve been staring at this article for days, and intentionally waited to respond to it so that I could have a level head… because as anyone who has been following this blog knows, this kind of bill upsets me on a very deep level.

Before I give my response, here is what Jena Longo, Deputy Communications Director for the Senate Commerce Committee had to say about the general concern and anger coming from us net folks:

The president of the United States has always had the constitutional authority, and duty, to protect the American people and direct the national response to any emergency that threatens the security and safety of the United States. The Rockefeller-Snowe Cybersecurity bill makes it clear that the president’s authority includes securing our national cyber infrastructure from attack. The section of the bill that addresses this issue, applies specifically to the national response to a severe attack or natural disaster. This particular legislative language is based on longstanding statutory authorities for wartime use of communications networks. To be very clear, the Rockefeller-Snowe bill will not empower a “government shutdown or takeover of the Internet” and any suggestion otherwise is misleading and false. The purpose of this language is to clarify how the president directs the public-private response to a crisis, secure our economy and safeguard our financial networks, protect the American people, their privacy and civil liberties, and coordinate the government’s response (cnet).

In no small terms, this is a bad bill.

First and foremost, it states an unachievable goal. Controlling the Internet really isn’t possible. Sections could be controlled, but there will always be knowledgeable people who will be able to circumvent any control system. Such is the nature of a distributed network. However, the goal being unachievable doesn’t take away from that fact that trying is still tyrannical.

Second, if the technological argument doesn’t work for you, let’s look at the general nature of politics. Let’s say, for argument sake you believe that Barack Obama can do no wrong (or at the very least, means very well). You think that granting this man the power to take control over the Internet isn’t a problem because he is such a good guy, and you trust his judgment. I am not saying that he is, but I have no doubt that there are people in the US who do believe that. Would you grant these same powers to the next President? What about George W. Bush? Would you feel comfortable with him having these powers?

Don’t grant powers that you wouldn’t want in the hands of the other side. Inevitably someone you don’t like, and don’t agree with will be President.

Third, what constitutes a “severe attack or natural disaster?” Who decides that? It’s not always as clear as 9/11 or Hurricane Katrina. I’m sure that civil disobedience could be construed as a severe attack.

This is vague, dangerous, and tyrannical bill.

Disney to Acquire Marvel Comics for $4,000,000,000

Over the coming year, I’m sure we will see a variety of good and bad changes as a consequence.

"Four billion dollars... Muwhahaha Muwhahaha!"

I wish I owned Marvel Stock today.

The Town of Tonawanda Veterans Memorial

Every once in a while life affords you the opportunity to witness, and play a small part in something great.

My friend and college buddy Peter Rizzo had been an official in the Town of Tonawanda; a suburb of Buffalo, New York. I’ve known and worked with quite a few government officials in the past, and Pete is one of the rare few who doesn’t do things for power, attention or with any expectation of reward. He works hard for what he feels is right.

Why am I writing an obviously non-geek post about a friend/ local official?

The answer to that is because Pete accomplished something incredible last week.

On Tuesday, August 18th, the brand new Town of Tonawanda Veterans Memorial was dedicated. Somewhere between 1,500 and 2,000 people showed up to honor our veterans at the unveiling of a spectacular new monument. General Colin Powell delivered the keynote address, and Pete read a Presidential Proclamation from Barack Obama, in addition to his own speech.

Here’s a video of local news coverage of the event:

A portion of Peter’s speech really underscores the purpose and thought behind the memorial:

All of our veterans sacrificed for us, whether they served in the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, or Merchant Marine. Whether from private to general, from seaman recruit to admiral, or from airman to general, regardless of rank, every single veteran has sacrificed for us, for our community, for our country. That, ladies and gentlemen, is why the memorial before you lists only names, and not rank. Rank is an honor in and of itself, but service is the common thread that unites them all. We honor all who have served us equally, without prejudice.

I had the opportunity to be a sounding-board for Pete throughout the entire process, and help him craft his communications and pitches to get this project off the ground. While I played an incredibly small role in this big project (which entailed raising $100,000 (correction) more than $180,000 and navigating the labyrinth that is local politics), I am just honored to have been a part of it. However, I must confess that I didn’t believe the thing would ever get built.

I seriously underestimated Pete’s dedication, determination and seemingly endless well of patience. He wanted to do something to honor, and remember the sacrifice of all veterans, of all ranks, from all wars. He succeeded.

For most people, the Town of Tonawanda Veterans Memorial will honor our Country’s veterans. For those of us who know Pete, and understand how hard he worked to make this idea real, the Memorial will also serve as a monument to action. It’s easy to come up with an idea like this. Working nearly six years to make it a reality is something entirely different.

… And that’s worthy of an off-topic post.

(Photos)