nettime mailinglist

Ontology of the DroneJordan CrandallWe begin this analysis from the tail end, rather than the front. Not withthe eyes, but with the ass. We start at the bottom and work our way up.When we finally arrive at the helm, we may be a bit greasy.When seen from below, the tiniest component can assume large-scalerelevance, can have the biggest effects. We ignore it at our peril. AGlobal Hawk – the largest unmanned plane in the U.S. military’s arsenal –was once brought down by a RUDDER. As the hulking, ungainly vehiclerumbled through the sky, resembling a strange sea creature with no eyes,this lowly steering device swerved back and forth at the tail end, lodgedwithin the fin. Its motion was irregular, owing to the fact that it hadbecome loosened during a previous mission. During the fatal flight, itbegan flapping uncontrollably. Its excessive flailing created, over time,a sufficient degree of destabilization to cripple the mammoth plane andsend it plummeting to earth.In the event of a failure, inquiries are launched, explanations set intomotion. Probes are conducted into – in this case – the maintenance of therudder, the programming of the mission, the writing of the code. Theyreveal the drone’s concealed infrastructures, its systems of operation,logistics, and maintenance. When delving into this subterranean level,parts take on new relevancies and meanings, for they are always linkedwith other components in shared functions that complicate theirdiscreteness. The roles that they play are always contingent, connectedacross scales in relational couplings that are hard to fathom. Even thesmallest coupling can be of paramount importance.In certain cases, the rudder might be viewed as an autonomous entity. Ahuman observer might isolate the form, regard it in terms of its materialand functional specificity, marvel at the contours of its design. Itssmooth, curved shape is the material outcome of the need to harness theproperties of moving air – to maximize the efficiency of the interactionsbetween air and the solid bodies that move through it. Yet without theinput of information or power, the device does nothing. It is simply acontrol platform, a surface that awaits command. The control is providedby an actuator (a motor). The rudder is attached to its output hub andsecured in place with hinges.At the most basic scale, the rudder’s job is very simple. It moves backand forth along a set range of motion in accordance with receivedinstruction. When we move up in scale, this action stays the same, but thetask changes. At a larger scale, its job is to change the shape of thetail fin’s surface and subsequently vary the amount of force that itgenerates. At a still larger scale, its job is to control movement of theplane about its vertical axis – to change the horizontal direction inwhich the nose is pointing.In order to accomplish these tasks, the rudder must work in conjunctionwith the plane’s other directional control surfaces. The cooperationoccurs across a number of fronts. Actuators drive control platforms attheir own local scale (such as at the tail or wing), in ways that altertheir aerodynamic features, and these movements, in turn, alter theaerodynamic characteristics of the larger-scale platform of the plane. Theoverall cooperative job is to provide stability for the aircraft – to keepit straight in flight.The actuator assumes command based on the control signals that itreceives. It converts these control signals to physical actions. Itsability to drive its platform well requires that it receive informedoperational instructions. In order for this to occur, environmentalconditions must be detected and measured, the data processed by the flightcomputers, and the necessary information exchanged via transmitters andreceivers. The flight computers send relevant information to operatingcrews and other teams of actors who might be involved with launch andrecovery elements, maintenance and logistical support systems, missioncommand and control, or image processing and dissemination. Flightengineers at ground control stations monitor operational states viatechnical data arrayed on displays. Pilots navigate by GPS signals andother locational data downloaded by satellite transmission and translatedas coordinates on geographic information systems.The correct data, once assembled into coherent control signals, instructthe actuators to drive their respective control platforms. The plane issteered and its relative position, speed, and attitude are adjusted inaccordance with this instruction, and a cohesive flight is (it is hoped)produced.The plane’s actuator-platform affiliation, then, works in conjunction witha multiplicity of actors whose functions are to sense, process, andcommunicate the relevant information. The vehicle’s countless otheraffiliations, working across various scales of operation, are alldependent upon the kinds of couplings that they seek out or afford.Because of the rudder’s properties – its material quality, density,curvature, and texture – it has the capacity to deflect and contour theair that flows into it. When coupled with a motor that has the capacity tomove it, the rudder-actuator is endowed with the more complex property ofback-and-forth motion. When it is coupled with an instructor capable ofcommanding it, the mechanism activates its potential to change the shapeof the tail fin’s surface. It now achieves its capacity to vary the amountof force it generates. When working in conjunction with the plane’s otherdirectional control mechanisms, with their different capacities to varyforce levels, it has the capacity to control the movement of the planearound its vertical axis.The unmanned aerial system operates as an affiliation of maintained andmonitored states through the activity of actors that might be human,mechanical, informational, environmental, or institutional. These actorsoperate at various scales and levels of complexity, whether at the levelof hardware, software, image, data, controls, or flight or ground crews,or at the scale of logistical support, service, or operator andmaintenance training. The affiliations that they constitute are practicesas much as object-configurations, systems as much as parts. As data flowsconnect the flight crew to the plane, they also connect the plane andflight crew to intelligence teams and arrangements of commanders andtroops on the ground or in the air. Their links and flows are determinedthrough existing connections, platforms, and procedural agencies, yet atthe same time they help instantiate them. Transmitted signals aremodulated and rendered discrete as code, in concert with the programs,hardware, organizations, and personnel that rely on them. As they flowthrough such actors, the signals are filtered, constrained, related, andinterpreted, and in the context of this activity the bounds and locales ofmateriality are enacted.Through it all, the rudders remain stable. The transmissions are cleared,the connections enabled. Collective intelligence and skill emerge foroperation. Hardware, personnel, and supplies are integrated into tacticalformations. Communication protocols and pathways fit together in stablesystems. Ideas fit together in doctrines. The component actors withinthese ecologies are relatively discrete and stabilized. Yet they areactive: they band and disband, accumulate and release, extend andconsolidate. Some links are weak and some more durable. A dispatch issimple, whereas a doctrine is complex. Even internally, composites thatwould seem to be solid are embroiled in bandwidth battles and interservicerivalries. All must be actively maintained, with varying levels offrequency and force.Even though they operate at different scales and levels of complexity,these components and ecologies are somehow integrated into coherent,stable formations that can be replicated and relied upon. Contexts arecreated, communication among components facilitated, and inferences fromdata drawn. They stabilize and cohere because of the procedural structuresand standards of the higher-order affiliations into which they fit –networked, scalar concealments that might exist at the algorithm,hardware, or logistics level, or at the local, regional, or nationalscale. The tasks performed, whether at the small scale of control surfacesor the large scale of control infrastructures, are accomplished by linkingto other affiliations and functioning in accordance with them in terms ofcommon programs.It is a matter of the modality of the linking. It is a process of bonding,synchronization, calibration, and agreement that, occurring acrosscomponents and systems functioning at different speeds, scales,magnitudes, and levels of complexity, does not involve simply aconventional relational structure. The difficult question is not howactors relate to one another, but how they gather together to stabilize incohesive wholes that are more than the sum of their parts. It is a matterof how, once sufficiently stabilized, they replicate, become redundant,and standardize, at various scales, across various platforms of endeavor.The functions of sensing, processing, communicating, and actuating aredistributed, shared, and consolidated across a number of ontologicalplatforms. Many biological and machinic assemblages perform all of thesefunctions. At the most basic level, all component actors are sensors andtransmitters of energy. They emit and absorb electro-chemical signals,vibrations, and electric or nervous impulses. They filter and calibrateaffective, rhythmic, and linguistic flows in ways that increase ordiminish their ability to apprehend, act, and materialize. Thefoundational structure of this relationality is not based solely ondifference. Actors may consolidate as discrete entities, yet they alsovibrate in terms of constrained transmissions and modulated thresholds,however approached, attained, or crossed. Relationality involves thecorrespondence of elements, yet also involves the limitation of flows.Conventional ontological categories recede and performative functions riseto the fore: the scalar roles that agencies perform. Functions are alwaysconsolidated in the specificities of actors, which might be human,institutional, technological, spatial, or representational in nature.These actors achieve a level of discreteness, in concert with externalagencies that rely on them. But the challenge is to hold specificity anddistribution together – placing part and practice, component and system,together on the same analytical plane. The drone is a rigid flyingplatform, yet it is also a dynamic system defined by the atmospheric,technological, and institutional systems that it moves through.The rudder’s direction in manned aircraft was once manipulated by a pilotwho moved a pair of foot pedals. Although most of the Global Hawk’soperations are the result of programming and commanding the autopilot’scomputers – a rudder command is sent encrypted via fibre optic overseascable and satellite and takes about three seconds to reach the plane –this does not mean that the agency of the pilot has been fully replaced bya program or relocated in one human crew member at one site. It is amatter of looking at the distribution and embeddedness of the pilotingfunction – understanding how its capacities have been redistributed insensing, processing, and actuating affiliations at various scales andconsolidated in new clusters of ontological significance.It is messy work, which only increases our workload. It drags us furtherdownward, just when we are ready to ascend. Often we undertake it onlywhen something goes wrong – the necessity of the endeavour propelled bythe advent of the failure.At the onset of the Global Hawk crash, the investigation was set intomotion. It located the rudder-actuator as the faulty agent – its excessiveflapping was identified as the cause of the plane’s demise. But where,exactly, was the fault located? Perhaps it lay deep within the mechanicsof the actuator itself. No matter how stable and correct the command, thecomponent may have responded only partially, or not at all, to theinstruction’s demand.Or perhaps it was located in the instructions themselves, or in theirtransmission. It could have been located in the program through whichthese instructions were compiled, or in the agency that programmed them.Because the loosening of the rudder-actuator complex was not detected, thefault could have been located in the performance of the sensor thatmonitored the actuator’s output hub.The output of each set of components at each scale of organizationprovides units of assembly for the next level up. Data may be processedcorrectly at one scale but incorrectly at another. Faulty measurementsalter the measurements required by controllers, and, depending on theirseverity, may scale up to degrade the overall feedback loop. Onecontingent fault may lead to another, cascading upward through the levelsof the system to affect its overall performance. The small-scale fault canlead to the large-scale failure.There are no hard-and-fast boundaries between fault and failure, but thereis a transition point. Failure comes when a fault cascades up to cross acritical threshold. It is a matter not of eliminating fault, but ofdeveloping a control system equipped with an adequate degree ofrobustness.The drone’s components and systems take shape in degrees of coalescenceand disruption, at various frequencies, rhythms, magnitudes, and scales ofendeavour. They are subject to external forces, to the environmentalstress placed upon them. How much can a part take before it fails,decouples from its job, spins out of synch? Forces of temperature, mass,and vibration conspire against it. Discursive pressures, too. The droneworks as a platform because the agents that it helps to assemble, howeverorganic or inorganic, material or linguistic, together stabilize asufficient degree of operational commonality – agreement that the thingworks. The agreement happens through a setting of the terms: theascendance of the organizing principles, or programs, that allow sustainedaffiliation to be achieved.-Perhaps now, having worked our way up from the greasy mechanics on thelower decks, we can arrive at the top. We can clean up and assume ourrightful place at the helm, clicking through the drone’s images, its viewsfrom above – its control panels, the representational constructs throughwhich it sees, through which we see, and through which we seek tounderstand its operations and politics. However, this is not so easy, forin the analytical orientation that drone ontology demands, the cockpit isgone.If there is a dominant genre of image, it is perhaps the simulation. Itsinterface is familiar to any aficionado of video games and high-techadventure films. Like the control panels of actual flight crews, it bearsthe traces of the commercial game formats from which it is derived. Yet,like the actual drones of which they are a component, the coherency anddiscreteness of these interfaces dissolve upon scrutiny, scattering intoarrays of component actors that are shared by other affiliations. Theseactors – visual and rhythmic motifs, behavioural conventions, perspectivalformats, codes, tags, controllers, users, procedures, game architectures,rules – circulate and bond across multiple domains of experience,traversing the divides between corporation and government, operation andtraining. The particular applications in which they accumulate, developedlargely by the game industry and influenced by its formats of cognitiveand affective engagement, are made to excite the player and must beadjusted in accordance with the velocities, magnitudes, and textures ofthe real world.The component actors of these gaming, control, and simulation ecologiesrelate as discrete entities, yet they also modulate and constrain flows atvarious scales of experience. They are relatively stabilized, consolidatedplatforms but also dynamic systems defined by the environments that theymove through. As they configure and fluctuate, they require continuousadjustments across the various scales, magnitudes, and rhythms at whichthey are active. From which ontological “side” does the agency of thisadjustment derive? The differentials, commonalities, and alignments thatare negotiated do not involve hard-and-fast separations. The actioncourses through all of the actors in attendance, as these actors perform –performatively enact – within the dynamics of the various situations thatarise, in various degrees of attunement to the shared priorities that arerevealed.Agency manifests by way of its action and maintenance: through the ways itcomes to perform, at various speeds and degrees of complexity, and theextent to which this performance is recognized, valued, and maintained. Anactor endeavours to be an adequate player of the game. What is deemedadequate performance, and how is it sustained? Some aspects of practice,prioritized, congeal into higher-order principles. Sufficientlystabilized, they replicate, become redundant, and standardize, at variousscales, across various platforms of endeavour. They perpetuate theirstandards such that other actors come to move in accordance with theirterms.It is a matter of maintaining sufficient stability at numerous scales ofpractice, to the extent that these shared formats, agreements, andstandards can come to exist: potential alliances that can offerpropagation and endurance over time.As simulations often require nothing more than a joystick and portablecomputer, the same high-end environments that are found in stationarysystems can be taken directly into the field. Some simulations are pluggeddirectly into actual ground control stations, allowing operators to togglebetween simulation and actuality, rehearsal and mission, within afunctional crew station. Game-based training becomes an essentialprecursor to deployment, increasingly integrated into actual operations inreal time.Ground control stations, training simulations, and video games occupy acommon cognitive and affective terrain: sites of data rendered actionable.Together they constitute an interlocking complex, harnessing theimaginary, that conditions orientation in the world. Along with theinfrastructure of the bases and training facilities within which theyunfold, the enacted routines of this complex play a large materializingrole: as affiliations of monitored and maintained states, they stabilizeand entrain the material agencies of crew members and flown drones.Across these dynamic, entraining affiliations, functional organizations ofknowledge and skill are redistributed and reconstrained, along withpositions, categories, and divisions of labour. As agencies circulate andbond across multiple domains of experience, traversing the divides betweencombat and entertainment, research and commerce, unlikely bedfellows arebrought together through economic need. The redistribution of manpower –the shift from soldiers in battlefields and fighter planes to those inhigh-tech ground control units and command centres – challenges thestances, positions, and qualifications that have defined previousgenerations. The values and dispositions of unmanned warfare do not alwaysalign with the gendered roles, imaginaries, and concepts of adequacy thatwere present in the heroic ideals of the past. Displacement from themastering console of the cockpit, haven of modernist subjectivity, doesnot come easy.Nor do the incessant demands for new adequacies. As unmanned systems gainthe ability to record activities on the ground over much longertimeframes, the vast amounts of data that they absorb can easily outrunthe capacities of personnel. Cameras and sensors become ever moresophisticated, yet they are of limited value unless they can beaccompanied by improved human intelligence and skill. The task ofinterpreting what the drone is seeing falls partly into the hands of theflight crew, and video and sensor feeds are also sent to analysis anddissemination sites at bases around the world. Inside their cavernousrooms, analysts filter vast streams of data. They, too, are hard-pressed:staring for hours on end at their monitors, nearly inert at their chairs,they try to ferret out the single, telling deviance in the normalizedflow. Armed with the skill of extracting relevant data from image flowsand information arrays, they attempt to organize those data into patternsfrom which extrapolations can be made.The unmanned system, as an affiliation of components and practices, relieson analysis and dissemination sites like these. They are vital platformsof the drone in its shared perceptual and analytical capacities, itssensing, processing, communicating, and actuating functions – nodesthrough which its data are streamed, formatted, tagged, and renderedsearchable across networks of datasets. As the image and sensor data areorganized and stored, they become the primary site through whichcorrelations can be made and inferences drawn. Databases, activatedthrough search algorithms, become the primary repository of knowledge.The challenge is that of tracking vehicles, objects, and humans on theground with a higher degree of precision, in ways that lessen the demandson human decision-making: to amplify the overall intelligence and skill ofthe system. This often takes the form of enhancing the capacity oftracking and search algorithms, along with the network processingcapability required to parse and coordinate the data. It involvesincreasing the ability of drones to sense, reason, learn, and makedecisions, and to collaborate and communicate, with a minimized degree ofdirect human involvement.Such systems are often described as automated or autonomous. Yet theunmanned system does not eliminate the human: it redistributes theagencies of warfare. The capacities of sensing, analyzing, and alerting –the intelligence and skill required to interpret information and act onthe results – are shared by an affiliation of actors, however algorithmic,organic, or systemic. Their ontological statuses arise from theirperformative practices within the functional organization of the system.It is a matter of how they are maintained as dynamically stable entities –sustained, naturalized, and rendered discrete – and the programs throughwhich this is accomplished. It is a matter of the priorities that comeinto play: the patterns and flows that are deemed most appropriate to thecircumstances, as they are stabilized and maintained in practice.As intelligence migrates into unlikely, shared sources, even those thatare spatial and atmospheric, and agency is understood to be distributedand embodied in all manner of organic and inorganic actors, a sense ofskill emerges whose source is in negotiation rather than domination. Here,an actor works with a material rather than against it, cultivating anexisting, emergent meaning rather than externally imposing one. Unforeseenintimacies arise. It requires an agile practice attuned to the unexpected,an excessive proximity to that which cannot be contained or possessed.Analytical notions of power diminish, along with the control consoles thatprovide their supports.Below the decks the rudders swerve.-

Theodor Holm Nelson (born June 17, 1937) is an American sociologist,philosopher, and pioneer of information technology (IT sociolosopher).He coined the terms "hypertext" and "hypermedia" in 1963 and publishedthem in 1965. He also has been credited with first using the wordstransclusion, virtuality, intertwingularity, and teledildonics.This year he came up with a series called "Computer for Cynics" wherehe explores themes like:Computers for Cynics 0 - The Myth of Technologyhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdnGPQaICjkComputers for Cynics 1 - The Nightmare of Files and Directorieshttp://youtu.be/Qfai5reVrckComputers for Cynics 2 - It All Went Wrong at Xerox PARChttp://youtu.be/F-OUTjml12wComputers for Cynics 3 - The Database Mess http://youtu.be/E6mNoUiWOYoComputers for Cynics 4 - The Dance of Apple and Microsofthttp://youtu.be/nrDDFl-D2TcComputers for Cynics 5 - Hyperhistory http://youtu.be/7jmlnKBuJPEComputers for Cynics 6 - The Real Story of the World Wide Webhttp://youtu.be/KOclv0NrSsQComputers for Cynics N - CLOSURE: Pay Attention to the Man Behind theCurtain http://youtu.be/CFKestdf2owddhttp://hyperland.com/ccynPage-D1

The visual + links can be viewed oat my news-tableau pages on Flickrhttp://flic.kr/p/dEr5zhSocial & Natural Volcanos: Orange Alert in PatagoniaSOCIAL & NATURAL VOLCANOS: ORANGE ALERT IN PATAGONIA with the future Dutch king and his family staying at the premises of the local Governor of the regions at the Nahuel Huapi Lake (lake of the Puma in Mapuche Indian language).On wednesday the 19th the royals had their traditional photo=press shoot to show of their well to do state to the royalist press, while one day later a 'SOCIAL VOLCANO' errupted in the nearby town of Bariloche where the poor and revolting started to loot a supermarket, an incident that started off with the failure to deliver timely the promised food-support packages. The self-help proletarian shopping soon crossed over into the looting of less essential luxurious goods, as every one likes to fancy themselves to be royals.Meanwhile the local volcano, just over the border at 45 kilometers from the royal residence, choose to erupt once more, as it had done last year just after Christmas. The local authorities have given out a Red Alert for this NATURAL VOLCANO.Lake Nahuel Huapi is thought to be in Mapuche lore the home of a mythical monster 'Nahuelito', some claim to have seen this humped snake, also described as a survived Plesiosaur and of course there are mysterious photographs showing Nahuelito.The members of the House of Orange certainly do have the habit of attracting danger during their holidays.---BOXING DAY IN ARGENTINA was a few days earlier this year with 'proletarian shopping' starting in the resort city of Bariloche, 1,563 kilometers (971 miles) southwest of Buenos Aires, at the same moment that the Dutch royals were enjoying their Christmas holidays in a fake castle situated at the same lake at this small city. It started with the local poor claiming their welfare support food boxes from a local supermarket and as that did not come soon enough, people started to take things themselves without paying, within short time - as usual - the ownership barriers evaporated and more serious shopping started. The same phenomenon with slight variations in other cities of Argentina. Observers noted that other than the big looting in the year 2001, this time it was not for food only but for luxurious goods. The last thing is seen by the ruling classes as an even worse offence, as hunger may be accepted, but lower classes wanting to possess the same thing as the higher classes, is something 'not done'...Tjebbe van TijenImaginary Museum ProjectsDramatizing Historical Informationhttp://imaginarymuseum.orgweb-blog: The Limping Messengerhttp://limpingmessenger.wordpress.com/

Move Commons is a simple tool for connecting potential volunteers andcontributors to initiatives, collectives and NGOs.For a full summary check our crowdfunding campaign. A visual demonstrationcan be seen in the preview, additional info in our blog and in the list ofthe possible implications.http://movecommons.org/Network Effect AllianceHelp solve the internet innovation paradoxThe problemIt is easy to innovate on the internet - exiting new services areintroduced every day. It is an interesting paradox that so far it hasproven nearly impossible to renew the core underlying technologies of theinternet itself.A major bottleneck: in this respect the service offering of ISP's andhosting providers is just about the same as in the late nineties of theprevious century, when the internet was first introduced to a mass audience.http://networkeffectalliance.org/FN +91-832-2409490 or +91-9822122436 fn-L0usHwIw0nmGglJvpFV4uA< at >public.gmane.orgAudio recordings (mostly from Goa): http://bit.ly/GoaRecordingsGoa,1556 http://www.scribd.com/doc/76671049/Goa1556-Catalogue-Books-from-Goa

=========================================dead music=========================================i do dead music: music of the dead, music by the dead, music for the dead.sometimes someone listens over my shoulder until our bones fall off. ourbones are bright bracelets but the music goes out. sometimes someone doesdead music. yes because the dead are eternally with us, and my music, atleast to me, appears stillborn. I'm not sure what you mean like allelements; objects have resonances but if they're chaotic enough they'dcancel out. Meanwhile for us humans most music dies unrecorded andprobably unheard except for the musician - because I work the graveyardshift. because there's nothing dreamed of in this world, there's just theworld. because the world does not dream. because it does not i do deadmusic. my saz was made by ahmet tekeli a famous saz player. there is apicture of him in Rebecca Bryant, The soul danced into the body: Nationand Improvisation in Istanbul. the label reads Figure 5. Saz greats in a_meyhane_ (bar/restaurant): Left to right, Semsi Yastiman, KastamonuluYorgansiz Hakki Baba, and Ahmet Tekeli in Kastamonu, 1967 (courtesy ofSinan Yastiman). my saz now has violin pegs, six working strings, a bridgepositioned upon veneer, a somewhat damaged headstock, a poorly-paintedbowl (black), and cracks. the sound is the sound of the dead. on my suroz,the sound is the sound of the dead. do i play for myself. i imagine allinstruments in flight from the open window ascending silently into thesky. i imagine they call for me. tonight i walked among them strumming theopen strings. they say, whatever you do is insufficient, your hands aretorn and crippled, your mind bedraggled, you think about death and yourthinking is a dream. i cannot reply unless i dream, and my dreams arenightmares of death and close-knit families internally torn apart. on thesaz i play without error and without tradition, i know no songs, i cannotsing anyway. to listen and play dead music is to inhabit the ashes of theworld. the world unsung has no history, no moments. it is the singing ofthe world that transforms sound into speaking, that gives stories thestrength of continuing the history of death. our history is the history ofdeath and there is not, even for a moment, any other history. we do notrevive the past, we are drawn into its graves, we are already accumulationand abyss. among ourselves with think we are talking. if you listen to arecording of my saz you can imagine fingers in motion, the light weight ofthe instrument, the smoothness of the neck, the roughness of the sound-board from so many players. it is all grey, the color of non-existent whenthe first whites and last blacks transform into last blacks, first whites.that moment when death seeps through and you realize nothing has seeped inall eternity, it has always been what we interpret in shuddering as motionand meaning, just as we are forgetful and the promise or premise of thefecundity of infinite worlds dies before the music has even a chance ofbecoming-music, when it appears to take up residence, reside. besides, youdo not listen, and if you did, you would have to always listen, havealways listened. just in order to make an other order, to make an other.which you cannot do. which is why i play for myself and it is always anappeal and always unappealing. it refuses the raggedness of enlightenmentwhen something crackles and you believe you are transformed. but themountain is still a mountain. the mountain always was a mountain. thesolace of geologic time transforms it into flatness. notes are nevercarved, they appear dream-like to inhabit the air. they do not. they arenot heard. there is possibility of hearing. there is no hearing. there isno life, there is either death. there is no history and no death. there isnone of this. there is no writing. there is no sounding and no sounding-out. nothing is heard. all music is dead music. i do dead music. i do deadmusic: music of the dead, music by the dead, music for the dead. i donothing. in figure 5, ahmet stares at the camera with an odd expression.he is on the right. he appears related to me. i am playing his saz whichhas been changed through history. it is not his image and it is not ahmetand he is not looking at anything. every statement precedes with a codiciland is followed by a codicil. the codicil is mute. the codicil enunciatesthe end of the universe within an imaginary belonging to the text. to thestatement. to every statement. the codicil is continuous reiteration. itprecedes and follows everything. it is within everything. it precedes andfollows every word. it is within every word. it precedes and follows everyletter. it is within every letter. it is within every sound. it is withinthe sound of the saz. it is within the string and the vibration of thestring. it is the texture and textile of dreams. it precedes and followsdreams. it is within dreams. it is not imaginary. the codicil is the musicof the dead, music by the dead, music for the dead. but we are dead.=========================================< nightmares of death and close-knit families internally torn apart. onthe > nightmares of death and closeknit families internally torn apart. onthe < when something crackles and you believe you are transformed. but thesolace of geologic time transforms it into flatness. notes are never >salce of geologic time transforms it into flatness. notes are never <letter. it is within every letter. it is within every sound. it is within=========================================

From: Dave Farber [mailto:dave-skGKvZKd2/+sTnJN9+BGXg< at >public.gmane.org] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 5:35 AMTo: ipSubject: [IP] Google???s Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/technology/googles-lawyers-work-behind-the-scenes-to-carry-the-day.html?hp---------------------------------------------I've blogged about this:I'm wondering though whether the issue concerning Google is rathermisplaced when included under matters concerning free speech/freeexpression. Whether a search algorithm propelling a robotic process ofinformation selection would be covered by free speech "rights" issomething for legal scholars to ponder at their leisure.I'm wondering rather whether the appropriate rights/freedomsvenue under which to assess Google's activities might not moreappropriately fall under "freedom of thought" rather than"freedom of speech" i.e. that it concerns the way we know thingsor our capacity to know certain things (and not have the means to know(or believe) other things).http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel-neither-it-is-like-nernsts-third-law-of-thermodynamics-or-the-nicene-creed/ http://wp.me/pJQl5-ab M

Published end of November 2012, but still highly relevant.bwo BytesforAll list)original to:http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/hyping-one-threat-to-hide-another/article4140922.eceHyping one threat to hide anotherParminder Jeet SinghThe U.S. and dominant global Internet companies fear regulation because itwill adversely affect their control over the communication realmA lot of global attention right now is focussed on the World Conference onInternational Telecommunications of the International TelecommunicationUnion (ITU) which will get under way in Dubai next week. This meeting istaking up a review of International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs).When the ITRs were last reviewed in 1988, the Internet was not commonplaceand, therefore, did not find mention. In 2012, it is difficult to think ofglobal communication without the Internet. The key question today iswhether the remit of the ITU should extend to the Internet or not, and ifindeed it should, to what parts and aspects of the Internet, and in whatmanner.One summary view, quite popular in many quarters, is that with theInternet taking over global communication systems, there is no role forthe ITU anymore. Unlike traditional telecommunication — largely, telephony— global Internet traffic is mediated entirely through commercialarrangements among private players with almost no involvement of aregulator. Free market proponents, having greatly dominated the discourseso far, hold that the free market has fully triumphed, and delivered, inrelation to the Internet. This model should not be disturbed. There is,therefore, no need for any kind of regulation of the Internet.‘Free market view'This ‘free market’ view has found a powerful ally among freedom ofexpression groups, so much so that the debate about the future of the ITUis almost entirely fronted by evocative appeals about preserving theInternet as the ultimate domain of free expression. Unlike marketfundamentalism, there are no two views about freedom of expression amongmost groups and people, and thus such a strategy is understandable.Perhaps for similar reasons, Hillary Clinton has spelled ‘Internetfreedom’ as a key U.S. foreign policy agenda. It may, however, need deeperthought and analysis to assess whether the real agenda here is to use thenew Internet-based global communication realm — with the unprecedenteddomination of U.S. companies in it — as the key means for global economic,social, cultural and political domination in the post-industrial world.Any kind of global regulation of the Internet, or even articulation ofglobal principles of public interest, does not serve this agenda.The issue of freedom of expression vis-à-vis regulation of the Internet isof course very real. States are quite nervous about the transformationalnew means that allow citizens to exercise voice and associational power asnever before. They are scrambling to get their hands on some lever or theother to prevent the potential damage. And it is not only the developingcountries that are busy in this regard, so are the developed ones, greatlyenhancing their surveillance capabilities. Nevertheless, at the ITU veryfew countries have floated proposals that could increase governmentalcontrol over Internet content. These proposals mostly pertain tosubverting the current globally managed Internet names and addressessystem, and the globally configured Internet traffic routing, to createmore controllable national Internet spaces, or ‘national segments’ of theInternet, as one proposal calls them. There is very little support forthese proposals. Almost all developed countries and most developing ones,including India, have not supported these.At the recently concluded U.N. Internet Governance Forum at Baku, areporter asked Terry Kramer, the chief U.S. delegate to the upcoming ITUconference, what the whole fuss is about when decisions can be taken onlyby consensus and there is so much opposition to these problematicproposals. Mr. Kramer was disarmingly honest in his response. He agreedthat there was not that much real danger of anything happening at the WCITitself. But, he said, this is a long-haul thing. What is at stake are theprinciples that will guide Internet regulation/governance in the long run.And in this regard, he continued, Dubai was just one of the manyforums/meetings/crossroads, and many more are yet to come.The U.S. and the dominant global Internet companies, which are at theforefront of the anti-ITU campaign, know their game and objectives quitewell. It is important that others do so too. This is about the newparadigm of global governance/regulation of the communication realm. Mosthype around the WCIT seems to be missing this point, largely because it isto a considerable extent orchestrated and misled by the dominant powers.The paradigmatic issue here is whether the Internet, as the centrepiece ofthe new global communication realm, should be regulated at all. Freedom ofexpression is just one side of the story. The other, rather well disguisedside is about the political economy of the global communication realm. Itis about the division of resources within the communication realm, and,even more importantly, the larger global and sub-global division ofresources — economic, social, and political — which is fundamentallyimpacted by the nature of regimes that govern the global communicationrealm.Closely regulatedThe communication realm — or more descriptively, the information andcommunication realm, and its technologies — has always been closelyregulated in public interest. It is generally understood that it is ofvital and extraordinary public interest, and cannot just be subject onlyto normal commercial regulation, that for instance governs trade in whitegoods. Every telephone company is obliged to carry the traffic from everyother company in a non-discriminatory manner, which is called the commoncarriage rule. One can well imagine what it would be like if this rule isnot enforced. Long back, there was a time when there was no such rule. Thetelephony revolution was made possible because regulators forced commoncarriage regulation on big companies in the U.S. and other places.Similarly, the IT revolution began when regulators in the U.S. forcedsoftware to be unbundled from hardware, whereby an independent softwareindustry could develop. The rest is history.There are universal service obligations in the telecom sector wherebyevery telecom provider must service every person/ household, etc., whetherit serves its business model or not. And then there are regulations ontariffs, quality of service and so on. Telecom providers are forced tocomply with disability friendly features, and they also contribute toUniversal Service Funds that are used to universalise communicationservices. All of this, and much more, will disappear in an unregulatedcommunication system. In taking a collective political decision on whetherthe Internet is at all to be regulated or not, we need to understand thatwe are taking decisions on all these issues, and not just on freedom ofexpression.In order to understand the real stakes in the ‘regulation or not’ debateregarding the Internet, it is best to look at what is happening in theU.S. right now. The U.S. telecom market is dominated by two players,Verizon and AT&T. Verizon has challenged the Federal CommunicationCommission’s authority to enforce net neutrality (the Internet equivalentof the ‘common carriage’ rule), arguing that the Internet is not telecomand thus outside the FCC’s mandate. AT&T went a step further. It claimedthat since even traditional telecom services, like telephony, increasinglywork on Internet Protocols (IP), the FCC’s remit should not cover eventelephony. In essence, more or less, the claim is that no regulation ofthe communication systems is needed at all. The FCC can close down!Markets have taken over, and are their own arbitrators!California recently became the latest of many States in the U.S., mostlyRepublican-ruled, which have deregulated Voice-over-Internet-Protocol,effectively removing regulatory control over telephony service,disregarding the concerns expressed by many public interest groups. Thereare many deep implications of such changeovers. To give just oneillustration, unlike traditional telephony systems that are obliged tohave their own power-supply to account for emergency situations, the newIP based systems do not have such obligations. When most ‘new systems’failed recently in the aftermath of Storm Sandy, unlike earlier times, theFCC found itself unable to question the disaster preparedness of thecompanies providing much of the communication infrastructure in the U.S.today.What is happening at the ITU today, in good measure, is this game offreeing our communication realm from all public interest regulation. Asmentioned, it is about a new paradigm of ‘complete non-regulation.’ Andonce the victory is achieved at the ITU, whereby the Internet and other IPnetworks, which would soon be the basis of all communicationinfrastructure, are considered out of any kind of regulatory oversight,the game will then be replayed at the national level, citing ‘globalnorms.’ In fact, during an on-the-side chat at a recent Internetgovernance meeting in New Delhi, a telecom company representative made asignificant give-away remark. He said to an official of the TelecomRegulatory Authority of India (TRAI), ‘but isn’t net neutrality about theInternet, and therefore TRAI should have nothing to do about it.’In presenting a view on whether or not the Internet should be subject tothe remit of the ITU and the ITRs, India may be taking a position onwhether it seeks to free the Internet from all regulatory control, whichlogic would then perforce also extend to TRAI’s remit at home. The leastone can say, and appeal to the government and other actors in the space,is that this should be a considered decision after thoroughly assessingall sides of the story.Freedom of expression is not the only issue that is involved here. Thereare so many other issues, involving significant economic, social andcultural considerations, that are at stake with regard to regulation ofthe Internet. It may not be wise to throw out the baby with the bathwater.(Parminder Jeet Singh is Executive Director of Bangalore based NGO, IT forChange. Email: parminder-WwmOf7lRoEz1tl9SAq5sdA< at >public.gmane.org)Keywords: Internet regulation, Internet freedom, Freedom of expression,International Telecommunications, ITU, ITRs, global Internet traffic

Short link for this page: http://gu.com/p/3c94n 'Squatters are not home stealers' The criminalising of squatters in Britain is part of a Europe-wide backlash. But with at least 10% of the world population squatting, can they really be a menace to society? On 26 September, Alex Haigh became the first person to be jailed under section 144 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act. His crime was one of which countless thousands of people could now be guilty: squatting. A 21-year-old from Plymouth, Haigh was arrested for living in a house in Pimlico that had been empty for over a year. He had come to London seeking work as a bricklayer; now he has a criminal record. When section 144, which makes it an offence to squat in a residential building in England and Wales, came into effect at the beginning of September, many people agreed with it, including 52% of Guardian readers in an online poll. But is squatting really a menace or a burden to society? Might it even be beneficial? And when we talk about squatting, what do we really mean anyway? Those questions are raised again this week, albeit belatedly, by a surprising new adjudicator: Richard Madeley. In Madeley Meets The Squatters, the former breakfast TV maestro turns investigative reporter, visiting squatters and anti-squatters alike, and bringing more nuance to the subject than the current administration did when it drafted section 144. Grant Shapps, co-chair of the Conservative party, has a very clear idea of what squatters are: they are people who come and steal your home while you are on holiday. Justifying the law change in this paper, Shapps cited some well-publicised recent incidents of homes stolen by squatters, including that of Oliver Cockerell, a Harley Street doctor, which was occupied during renovation work while his wife was pregnant. Dr Cockerell blamed "gangs of anarchists and eastern Europeans". Shapps went on to describe squats as "death traps of despair" and spoke of squatters' lives as "characterised by gloom and anguish". "The gentle and romantic image of communal harmony and a counter-cultural lifestyle is an illusion," he declared. These negative stories have dismayed many long-term squatters. Take Joe Blake and Reuben Taylor, two squatters in their 20s who live in an abandoned plant nursery near Heathrow airport. Their set-up, Grow Heathrow, is far closer to Shapps' illusory harmonious community than a death trap of despair. In fact, you could call it a squat-topia. Blake and Taylor's group - now numbering 17 or so - cleared their site of 30 tonnes of waste and repaired derelict greenhouses to live in. They grow organic vegetables, which they sell via the local grocer. They hold bicycle workshops, arts and crafts sessions and gardening workshops for the local community. They even do the gardening for the local constituency office. They have displaced no one and the neighbourhood wants them there, since they campaign against the proposed third runway. It's a frugal existence, mind you. The only electricity is via a wind turbine and solar panels - just enough for music and the internet. It gets bitterly cold in winter. The "shower" is a Heath Robinson-like contraption consisting of a water butt on top of some scaffolding, with pipes leading to an old radiator with a fire underneath it. "We're building a roof for it so we don't get rained on while we're showering," says Blake. It would be very difficult to paint these squatters as a burden to society. They don't even have a carbon footprint. grow heathrow Grow Heathrow was set up in an abandoned plant nursery near the airport. Photograph: Martin Godwin for the Guardian. Blake and Taylor are also members of Squatters' Action for Secure Homes, or Squash, a voluntary group that has been leading the campaign against section 144. Most of the governments' arguments for criminalising squatting they can instantly rebut. They say the well-publicised examples of squatters stealing people's homes represent an insignificant proportion of the estimated 20,000 to 50,000 people squatting in the UK, most of whom live in long-term abandoned properties (the government has done no research of its own since 1986). Last month, 160 experts on housing law wrote an open letter complaining that "media and politicians are misleading about law on squatters" and that the existing law was adequate to protect homeowners like Cockerell. In the government's own consultation last year, 96% of respondents agreed that the law did not need changing, including most homeless charities, the Metropolitan Police, the Criminal Bar Association and the Law Society. "They completely overplayed it," says Blake over a cup of tea in Grow Heathrow's greenhouse kitchen. Shapps and co whipped up a moral panic, aided by sections of the media, then section 144 was "sneaked" through parliament during the bill's last three days, he says. "Squatters aren't very well represented in the media, so you just hear these horror stories in the papers. But most squatters want to stay somewhere for a long time. They don't want to take someone else's home." "What you don't get is the story about the pregnant squatter who's kicked out on the street," adds Taylor. "Many squatters are homeless and vulnerable." "From our point of view," Blake continues, "the only people this law protects are property speculators and unscrupulous landlords who are keeping properties empty." Dharavi Asia's Largest Slum 'They're not mafias. They are law-abiding citizens, workers' ... squatters in the Dharavi slum in Mumbai. Photograph: Bethany Clarke/Getty Images Moral panic over squatting is not difficult to engineer, says Dr Hans Pruijt of the Erasmus University, Rotterdam, who has studied squatting across Europe. In the Netherlands, a country with a formerly enlightened squatting tradition, it was outlawed in October 2010, by a very similar process to the UK. In Spain, in the mid-1990s, squatting was tenuously linked to terrorism before being outlawed. It is invariably rightwing governments that push through the laws, Dr Pruijt observes, often on the basis of spurious arguments. "I think it's part of a revanchist mood in politics," he says. "Everything that people hate is blamed on soft, leftwing politics from the 1960s and 70s - migration, squatting, Muslims. So it's revenge against what happened in the past." Pruijt has identified five basic reasons why people squat: out of deprivation and an immediate need for shelter; as a strategy for pursuing an alternative lifestyle (often by the middle classes); for entrepreneurial reasons, such as setting up a community centre or small business; for conservation reasons; and what he calls "political squatting" - as an arena for confrontation with the state. The categories often overlap, as with Grow Heathrow, but none of them are intrinsically harmful to society, Pruijt says. Some forms of squatting are demonstrably beneficial. In Dutch there is a word krakers - literally "crackers" - to describe the type of constructive squatter who fixes up damaged buildings. "Squatters quietly restore house" is a story that rarely makes the papers, although in the 70s in Amsterdam, hundreds of squatters moved into and repaired dilapidated buildings in the historic Nieuwmarkt area, and fought to save the neighbourhood from large-scale demolition and redevelopment. It was the beginning of a successful conservation movement in the city. Furthermore, squatters are often involved in activities that bring little financial reward but are often beneficial, Pruijt points out, such as music or art or community projects. In the UK that category now includes teaching, nursing and studying at university. Some would say all squatting was political, though. Property equals power, and squatting has been historically linked with the struggle of the dispossessed, anti-establishment movements, and the control of space. The practice is as old as the notion of property itself. The origins of "squatters' rights" lie in the ancient, unwritten law that if you could erect a dwelling overnight on a piece of land, it had the right to stay there - similar laws can be found around the world. As such, squatting was one of the processes by which European and even American cities grew, as makeshift settlements became permanent communities, which were often then appropriated by landowners and replaced with something more profitable. Particularly talismanic in the political context was Gerrard Winstanley and his Diggers, who provoked a wave of shortlived Christian communes in the 1640s. Winstanley questioned the very foundations of property ownership, and the class structure that resulted from it. Those sentiments run through the major postwar squatting movements: communist, anarchist, hippie, environmental. As a student, I squatted for three years in the early 1990s in the Leytonstone area of east London. Even in the halcyon days of student grants, London was expensive and squatting was a cheap option - with countercultural credentials to compensate for the lack of glamour, or hygiene. But there was also a political slant: this was along the route of the proposed M11 link road, which became a flashpoint in the movement against the conservative government's road-building agenda - as personified by celebrity crusty Swampy. We were getting a free place to live, but we were also fighting against the destruction of the community. Events came to a head on my former street, Claremont Road, which became the last, stubborn stronghold against eviction. In December 1994 (when I no longer lived there), it took several hundred police officers several days to remove the non-violent squatter-protesters. The appropriation of space is still a protest tactic, as shown by the Occupy movement today, but their gestures are largely symbolic forms of squatting rather than a long-term strategy. Protesters Against The M11 On A Rooftop In Claremont Road Leytonstone Squatting as politics ... protesters against The M11 In Claremont Road, east London in the early 90s. Photograph: Glenn Copus/Associated Newspapers/Rex Features But if squatting is on the retreat in Europe, it has exploded in the rest of the world. According to a recent UN estimate, some 800 to 900 million people around the world are technically squatters - over 10% of the world's population. The socio-economic conditions are different: these are overwhelmingly rural migrants settling on the outskirts of cities. But these are still people occupying land they do not own, without permission. Questions of whether or not squatting benefits society are redundant here; squatting is society. In Mumbai, India, for example, slum-dwellers represent roughly 60% of the population. In Turkish cities, it is roughly 50%, Brazilian cities, 20%. These squat neighbourhoods are often referred to as slums, shanty towns, favelas or bidonvilles. They are often characterised as grim places, with poor sanitation, high crime rates, drug gangs, and other problems. But it's often a misconception, says Robert Neuwirth, author of Shadow Cities: A Billion Squatters. He spent two years living in slums in four of the world's largest cities: Mumbai, Nairobi, Istanbul and Rio de Janeiro. "They're not criminal enterprises. They're not mafias," he says. "These are people, law-abiding citizens, workers. People who wait on the tables and clean the rooms in the tourist hotels. People help each other and take care of each other. These were wonderful places to live, once you step beyond the fact that they don't have a sewer system." In many cases, slum squatters are literally second-class citizens, with no power to improve their neighbourhood, and vulnerable to exploitation. In Rio de Janeiro for example, favelas are being razed in preparation for the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympics. But in other cases temporary dwellings have evolved into more permanent neighbourhoods, just as they did in pre-industrial Europe. Rio's Rocinha district, for example, is technically a favela but is no longer recognisable as such; it has multi-storey concrete dwellings, plumbing and electricity. "Where they can, you find people rebuilding their homes over 20 or 30 years, one wall at a time," says Neuwirth. "From mud to cardboard, to wood, to brick, to reinforced concrete, as they save." Torre David The 'vertical slum' ... Torre David in Caracas is a 45-storey tower block that houses some 2,500 squatters. Photograph: Daniel Schwartz/Urban-Think Tank Is this entirely different to the European understanding of squatting? For one thing, the two are beginning to overlap. In the centre of Caracas, for example, stands the Torre David, a 45-storey bank tower that was abandoned halfway through construction. It is now home to some 2,500 squatters, who moved in, completed the building and divided its spaces using found materials. It has been called a "vertical slum" - with its own shops, amenities, water and electricity (there are still no lifts). In the broader sense, what ties together these disparate instances of squatting is human beings' capacity to organise and provide for themselves. "Wherever you go in the developing world, and, I would argue with most of the squatters in the UK and the US, you're talking about a notable act of self reliance by people facing a system that does not provide housing they can afford," says Neuwirth. "This is something we should be saluting, rather than looking at it as some kind of horrific, criminal approach." "It's the basic paradigm of our time: we shouldn't trust so much in the state. We shouldn't trust so much in big companies, we should take responsibility ourselves," says Pruijt. "Squatters have pioneered this." It is difficult to see how outlawing squatting will benefit the British taxpayer. Squash predicts section 144 will cost the public purse an extra £790m in the first five years, due to greater demands on homeless rehabilitation, housing benefit and other government services. Plus police resources diverted to protecting properties and evicting squatters, and judicial resources diverted to processing and convicting them. "The legal aid bill was supposed to be a cost-cutting bill, but this one clause will wipe out the entire expected saving," says Blake. One phenomenon that has taken hold in Holland that's likely to come our way is anti-squatting - in which a handful of occupants are officially permitted to occupy an empty property, thereby preventing real squatters moving in. Anti-squatters usually pay a nominal rent, but forfeit basic property rights: prospective buyers can visit at any time and they can be evicted at a moment's notice. So technically, anti-squatters are second-class citizens, not far removed from developing-world slum-dwellers. Still, that's a better option than the alternative housing strategy the coalition is offering Alex Haigh: prison. Rocinha favela Rio de Janeiro The Rocinha favela in Rio de Janeiro ... squatters have installed plumbing and electricity. Photograph: Christophe Simon/AFP/Getty Images) What the squatting dispute boils down to is a split between those who consider private property to be sacred, and those who would prioritise the right to shelter. Few people would happily forfeit a second home to squatters, but nor does it feel morally justifiable for a nation to have an estimated 930,000 empty homes while people sleep on the streets. "We're facing one of the worst housing crises we've ever faced," says Blake. "They're cutting housing benefits, cutting provision to homeless charities, there's massive youth unemployment and property prices are unaffordable." Those conditions are not likely to change any time soon. Nor do continual promises of new, affordable homes look likely to bear fruit in the near future. Grow Heathrow is safe for the time being, since section 144 only applies to residential properties, but they are in no doubt the law will be extended to include commercial properties, including their community. Like all long-term squatters, they are now wondering how long they have got before they are thrown out and reclassified as criminals. Shapps' proclamation that squatters' lives were "characterised by gloom and anguish" now looks more like a self-fulfilling prophesy. "People are really scared at the moment," says Reuben Taylor. "There's a lot of fear and anxiety. Some people will end up on the streets, some will end up on housing benefits, some will find other places to stay, and some might go to jail. It's a big unknown." * © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

It's hard to wrap one's head around the number of possibleimplications this shift in energy extraction has. One thing seemsclear, oil/gas production will not peak any time soon. So neitherthe breakdown of fossil fuel civilization is taking place, or willincreased oil/gas prices drive the shift towards renewable energysources.So, things are likely to continue the way they are. Not really asustainable path, isn't it.FelixUS to become 'net energy exporter'Last updated: 7 January 2013http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/01/20131514160576297.htmlShale gas boom rewrites geopolitical rules, as US is set to producemore petroleum than Saudi Arabia within a decade.Some industry veterans believe it's the biggest development in theenergy game since 1859, when the first US oil well gushed from beneaththe earth in Titusville, Pennsylvania.In changes that would have been unthinkable just five years ago, theUS is set to become a net energy exporter in the next few years,thanks to the controversial process of fracking that is re-wiringgeopolitics and the world of energy.The practice of shooting steam and chemicals into shale rockformations to unlock energy sources previously considered marginal has"changed the world", according to one lawyer with more than 40 yearsof experience negotiating natural gas contracts."We are talking about increases [in natural gas production] of 15to 20 percent per year," George Washington University law professorRichard Pierce told Al Jazeera. "The US is now 100 percent independentin natural gas and within the next half a dozen years [North America]will be independent in oil. It will become a global supplier, ratherthan a demander, in a hurry."'Once-in-a-lifetime experience'New technologies to access hard-to-reach fuels mean that, in 2012, theUnited States experienced its largest rise in annual oil output sincethe middle of the 19th century, according to data from the US EnergyInformation Administration (EIA) released in December. Shale gas isa fossil fuel trapped inside formations of shale rock. Some of theseformations also contain oil.The expected 760,000 barrel-per-day increase in US crude oilproduction in 2012 is the largest rise in annual output since thebeginning of US commercial oil extraction in 1859, an EIA officialsaid in a statement.Fracking controversy"This is a once in a lifetime thing we are experiencing now," PaulFaeth, a senior fellow with the CNA research organisation, told AlJazeera. "The chemical industry is moving back to the US [because ofcheap gas] and demand will increase because of low prices."The gas boom has led to about $90bn in new investments in related USindustries over the past two years, including steel manufacturing,petrochemicals production and fertiliser fabrication, according to DowChemical's calculations.Since 2005, more than $125bn has been spent on shale extraction,including drilling and purchasing land, by the 50 largest US oil andgas companies, according to a study by Ernst and Young.High prices over the past decade, the flow of petroleum from eastto west, and the gush of money the other way has allowed Russia tore-assert its international clout and Gulf states to build up massivesovereign wealth funds. The shale boom has the potential to derailthose trends.In 2011, members of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting countries(OPEC) earned $1,026bn in net oil export revenue, a 33 percentincrease over 2010, the US Energy Information Adminisiration reportedin May. If the price of oil drops because of new supplies, or ifnatural gas starts to eat into demand for traditional crude, oil-richnations could potentially find themselves significantly less well-off."There will be significant impacts for security and global politics,"Faeth said of the shale boom.Blue-eyed 'sheikhs'Thanks largely to fracking, the US is set to overtake Saudi Arabia andRussia to become the world's biggest oil producer by 2017, accordingto a November report from the International Energy Agency (IEA).Should gas-dependent leaders, including Russia's Vladimir Putin or theEmir of Qatar, be worried? Will the wealth and power of steely-eyedex-KGB agents or white-robed sheikhs be overshadowed by a rebirth ofthe American oil man - a new breed of Beverly Hillbilly?"In the medium term, I think Qatar and Russia are okay," Frank Asche,professor of risk management at the University of Stavanger in Norway,told Al Jazeera. "Not [just] because they sell to customers onlong-term contracts, but because the infrastructure is there."Transporting natural gas around the world is more difficult thanmoving oil. Russia has pipelines running to Western Europe, whileQatar - the world's largest natural gas exporter - has shippingterminals in key Asian markets.Oil has a single, global price. But because of transportationchallenges, the cost of natural gas varies widely between markets:Japan pays more than five times as much for natural gas compared withthe US, according to some estimates. But that could change as newreserves are found and technologies advance."I think we are moving closer to a global natural gas market," Aschesaid. "It's only a matter of time, I think, until you see somethinglike a big super-tanker that can carry LNG (liquefied natural gas)around the world."Fault Lines: Fracking in AmericaIn the short-term, when prices are dependent on geography, theUS is hardly alone in tapping into shale formations for domesticconsumption. Other states that traditionally imported much of theirgas, including Australia, Argentina, South Africa, Poland and Chinaare also looking to cash in on the shale boom. But for now, the US isbenefiting the most from the recent gas gush.Water 'crisis'Environmentalists and some analysts, however, caution that jubilantpredictions from a country that consumes some 25 percent of theworld's oil will run into environmental constraints including globalwarming and a lack of fresh water."There is no question that fresh water is going to be a seriousconcern… the water crisis will be the next big crisis people will haveto confront everywhere in the world in the next few decades," Pierce,the energy lawyer and professor, said. "Limits on fresh water, to acertain extent, will be the determining limit on fracking capability…how serious a limit is hard to say."Extracting gas from one well through fracking takes about five milliongallons of water, the equivalent of between 800 and 1,300 truckloads,said energy consultant Faeth. Over its lifespan, an average wellproduces more than 4 billion cubic feet of gas equivilent - enoughenergy to power about 16,000,000 homes for one day. Mixed withchemicals, much of the water ends up contaminated after being used inthe fracking process. One well will often need to be fracked up to 18times, drastically increasing water contamination."The industry is not that transparent; we don't know exactly how muchwater is being used in different places," Lorne Stockman, researchdirector of advocacy group Oil Change International, told Al Jazeera."Public discomfort with the fracking boom is growing, especially instates like Ohio… I can't say if it will come to a head."Despite concerns about water quality, energy companies and supportersof unconventional gas extraction say the process is good for theenvironment, as it means "dirty" coal could be replaced by gas inpower plants and other facilities.The jury is still out on whether that's correct.A study released in the journal Nature earlier this month found thatfracking operations in Utah and Colorado leak about nine percent ofthe total methane contained in the wells. Methane, the chief componentof natural gas, is a far worse contributor to global warming comparedwith carbon dioxide, and the figure of nine percent claimed by thestudy is higher than previously thought."The methane emissions matter a lot in the broader scheme of things,"Faeth said. "If the study is right, the impacts of unconventionalgas [on the climate] would not be positive compared to coal… [Forenvironmental problems] gas will not be the long-term solution."The fracking process, which forces steam and chemcials into rockformations, has also been known to cause earthquakes in Ohio, the UKand other regions.Pressure on renewablesThe gas boom could actually hurt sustainability in the long-term, asinvestment capital needed to finance research into solar, geothermaland wind energy is diverted to drill for gas in middle America."You can't separate climate change from discussions about globalsecurity. We have far more oil, gas and coal than we can afford toburn if we are going to avoid catastrophic climate change."- Lorne Stockman, Oil Change InternationalIf natural gas prices remain reasonably stable, banks can get aguaranteed return on capital invested in extraction, making theshale game a reasonably safe bet that is popular with Wall Street.New, renewable technologies, on the other hand, often take years ofresearch before they come to market and a return on investment isnot guaranteed. Often pioneered by small start-ups, the next energygame-changer could miss out on funding opporunities, as the bigplayers are busy tapping shale deposits.In some respects, the industry has been a victim of its own success inthe short-term; natural gas prices in some areas are down more than 50percent since the middle of 2008, due to new supplies coming into themarket."In the power sector, cheap gas has hurt renewables to some degree,"Faeth said.Through 2013, analysts do not expect a lot of wells to be drilledin new fields, as producers focus on oil development and exploitingexisting wells. This slight downturn, however, is unlikely to last fortoo long.If prices stay low, power plants and petrochemical facilities arelikely to buy more gas to fuel their industries, thus leading to moredemand and higher prices. The key element over the long-term is thatmajor reserves have been unlocked in an area previously thought tohave hit its "peak" production, analysts said.'Leave it in the ground'Traders in New York and wildcat drillers in Pennsylvania might becelebrating the newly minted resources, as are security hawks whorelish the idea of reducing US energy dependency on the Middle East.But there is near-universal consensus among scientists andpolicymakers that these new resources should be left in the ground."No more than one-third of proven fossil fuels can be consumed priorto 2050 if the world is to achieve the two degrees Celsius goal" -the limit for averting catastrophic climate change - according toInternational Energy Agency data released in November. The IEA ishardly Greenpeace, and predictions from the IEA, an industry-backedbody, should be taken seriously, environmentalist campaigners said.Leaving massive amounts of cheap natural gas untouched, however, willbe nearly impossible for politicians in the US and beyond who arekeen to jumpstart recession-battered economies and end dependence onforeign energy sources."The advantages gained geopolitically [for the US] by these newsources are small compared to the disadvantages of remaining dependenton oil as a source of energy given the threat of climate change,"Stockman said."You can't separate climate change from discussions about globalsecurity. We have far more oil, gas and coal than we can afford toburn if we are going to avoid catastrophic climate change."---|- http://felix.openflows.com ------------------------ books out now: |*|Cultures & Ethics of Sharing/Kulturen & Ethiken des Teilens UIP 2012*|Vergessene Zukunft. Radikale Netzkulturen in Europa. transcript 2012*|Deep Search. The Politics of Searching Beyond Google. Studienv. 2009*|Mediale Kunst/Media Arts Zurich.13 Positions. Scheidegger&Spiess2008*|Manuel Castells and the Theory of the Network Society.Polity P. 2006*|Open Cultures and the Nature of Networks. Ed Futura / Revolver, 2005 |

FYIWe have launched 3 days ago Partido _X , the Party of the Future, a party with no faces and based in Internet.Astonishing results.We hope we can keep in touch with all of you for feedbacks and collaborations.All the bestXhttp://partidodelfuturo.net/en/ORIGINALhttp://partidodelfuturo.netFaceBook Fanpage:http://www.facebook.com/PartidoXPartidodelFuturoTwitter:https://twitter.com/Partido_XSome press:EL PA?S (shared 15000 times and 3000 comments):*Joseba Elola: "Seguidores del 15-M y la cultura libre en Internet ponen en marcha el Partido X" (8-1-2013)http://politica.elpais.com/politica/2013/01/07/actualidad/1357586962_260864.html (publicada luego en MEN?AME: http://www.meneame.net/story/seguidores-15-m-cultura-libre-internet-ponen-marcha-partido-x)http://noticias.lainformacion.com/asuntos-sociales/partido-x-no-queremos-delegar-nuestro-futuro-en-ningun-tipejo-por-eso-mantenemos-el-anonimato_ezuGrbrWnwBaCw3wetsqp/OTHER LANGUAGESLE MONDE (Francia): "Les `indign?s' cherchent leur place dans la recomposition de la gauche espagnole"http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2013/01/09/les-indignes-cherchent-leur-place-dans-la-recomposition-de-la-gauche-espagnole_1814441_3214.htmlINFOBAE (edici?n argentina):http://america.infobae.com/notas/64498-Indignados-espanoles-forman-su-propio-partidoILFATTOQUOTIDIANO (Italia)http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2013/01/10/spagna-nasce-partito-x-resettiamo-sistema-e-linizio-della-fine/465475/Blog LATITUDE de Jonathan Blitzer (NEW YORK TIMES, 11-1-2013) . "Democracy. Period":http://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/is-spains-newest-political-party-party-x-too-idealistic/Gabinete Digital do Rio Grande do Sul, "Gabinete Digital ? refer?ncia para novo partido pol?tico espanhol":http://gabinetedigital.rs.gov.br/post/5488/Prensa polaca ("Seg?n google el t?tulo quiere decir`Indignados espa?oles entrar en la pol?tica'"):http://wyborcza.pl/2029020,75477,13171003.htmlRT NOTICIAS (Rusia)http://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/view/83139-nace-partido-x-reiniciar-democracia-espanolaCR?NICA (M?xico):http://www.cronica.com.mx/nota.php?id_nota=720902MILENIO (M?xico):http://www.milenio.com/cdb/doc/noticias2011/522759173a7e9e33a16792faef8a81efP?BLICO (Portugal):http://publico.pt/mundo/noticia/partido-x--partido-do-futuro-quer-democracia-e-ponto-em-espanha-1579893Prensa rumana:http://www.ziarulevenimentul.ro/stiri/Stiri%20Externe/in-spania-a-luat-nastere-partidul-x--52763.htmlGlobal voices Online (English):http://globalvoicesonline.org/2013/01/07/spain-new-year-new-party-new-system/Global voices Online (franc?s):http://fr.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/01/04/133697/Global voices Online (italiano):http://it.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/01/spagna-anno-nuovo-partiti-nuovi/Global voices Online (portugu?s):http://pt.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/01/08/espanha-ano-novo-partido-novo-sistema-novo/Global Voices Online (en malgache, idioma de Madagascar):http://mg.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/01/07/44167/Global voices Online (castellano):http://es.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/01/04/espana-nuevo-ano-nuevo-partido-nuevo-sistema/__SPAINEuropa Press:http://www.europapress.es/nacional/noticia-nace-partido-partido-futuro-resetear-espacio-electoral-espanol-desalojar-hemiciclo-20130108143030.htmlEfe:http://www.diariodenavarra.es/noticias/mas_actualidad/nacional/2013/01/08/nace_partido_para_quot_desalojar_quot_hemiciclo_quot_resetear_quot_politica_103368_1031.html*"EL partido sin rostro" (Opini?n, 9-1-2013):http://elpais.com/elpais/2013/01/08/opinion/1357675789_303506.htmlRTVE:http://www.rtve.es/noticias/20130108/nace-partido-para-desalojar-hemiciclo-resetear-politica/597221.shtmlLA VANGUARDIA:http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20130108/54358886539/nace-partido-x-partido-futuro.html20MINUTOS:http://www.20minutos.es/noticia/1694253/0/partido-x/partido-del-futuro/reiniciar-el-sistema/EL PERI?DICO:http://www.elperiodico.com/es/noticias/politica/nueva-oposicion-ciberpunk-partido-del-futuro-partido-2288955P?BLICO:http://www.publico.es/448521/nace-el-partido-x-para-desalojar-el-hemiciclo-y-reiniciar-el-sistemahttp://www.publico.es/448521/el-partido-x-pretende-reiniciar-el-sistema-pero-no-explica-comoFirma R. G.:ABC:http://www.abc.es/espana/20130108/rc-seguidores-ponen-marcha-partido-201301081411.htmlhttp://www.abc.es/espana/20130108/rc-seguidores-movimiento-ponen-marcha-201301081411.htmlEL DIARIO MONTA??S:http://www.eldiariomontanes.es/rc/20130108/mas-actualidad/nacional/movimiento-crea-partido-201301081321.htmlEL DIARIO VASCO:http://www.diariovasco.com/rc/20130108/mas-actualidad/nacional/movimiento-crea-partido-201301081321.htmlLA SEXTA:http://www.lasexta.com/noticias/nacional/nace-partido-futuro-apuesta-politica-inspirada-15m_2013010800043.htmlCADENA SER:*"El Partido X apuesta por la transparencia pero esconde su identidad" (8-1-2013)http://www.cadenaser.com/espana/articulo/partido-x-apuesta-transparencia-esconde-identidad/csrcsrpor/20130108csrcsrnac_8/Tes*Juanjo Mill?s en Hoy por Hoy (9-1-2013, no s? si es lo mismo que abajo):http://www.cadenaser.com/cultura/audios/hoy-hoy-00-11-00/csrcsrpor/20130109csrcsrcul_1/Aes/*Opini?n de Soledad Gallego-D?az en Hoy por Hoy (9-1-2013):http://www.cadenaser.com/opinion/audios/soledad-gallego-diaz-partido-x-le-falta-claridad/csrcsrpor/20130109csrcsropi_1/Aes/ELDIARIO.ES:http://www.eldiario.es/politica/Partido_X-entrevista-programa-anonimos-15m_0_87841344.htmlTELE5:http://www.telecinco.es/informativos/nacional/Partido_X-_Partido_del_Futuro_0_1537725328.htmlLA INFORMACI?N"De los 'hijos' del 15M, llega el Partido X para "reiniciar el sistema":http://noticias.lainformacion.com/espana/de-los-hijos-del-15m-llega-el-partido-x-para-reiniciar-el-sistema_YU8tGaMWxMQTkPk96WTud4/Vi?eta de JR Mora: http://humor.lainformacion.com/jrmora/2013/01/08/partido-x/CUATRO:http://www.cuatro.com/noticias/espana/Partido_X-_Partido_del_Futuro_0_1537725413.htmlANTENA 3:http://www.antena3.com/noticias/espana/nace-partido-impulsado-seguidores-15m_2013010800069.htmlEL MUNDOhttp://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2013/01/08/espana/1357667341.htmlONDA CERO:Isabel GEMIO "Te doy mi palabra" (5-1-2013)http://podcast.ondacero.es/mp_series1/radioshow/ondacero.es/2013/01/05/00008/001.mp3http://www.ondacero.es/noticias/nace-partido-impulsado-seguidores-15m_2013010800069.htmlLA MAREA:http://www.lamarea.com/2013/01/08/el-partido-x-genera-aun-mas-incognitas-tras-su-presentacion/La INFORMACI?N:http://noticias.lainformacion.com/espana/de-los-hijos-del-15m-llega-el-partido-x-para-reiniciar-el-sistema_YU8tGaMWxMQTkPk96WTud4/http://humor.lainformacion.com/jrmora/2013/01/08/partido-x/TENDENCIAS 21:http://www.tendencias21.net/notes/Nace-el-Partido-X-una-formacion-politica-que-pretende-reiniciar-el-sistema_b5103271.htmlDIARIO SUR:http://www.diariosur.es/rc/20130108/espana/movimiento-crea-partido-201301081321.htmlDIARIO DE SEVILLA:http://www.diariodesevilla.es/article/espana/1433722/seguidores/m/fundan/partido/futuro.htmlINTERECONOM?A:http://www.intereconomia.com/noticias-gaceta/politica/llega-partido-x-intencion-reiniciar-sistema-20130108QUE.ES:http://www.que.es/ultimas-noticias/espana/201301081411-seguidores-del15-ponen-marcha-partido-rc.htmlEL ECONOMISTA:http://ecodiario.eleconomista.es/politica/noticias/4513820/01/13/El-Partido-del-Futuro-o-Partido-X-nace-para-reiniciar-el-sistema-politico-Entremos-en-el-Parlamento-y-hagamos-un-ERE.htmlDEIA:http://www.diariovasco.com/rc/20130108/mas-actualidad/nacional/movimiento-crea-partido-201301081321.htmlCR?NICA NORTE:http://www.cronicanorte.es/nace-el-partido-x-quienes-son/32945EL NORTE DE CASTILLA:http://www.elnortedecastilla.es/rc/20130108/mas-actualidad/espana/movimiento-crea-partido-201301081321.htmlNOTICIAS DE NAVARRA:http://www.noticiasdenavarra.com/2013/01/08/politica/estado/el-partido-x-irrumpe-en-politica-para-reiniciar-el-sistemaLA RAZ?N "Partido X, al abordaje" (Opini?n, 9-1-2013)http://www.larazon.es/detalle_opinion/noticias/622240/opinion+columnistas/partido-x-al-abordajeEL CONFIDENCIAL (9-1-2013)http://www.elconfidencial.com/espana/2013/01/09/el-partido-x-se-defiende-no-hay-que-confundir-transparencia-con-anonimato-y-privacidad-112481/EL REFERENTE:http://www.elreferente.es/actualidad/politica/nace-el-partido-x-o-partido-del-futuro-para-reiniciar-el-sistema-en-espana-23499YAHOO.COM:http://es.noticias.yahoo.com/nace-partido-x-desalojar-hemiciclo-resetear-pol%C3%ADtica-122819271.htmlTERRA:http://noticias.terra.es/simpatizantes-del-15-m-fundan-el-partido-x-para-reiniciar-el-sistema,449720b4a1a1c310VgnVCM20000099cceb0aRCRD.htmlEL TRIANGLEhttp://eltriangle.eu/cat/notices/2013/01/es_presenta_el_partit_x_que_defensa_una_operacio_ciutadana_de_desallotjament_de_l_hemi_33228.phpLA VOZ DE GALICIAhttp://www.lavozdegalicia.es/noticia/politica/2013/01/08/nace-partido-x-pretende-reiniciar-sistema/00031357662231040539452.htmEL LIBRE PENSADORhttp://www.ellibrepensador.com/2013/01/08/partido-x-partido-del-futuro/DIARIO DE CADIZhttp://www.diariodecadiz.es/article/espana/1433722/seguidores/m/fundan/partido/futuro.htmlDIARIO DE JEREZhttp://www.diariodejerez.es/article/espana/1433722/seguidores/m/fundan/partido/futuro.htmlLA VANGUARDIA. Columna de Manuel Castells "Partido del Futuro" (12-1-2013):http://www.lavanguardia.com/opinion/articulos/20130112/54361811362/manuel-castells-partido-del-futuro.html#.UPEaXiAyV2k.twitterNaci?n Red:http://www.nacionred.com/egovernment/el-partido-x-el-partido-del-futuro-que-pretende-reiniciar-el-sistema-democratico-actualEl Ventano:http://elventano.blogspot.com.es/2013/01/el-partido-x-basado-en-la-red-se-ha.htmlhttp://gallegojoseluis.blogspot.com.es/2013/01/15-m-ponen-en-marcha-el-partido-x.htmlGrund Magazine:http://www.grundmagazine.org/2013/como-poner-de-acuerdo-los-intereses-de-los-trabajadores-y-los-empresarios-no-se-llamalo-x/ICTLogy:http://ictlogy.net/sociedadred/20130108-hace-falta-el-partido-x-partido-del-futuro/Blog de Pedro Vaquero:http://pedrovaquehttp://www.elreferente.es/actualidad/politica/nace-el-partido-x-o-partido-del-futuro-para-reiniciar-el-sistema-en-espana-23499ro.wordpress.com/2013/01/08/democracia-dos-puntos/ELBlog de Susana L?pez Urrutia ("El Partido del Futuro, despejando la X"):http://susanalopezurrutia.es/WordPress/el-partido-del-futuro-despejando-la-x/Voz P?puli:http://vozpopuli.com/nacional/19595-llega-el-partido-x-para-desalojar-a-los-politicos-del-espacio-electoral-donde-estan-atrincheradosPeriodista Digital "?Tiene usted la m?s ligera sospecha de qui?n est? detr?s del Partido X?":http://www.periodistadigital.com/politica/partidos-politicos/2013/01/08/futuro-usted-registro-15m-ligera-sospecha-referendum-wikigobierno-iniciativas-legislativas-populares-partido-xxxx.shtml#.UO2yaogrTM0.twitterhttp://www.diariodeleon.es/videos/espana/nace-partido-x-inspirado-en-movimiento-15-m_37166.htmlhttp://podcast.ondacero.es/mp_series1/radioshow/ondacero.es/2013/01/05/00008/001.mp3http://sesiondecontrol.com/actualidad/humor/partido-x/http://www.lavanguardia.com/opinion/articulos/20130112/54361811362/manuel-castells-partido-del-futuro.htmlhttp://www.heraldo.es/noticias/nacional/2013/01/09/nace_partido_partido_del_futuro_para_quot_resetear_espacio_electoral_quot_espanol_desalojar_hemiciclo_217738_305.htmlhttp://www.elboletin.com/index.php?noticia=67822&name=nacionalhttp://ampliable.com/la-x-el-partido-troyano/

I owe you one, dear nettimers. I got one wrong Mr B is back. And oneright: Monti is leveraging the vatican pro-business center to haveaccess to power with a minority vote by the electorate.Monti (allied with old foxes Fini and Casini) and funded byFerrari-Fiat's Luca Cordero di Montezemolo by being a shadow candidate(he's not an official candidate altho his name screams from his CivicChoice - with Monti for Italy pretty banal grey and blue logo) in theupcoming general elections (Feb 24-25) is derailingBersani(PD)-Vendola(SEL)'s chances to government.While the centerleft coalition has victory practically assured in thelower house, in the upper house the electoral law giving absolutemajority of seats to the best-placed coalition calculates majoritiesregionally, and so the centerleft needs to win Lombardy (where alsoregional elections are held after the collapse of 'ndrangheta infectedrightwing catholic system of government) or another major region inorder not to be blackmailed by Monti & C into cedingprimeministership.Monti, who's breaking the promise he made to the Italian people andthe President of the Republic Napolitano (his mandate will be oversoon after the elections) that he would remain one year as"technician" and then go when elections were due to be called inspring 2013 (he dimissioned a few months before he'd be forced do), isnot only a contestant for PD-SEL (democrats+postcommie left) alliancebut especially detrimental for Mr B's splintering armada, who hasallied his scandal-ridden and fissiparous party once more with thenorthern league, by launching its new leader Maroni having similarcorruption problems in the party to governorship of the LombardyRegion. He's unlikely to win, because there's also a strong Monticandidate, while the centerleft features a decent candidate,Ambrosoli's son (the lawyer killed by mafia in the banco ambrosianoblack funds affaire) the should carry the day. Regional and politicalvote are likely to diverge in Lombardy, however.My forecast is the Mummy aka Mr B and its team of green shirts areheading toward an electoral rout, that will hopefully eradicate theirnefarious influence on spaghetti politics for a long time. The bigissue that remains is however that of austerity. As youth unemploymentskyrockets to Spanish and Greek levels and poverty and cuts incosumption are spreading alarmingly thanks toProfessor-turned-eurocrat Monti's cuts in spending and tax raises,what's finally at state in the Italian elections is the continuationof this recessionary course of economic policy or a finallyexpasionary way (that is, keynesian rather than neoliberal) of lookingat the European crisis. My hope is that Monti's elitist politicalexperiment (he has asked Bersani to "silence" the left wing of hisparty and coalition and has spoken to a selected audience of FIATworkers in the company of CEO Marchionne while the metalworkers' unionwas locked out of the plant, in one his last days in office) will fallflat, which would mean 10% or below. But don't count on it.Anyway the real left lies elsewhere and this is true in Italy aseverywhere else in Europe. Real-world lefties should reconstruct outof radical democratic movements via their horizontal ways ofdecision-making a left worthy of its name and the realities of the21st century. If the comedian Grillo did it in Italy with its 5starmovement, can't we do a EU DRY (Real Democracy in Europe Now) thatremakes what is meant by left today.

On January 6, 2011, Swartz was arrested in connection with systematicdownloading of academic journal articles from JSTOR, which became thesubject of a federal investigation.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_SwartzRIP, Aaron SwartzCory Doctorow at 4:53 am Sat, Jan 12http://boingboing.net/2013/01/12/rip-aaron-swartz.htmlLessig Blog, v2Prosecutor as bullyhttp://lessig.tumblr.com/post/40347463044/prosecutor-as-bullyF2C2012: Aaron Swartz keynote - "How we stopped SOPA"http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Fgh2dFngFsg#!FN +91-832-2409490 or +91-9822122436 fn-L0usHwIw0nmGglJvpFV4uA< at >public.gmane.orgAudio recordings (mostly from Goa): http://bit.ly/GoaRecordingsGoa,1556 http://www.scribd.com/doc/76671049/Goa1556-Catalogue-Books-from-Goa

SWITZERLAND: THE MOST AFFLUENT COUNTRY ON EARTH IN THE YEAR 2013 (according to The Economist) restricts migration and asylum for refugeesfor the illustrated version see my Flickr Swift News-Tableau pagehttp://flic.kr/p/dLuywF------------------------------------BEST COUNTRY TO BE BORN IN 2013 = SWITZERLAND according to the The Economist Intelligence Unit ranking system. (1)The highest number of asylum seekers in Switzerland (according to the Neue Züricher Zeitung of January the 12th, 2013, do come from Eritrea (a country that does not rank within the first 80 countries in the world in order of living standards), Nigeria (ranks 80), Tunisia (ranks 59), Serbia (ranks 54), Afghanistan (does not rank in the first 80), Syria(ranks 73) and Macedonia (does not rank in the first 80). There were 28.600 asylum seekers in Switzerland in the year 2012. (2)There has always been an often invisible dividing line between human rights and economic reasons for migration, like the colours of the rainbow. More prosperity elsewhere, means less migration here. Sometimes the position of countries in our global communicative vessel system changes from receiving to sending. This has happened so often in a past nobody wants to remember. How many thousands of people from the Netherlands emigrated right after World War II to Australia, Canada and the United States? Let alone to call to mind the colonial and neo-colonial migration movements many of the European countries have been taken part in.It needs courage and desperation to leave your home, as most human societies have become used to a sedentary life style and thus develop all kind of attachments to the place where they have been born and raised. Time for The Economist to also publish a list and map of...WORST COUNTRY TO BE BORN IN 2013...to make the inhabitants of the high up countries in the Best Country List realise why they have become THE PROMISED LAND... for others.---(1) <a href="http://www.economist.com/news/21566430-where-be-born-2013-lottery-life" rel="nofollow">www.economist.com/news/21566430-where-be-born-2013-lotter...</a>(2) <a href="http://www.nzz.ch/aktuell/schweiz/hoechste-asylzahlen-seit-dem-kosovokrieg-1.17934897" rel="nofollow">www.nzz.ch/aktuell/schweiz/hoechste-asylzahlen-seit-dem-k...</a>(3) <a href="http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss_news/Rights_groups_urge_fair_asylum_procedure.html?cid=33945824" rel="nofollow">www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss_news/Rights_groups_urge_fair_a...</a>Tjebbe van TijenImaginary Museum Projectsdramatising historical informationhttp://imaginarymuseum.orgweb-blog: The Limping Messengerhttp://limpingmessenger.wordpress.com/Flickr: Swift News Tableaus by Tjebbe van Tijenhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/7141213< at >N04/sets/72157630468570982/

I must admit, I'm thinking about joining Facebook. It's such agiant social experiment. The main direction seems to be to totallyobliterate the difference between advertisement and virtually allother forms of speech.In many ways, it has already achieved this, but only on a sociallevel, turning everyone into avid self-promoters, collecting friendsand likes, and more or less subtlety suggesting that everyone shouldthink with every post "is this really the image of myself I want topresent?"Now, of course, pressure to monetize this new type of advertisingis mounting. There are shareholders to feed. One way to do so is toenable paying customers to bypass personal filters and enter people'sprivate spaces directly. At this point, two price points have beensuggested. $ 1 for normal people's private space, $100 for MarcZuckerberg's. But if you accept the idea of price differentiationhere, there is no reason why this could not be done more fine grained.Indeed, this can be done with infinite granularity and, of course,based on real-time algorithms.So, while now, everyone has a dynamic friend count, it's not farfetched that sooner or later, this will be accompanied by a price tagfor personal communication. It's kind of like a inverted speakers feefor everyone. Yet another form of democratization by media. Athens, weare coming.FelixFriday, Jan 11, 2013 10:20 PM CETFacebook’s perfect spam laboratoryWhat's really behind the company's scheme to charge $100 for the right to message CEO Mark ZuckerbergBy Andrew Leonardhttp://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/facebooks_perfect_spam_laboratory/Every day has its own Facebook outrage story. Friday’s entry:Mashable’s discovery that the social media network was offering usersthe opportunity to send a direct message to Mark Zuckerberg’s inboxfor the low, low price of $100.Actually sounds pretty steep, no? Certainly a far cry from December’sFacebook announcement that it was testing out a much more inexpensivesystem that would charge only $1 to make sure your message gotthrough, instead of being relegated to Facebook’s mostly hidden“Other” inbox.So what is it? A buck or a Benjamin? Or do “famous” people simplycommand higher price points? The Week got Facebook to shed some light: In a statement, a Facebook spokesperson says, “We are testingsome extreme price points to see what works to filter spam.” Inother words, the fee is an attempt to discourage people from sendingannoying messages to people they don’t know.Facebook’s explanation might seem reassuring on the surface, but isactually cause for alarm.Yes, spam would not exist in its present form if marketers werecharged for every email they vomited out into the void. So there’s noquestion that Facebook’s plans to charge for unsolicited messages tostrangers will cut down on the vast majority of spam that Facebookusers receive in their inboxes.But what Facebook wants to figure out is the exact intersectionpoint between how much spam we can bear and what people will pay tosend messages to strangers. Where’s the sweet spot that marks theborderline between an avalanche of spam that might (gasp!) discourageFacebook users to log in and a new revenue stream for Facebook?Facebook conducts such envelope-pushing experiments all the timeon its millions of users. I once had a Facebook spokeperson tellme confidently that the company would never follow the disastrouspath of MySpace, which overloaded itself with ads to the point offorcing of mass user migration elsewhere, because Facebook’s constantuser testing and monitoring would give the company ample warningwhenever it was stuffing too much advertising crap into our newsfeeds. Facebook’s always got its fingers on the volume knob, ready toturn down the advertising flow whenever the golden goose is in dangerof premature mortality.Of course, the worst aspect to Facebook’s strategy is that ifthey execute it perfectly, they can raise the volume of spam andadvertising so slowly and smoothly that we never quite notice just howmuch we’re being bludgeoned by marketing messages. In effect, Facebookis training us to be good corporate citizens, using our own observedbehavior to perfect their revenue-generating governance

re all,as some might have noticed or read, Dyne.org has been hacked andlulled a few weeks ago by the crewz at Everyone Gets Ownedhttp://pastebin.com/NnJ19iPz(beware the above is better read while playing your fav tunes of Autechre, Clock DVA, Ozric Tentacles, Chemical Broz or even NIN)In the E.G.O. release there is an interesting range of informationsabout the happy mess running in one of our public servers: you caneven use some of it to figure out some passwords and stuff. Damn.While the l33t sp33ch in the zine sounds quite l4m3 (c'mon guys, its2013, and happy new year!) the reader should be careful before judgingthis as a scriptkid gig, because to our analysis it seems to be aninteresting hack. EGO crewz have used a 0-day vulnerability in thewiki Moin Moin to gain shell access as www-data, something thataffected at that time a lot of more websites like the Debian wiki orthe Python wiki. Here are the details as released by the Moin Moincrews: http://moinmo.in/SecurityFixesAs of now this is a rather serious vuln, patches are almost all out,everyone should update. Our reaction to the discovery was simply toinform Debian and MoinMoin privately, nothing else. We were anywayhonoured to see a 0-day burned like that on us. Wow :^)The tech they used to gain the shell is quite serious, there is somesmart tunneling via Tor involved and cute moinexec.py shell, ingeneral a rather neat way to cut through our butter with a style thatlooks better in code than in their z1n3 l33t sp33ch.And they were also right in guessing that almost noone used Jaro Mail.Ultimately the E.G.O. hackers have been kind on us and have notbothered to damage or deface anything. Some people reported outage ofthe dyne:bolic webpage on reddithttp://www.reddit.com/r/pwned/comments/15ay04/dynebolic_r00ted/but that was pure coincidence since the dynebolic.org website ishosted on another machine that had an harddisk failure right duringthose days.In their release they speak about having rooted kernel, vendor andbugged our software with backdoors, but frankly that's not true. Wehave crypto hashes and signatures of all the software we distributeand controlling those everything matches. The server "Munir" which washacked had a lax security policy anyway because nothing reallycritical was in there.... it also seems that E.G.O. crews haven'tbothered to do root escalation either, but then we might be just wrongon that :^) and while our software users will still be safe, we'llleave those hackers keep a shell on our server, why not. After all,they seem to be able to get one anyway if they want.In fact, just in case they like to step forward with us privately, weare keen to have some exchange and even include part of theirinterested members in our network (yes, we do have some privatemailinglists, you might have seen then by now).At last, since as we mentioned the hack was done with proper tools andas of now a 0-day was burned for the lulz, we offer a reward of10.1337 Bitcoins to the E.G.O. hackers for releasing some of theirneat tools as free software, like the stuff they have used withus... if you do, just publish a Bitcoin address on the next zine,we'll pimp it up for your next golden teeth implant.that's almost all folks! now lets talk politics :^) we leave you withtwo quotes, the last one is a rather long text from the 5th issue ofthe Zero For Owned zine titled "Summer of Ham" where some knownr0ckst4rs were hacked. Immediately below another short quote. All thisbecause we agree with the rant of the often marginalized, so called"black hats": there are serious problems in the security industry,that the hacker community at large should address, maybe is the timeto bash the hell out of the manager cast and their fck'd up hierarchy.As Michael Abrash once wrote, quoting his colleague Gabe Newell: When he (Gabe Newell) looked into the history of the organization, he found that hierarchical management had been invented for military purposes, where it was perfectly suited to getting 1,000 men to march over a hill to get shot at. When the Industrial Revolution came along, hierarchical management was again a good fit, since the objective was to treat each person as a component, doing exactly the same thing over and over. [...] Hierarchical management ... bottlenecks innovation through the people at the top of the hierarchy, and there's no reason to expect that those people would be particularly creative about coming up with new products that are dramatically different from existing ones - quite the opposite, in fact. | \ / _\/_ Industry check .-'-. //o\ _\/_ -- / \ -- | /o\\ ^^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^-=======-~^~~^^~~^~^~^~|~~^~^|^~` We don't talk to police | We don't make a peace bondThe security scene is fucked. You have Dan Kaminsky lecturing you onhow DNS poisoning will destroy life as we know it. You have Matasanoharvesting talent and critiquing everyone, and then Ptacek can onlyannounce the release of....a graphical firewall management client.There's kingcope killing bugs and dropping weaponized exploits whilemaking no other contribution except putting a smile on the face ofkiddies. There's iDefense and their competitors selling exploits andonly doing research in how to make more exploits. There's Jeff Mossrunning a conference under the hideous misnomer "Blackhat Briefings"where the same researchers search for glory and present the same shityear after year. There are people who just live press release by pressrelease. And on top of it all, somehow you STILL have not got rid ofKevin Mitnick. The industry cares about virtualization one year andiPhones the next, every year forgetting the lessons it should havepicked up in the last.If you are just someone looking to pay a fair price to not get owned,you find out quickly that none of these people exist to help you.Very few people in this industry have their income model based aroundactually making you more secure. At best, some of them have it basedaround convincing you that you are better off. The very concept of "penetration testing" is fundamentally flawed.The problem with it is that the penetration tester has a limited setof targets they're allowed to attack, while a real attacker can attackanything in order to gain access to the site/box. So if a site on ashared host is being tested, just because site1.com is "secure" thatdoes NOT in anyway mean that the server is secure, because site2.comcould easily be vulnerable to all sorts of simple attacks. The timeconstraint is another problem. A professional pentester with a week ortwo to spend on a client's network may or may not get into everything.A real dedicated hacker making the slog who spends a month of eighthour days WILL get into anything they target. You're lucky if it eventakes him that long, really.Those things should all be very obvious, but whitehats still make themistake of discounting them. Look at Mitnick. Every time he gets ownedhe blames his host or his DNS provider. If he's getting owned throughthem, that's still his fault. Choosing a host is a security decision,it's just like choosing a password. If you choose a weak one youexpose yourself. It's still your fault.It's the same with outsourcing the development of yoursecurity-critical code. Mitnick could get someone else to make him aflashy website, and then blame them when it is full of file includevulnerabilities. People do this all the time, indirectly, by usingridiculous CMS or blog software. As an easy example, look atWordpress. Even easier, look at Wordpress in 2007. Horrid. Whenconsidering Wordpress, a blackhat starts reading the PHP, shudders andgiggles, and then laughs at the idea of ever using it on one of theirservers. A whitehat never gets that far apparently, they just installit and get owned. I simply fail to see how leading securityresearchers run all kinds of code that is blatantly dangerous. Arethey really that bad at reading code? Or do they just not care much iftheir passwords end up on Full Disclosure? If it's the second option,why is that? Why can these people make a living selling security whenthey make such bad choices? How do they maintain legitimacy? They takeless responsibility for getting owned than do the people who they sellservices to.There's a popular term for people who don't read code.We call them script kiddies.You cannot outsource blame. You HAVE to take responsibility for yourmistakes, whether they are mistakes in your code, mistakes in code youare using, mistakes by your host, or mistakes in who you trust. Theseare all security choices. Learn to control this shit. Learn how toread code. A lot of the time it only takes a very shallow audit torealise that the code is crap and is bound to have bugs. In a smarterworld, security professionals get paid to stop people from gettingowned. End of. These is no limit to the scope of an audit.Are you professional types really this out of touch? I see all thesepapers about how to protect yourself from these super-fucking-advancedtechniques and exploits that very few people can actually develop, andmost hackers will NEVER USE. It's the simple stuff that works now, andwill continue to work years into the future. Not only is it way easierto dev for simple mistakes, but they are easier to find and are moreplentiful. The whole concept of full-disclosure has backfired. It will neverwork. It's some slashdot hippie pipe dream. Even you dumbass corporatetypes should recognize this. If you're constantly giving away all thevulnerabilites you find, for *FREE* mind you (and what other industrydoes that?), and the vulnerabilites get harder and harder to find andexploit, it will get harder and harder for you all to do your "job".Frankly, I'm surprised that the non-disclosure movement didn't startin the security industry in the first place. In a way it did, bydefault. With full-disclosure, the security industry is all aboutshow and gloat, it is not about fixing anything. A lot of bugs havebeen fixed from it, but it comes with the price of an industry thatlikes to cripple itself. Projects run by teams of trained monkeys arealways eager to add more bugs to replace those that have been fixed.We hate the industry because it is full of shit. There are so manytrolls like Kaminsky who just desperately search for anything new, toget attention. So many talentless buffoons trying to scam theplanet. A lot of the actual talent out there is severelymisapplied. It's an industry tied to news and not results, becausevery few of you can even attain results. When you can't, who's thewiser? Your customers can hardly tell if you have really made themmore secure or not. Sometimes there are superficial benefits,sometimes there aren't. How do you convince the customer that they aremore ZF0-safe than before, if they were never targetted and probablynever will be? And you all lack the legitimacy to really do the jobyou should anyways. We can only expose so many frauds, the rest of youcan pretend you have changed something.Very few whitehats actually go out there and provide a service wherethey make people more secure. Not just for a day or a month. Are yougenuinely fixing the underlying design and logic flaws that generatesecurity problems for your clients or customers? If you actually cleanup every exposed security flaw they have, will they still be "secure"in six months or a year?We could go on. Just in general, the industry is failing.Flat out failing.You cannot even protect yourselves.----------------------------------------------------------------------

DELIVERY FOR MR. ASSANGE______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________A LIVE MAIL ART PIECEA parcel containing a camera is sent to Julian Assange at the Ecuadorianembassy in London through the Royal Mail. Through a hole in the parcel,the camera documents its journey through the postal system.The images are transferred to our website & twitter, where the status ofthe parcel can be followed in realtime.http://bitnik.org/assange/http://www.twitter.com/bitnk/!Mediengruppe Bitnik posted the parcel at 12:43 GMT on Wednesday, 16January 2013. The parcel is due to arrive at its destination within 24hours. Should the first parcel fail to reach Julian Assange, a secondand third attempt will be made within the next few days.We want to see where the parcel will end.Which route it takes and whether it reaches Julian.We just sent out the following message to Julian Assange.-------- Original Message --------Subject:Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:43:04 +0100From: !Mediengruppe Bitnik <connect-gyzlvN4RvWcdnm+yROfE0A< at >public.gmane.org>Organization: !Mediengruppe BitnikTo: XXX-Vu1+lsYFqecUuxhiZETOTNpPI6r2+5pS< at >public.gmane.orgHi Julian.We have just come back from the post office where we posted a packet toyou at the Ecuadorian embassy. The packet contains a cell phone, cameraand battery pack. Through hole in the packet the camera takes picturesof the packets surroundings and uploads them to our website.The Parcel Live:http://www.bitnik.org/assange/We will be tweeting updates of the parcel on twitter:https://twitter.com/bitnkThis is where you can follow the status of the packet in realtime.The parcel is a live mail art piece. It is intended as REAL_WORLD_PING,a SYSTEM_TEST inserted into a highly tense diplomatic crisis. Since youtook refuge there in June last year, the Ecuadorian embassy in Londonhas been the spectacular staging of an intense clash between theinternational order and freedom of information activists.We want to see where the parcel will end. Which route it takes andwhether it reaches you.There are over 9000 identical parcels! So, if the first parcel fails toreach you, we will undertake a second and third attempt.When you receive the packet, could you please:1. Show us your view of the diplomatic crisis unfolding outside the embassy2. Send the camera on to a person of your choice.We will ensure the tracking server stays online for future use.All the best!Cheers!!Mediengruppe Bitnikhttp://www.bitnik.org/assange/connect-gyzlvN4RvWcdnm+yROfE0A< at >public.gmane.org

[From the we're-much-closer-to-socialism-than-you-think department.]"Seriously, what's so funny about a trillion dollar coin?"by Dan HindMohandas Gandhi once gave a useful summary of the political process: "First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." Each tactic will be used for as long as it remains effective. After all, why would your opponents pay you the compliment of acknowledging your arguments unless they absolutely have to? The appearance of jokes, then, is often a significant moment. It marks the point where the first line of defence has collapsed.Before the financial and economic crisis, there weren't many people interested in talking about the mechanics of money creation and hardly anyone paid them much attention. Since then, the world's central banks have bailed out the financial sector with money whose origins were mysterious to most people, the Federal Reserve has launched three rounds of quantitative easing and the Bank of England has apparently thrown caution to the wind in its efforts to fend off a deflationary spiral.The recent flurry of interest in the trillion dollar coin is a sign of how far we've come. In the summer of 2011, Jack Balkin came up with an apparently wacky idea. He suggested that the American government could circumvent the debt ceiling by issuing a trillion dollar coin and depositing it at the Treasury's account at the Federal Reserve. The money could be used to meet the government's outgoings without any increase in borrowing. This last debt ceiling crisis has put the issue back on the table.A new discussionImperious silence about the mechanics of money creation no longer cuts it. Too many people have begun to ask questions about where money comes from, and why exactly some banks are too big to fail. Still, we are some way off the moment when a serious discussion of money will become possible. The present arrangements can only survive for as long as they remain undisturbed by general comprehension. Once we can think clearly about money, the game will be up for everyone who benefits from the current distribution of risks and rewards. This is something that the powerful have good reason to prevent, if they can.So here come the jokes. Jon Stewart on the Daily Show hooted at the very idea of a trillion dollar coin: "I am not an economist, but if we are just going to make s--- up, I say go big or go home - how about a twenty trillion dollar coin?" Stephen Colbert came up with "we should have known a coin was Obama's solution to everything. It was right there in his slogan: 'Change'." Last week America's big league satirists were serving up the next best thing to silence - the sound of high status laughter.The journalists were at it, too. Heidi Moore over at the Guardian called it "an elegant solution - if you are a cartoon villain given to sitting in a vast underground bunker and innovating plans for world domination while petting a white cat". Paul Vigna finished his blog at the Wall Street Journal with the warning that "if printing, or minting, money was a real solution to a nation's problems, Zimbabwe would be an economic superpower". Hilarious stuff.Moore also made what she thought was a serious objection to the idea of a trillion dollar coin: "The US mint probably doesn't have the capacity to create one out of real bullion". This was one of those illuminating moments when the Guardian and right-wing cable news were of one mind. Last week, Fox News told its viewers that a trillion dollar coin would weigh as much as 89 blue whales. And how silly would that be! Except coins don't have to be made of precious metal to be worth money, any more than dollar bills needs to be made from pixies' petticoats.Moore had the sense to acknowledge that, yes, "the mint could, on the direction of Treasury, just make a platinum-finished coin that bears the face value of $1tn". But, she insisted, that "would just create a nonsensical level of inflation in the value of the US dollar". Funnily enough, both she and Vigna were wrong about that. Paul Krugman points out that "printing money isn't at all inflationary under current conditions - that is, with the economy depressed and interest rates up against the zero lower bound".There are more problems with the idea that increasing the money supply is inflationary than Krugman wants to admit. Banks effectively print money when they issue loans. In other words, the financial sector is responsible for the creation of most of the money in circulation. To put it in terms familiar to Jon Stewart, banks make money up as they go along - trillions of dollars of the stuff. As the level of debt increases, so does the money supply. This can happen for long periods without any noticeable impact on the price of goods. The credit bubbles in the United States and the United Kingdom inflated at a time of persistently low inflation.Onto a different modelSo why do we let banks lend our money into existence and charge interest into the bargain? In theory, the profit motive makes bankers think carefully about who they lend money to and why. Productive enterprises and canny entrepreneurs will get the funds they need and the economy will grow. It's a lovely idea. In the real world banks prefer to lend money against real estate and other speculative assets. As long as the supply of credit increases, prices rise, interest payments are met and bonuses are paid. Everyone is a genius. When confidence collapses the government steps in to prevent a disaster. In the confusion the bankers run off with the loot and, after a brief pause, start calling for governments to take action to reduce their unsustainable debts. Hence cuts in government expenditure.The record shows that banks aren't terribly good at managing the money supply. Perhaps it's time to think about an alternative model, where those ultimately responsible for liabilities in the financial system determine where credit is allocated. That is to say, the citizen body as a whole decides what kinds of activities it wants to fund through the creation of debt and hence new money. After all, both the overall level of debt and the uses to which it is put are matters of pressing public interest. They are not particularly complex. In fact, as Galbraith says, they are repellently simple.But don't expect a rational discussion just yet. The US Treasury has now announced that it has no intention of minting a trillion dollar coin. For a while money creation will vanish from the news. The next time it appears we'll have to wade through some more gags about how silly it would be if the monetary system operated *as it in fact operates*. We are gregarious creatures and it is easy persuade us to stay away from subjects that those in authority insist are absurd. But ridicule will not obscure so simple a truth forever. Eventually the jokes will wear thin and we will have a fight - or a debate - about who controls the economy, a secretive state in cahoots with shifty and disreputable private banks, or a sovereign people.And then, if Gandhi was right, we'll win.http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/01/2013115152836161946.html

Software developer Bob outsources own job and whiles away shifts on cat videosVerizon's hunt for firm's mysterious hacker exposes 'top worker' at firm who let Chinese consultants log on to do his daily workguardian.co.uk, Wednesday 16 January 2013 18.12 GMTWhen a routine security check by a US-based company showed someone was repeatedly logging on to their computer system from China, it naturally sent alarm bells ringing. Hackers were suspected and telecoms experts were called in.It was only after a thorough investigation that it was revealed that the culprit was not a hacker, but "Bob" (not his real name), an "inoffensive and quiet" family man and the company's top-performing programmer, who could be seen toiling at his desk day after day and staring diligently at his monitor.For Bob had come up with the idea of outsourcing his own job – to China. So, while a Chinese consulting firm got on with the job he was paid to do, on less than one-fifth of his salary, he whiled away his working day surfing Reddit, eBay and Facebook.The extraordinary story has been revealed by Andrew Valentine, senior investigator at US telecoms firm Verizon Business, on its website, securityblog.verizonbusiness.com.Verizon's risk team was called by the unnamed critical infrastructure company last year, "asking for our help in understanding some anomalous activity that they were witnessing in their VPN logs", wrote Valentine.The company had begun to allow its software developers to occasionally work from home and so had set up "a fairly standard VPN [virtual private network] concentrator" to facilitate remote access.When its IT security department started actively monitoring logs being generated at the VPN, "What they found startled and surprised them: an open and active VPN connection from Shenyang, China! As in this connection was live when they discovered it," wrote Valentine.What was more, the developer whose credentials were being used was sitting at his desk in the office."Plainly stated, the VPN logs showed him logged in from China, yet the employee is right there, sitting at his desk, staring into his monitor."Verizon's investigators discovered "almost daily connections from Shenyang, and occasionally these connections spanned the entire workday".The employee, whom Valentine calls Bob, was in his mid-40s, a "family man, inoffensive and quiet. Someone you wouldn't look twice at in an elevator."But an examination of his workstation revealed hundreds of pdf invoices from a third party contractor/developer in Shenyang."As it turns out, Bob had simply outsourced his own job to a Chinese consulting firm. Bob spent less than one-fifth of his six-figure salary for a Chinese firm to do his job for him."He had physically FedExed his security RSA "token", needed to access the VPN, to China so his surrogates could log in as him.When the company checked his web-browsing history, a typical "work day" for Bob was: 9am, arrive and surf Reddit for a couple of hours, watch cat videos; 11.30am, take lunch; 1pm, eBay; 2pm-ish, Facebook updates, LinkedIn; 4.40pm–end of day, update email to management; 5pm, go home.The evidence, said Valentine, even suggested he had the same scam going across multiple companies in the area."All told, it looked like he earned several hundred thousand dollars a year, and only had to pay the Chinese consulting firm about fifty grand annually".Meanwhile, his performance review showed that, for several years in a row, Bob had received excellent remarks for his codes which were "clean, well written and submitted in a timely fashion"."Quarter after quarter, his performance review noted him as the best developer in the building," wrote Valentine.Bob no longer works for the company.

Let us honour Aaron by continuing his work, collectively.Aaron Swartz: Guerilla Open Access Manifesto(https://gist.github.com/4535453) • •Information is power. But like all power, there are those who want to keepit for themselves. The world’s entire scientific and cultural heritage,published over centuries in books and journals, is increasingly beingdigitized and locked up by a handful of private corporations. Want to readthe papers featuring the most famous results of the sciences? You’ll needto send enormous amounts to publishers like Reed Elsevier.There are those struggling to change this. The Open Access Movement hasfought valiantly to ensure that scientists do not sign their copyrightsaway but instead ensure their work is published on the Internet, underterms that allow anyone to access it. But even under the best scenarios,their work will only apply to things published in the future. Everythingup until now will have been lost.That is too high a price to pay. Forcing academics to pay money to readthe work of their colleagues? Scanning entire libraries but only allowingthe folks at Google to read them? Providing scientific articles to thoseat elite universities in the First World, but not to children in theGlobal South? It’s outrageous and unacceptable.“I agree,” many say, “but what can we do? The companies hold thecopyrights, they make enormous amounts of money by charging for access,and it’s perfectly legal — there’s nothing we can do to stop them.” Butthere is something we can, something that’s already being done: we canfight back.Those with access to these resources — students, librarians, scientists —you have been given a privilege. You get to feed at this banquet ofknowledge while the rest of the world is locked out. But you need not —indeed, morally, you cannot — keep this privilege for yourselves. You havea duty to share it with the world. And you have: trading passwords withcolleagues, filling download requests for friends.Meanwhile, those who have been locked out are not standing idly by. Youhave been sneaking through holes and climbing over fences, liberating theinformation locked up by the publishers and sharing them with yourfriends.But all of this action goes on in the dark, hidden underground. It’scalled stealing or piracy, as if sharing a wealth of knowledge were themoral equivalent of plundering a ship and murdering its crew. But sharingisn’t immoral — it’s a moral imperative. Only those blinded by greed wouldrefuse to let a friend make a copy.Large corporations, of course, are blinded by greed. The laws under whichthey operate require it — their shareholders would revolt at anythingless. And the politicians they have bought off back them, passing lawsgiving them the exclusive power to decide who can make copies.There is no justice in following unjust laws. It’s time to come into thelight and, in the grand tradition of civil disobedience, declare ouropposition to this private theft of public culture.We need to take information, wherever it is stored, make our copies andshare them with the world. We need to take stuff that's out of copyrightand add it to the archive. We need to buy secret databases and put them onthe Web. We need to download scientific journals and upload them to filesharing networks. We need to fight for Guerilla Open Access.With enough of us, around the world, we’ll not just send a strong messageopposing the privatization of knowledge — we’ll make it a thing of thepast. Will you join us?Aaron SwartzJuly 2008, Eremo, Italy

*Thanks for the idea*, Mark. Nettimers can check out the human economyprogram at http://web.up.ac.za/humaneconomy.Ronald * *Coase, an American economist of British origin, won a Nobel prizefor inventing the idea of transaction costs in his famous paper "The natureof the firm" (1937). He is now 102 years old and has just announced hisdesire, with a young Chinese associate, to found a new journal called "Manand the economy" (well he was born in 1910).A century ago, Alfred Marshall, author of Principles of Economics (1890)and Keynes' teacher at Cambridge defined economics as ?both a study ofwealth and a branch of the study of man?. But, in a manifesto published inthe Harvard Business Review last month, "saving economics from theeconomists" http://hbr.org/2012/12/saving-economics-from-the-economists/ar/1,Coase argues that "The degree to which economics is isolated from theordinary business of life is extraordinary and unfortunate.""In the 20th century, economics consolidated as a profession; economistscould afford to write exclusively for one another. At the same time, thefield experienced a paradigm shift, gradually identifying itself as atheoretical approach of economization and giving up the real-world economyas its subject matter. Today, production is marginalized in economics, andthe paradigmatic question is a rather static one of resource allocation.The tools used by economists to analyze business firms are too abstract andspeculative...This separation of economics from the working economy hasseverely damaged both the business community and the academic discipline.Since economics offers little in the way of practical insight, managers andentrepreneurs depend on their own business acumen, personal judgment, andrules of thumb in making decisions"."Economics thus becomes a convenient instrument the state uses to managethe economy, rather than a tool the public turns to for enlightenment abouthow the economy operates. But because it is no longer firmly grounded insystematic empirical investigation of the working of the economy, it ishardly up to the task.""At a time when the modern economy is becoming increasinglyinstitutions-intensive, the reduction of economics to price theory istroubling enough. It is suicidal for the field to slide into a hard scienceof choice, ignoring the influences of society, history, culture, andpolitics on the working of the economy. It is time to reengage the severelyimpoverished field of economics with the economy. Market economiesspringing up in China, India, Africa, and elsewhere herald a new era ofentrepreneurship, and with it unprecedented opportunities for economists tostudy how the market economy gains its resilience in societies withcultural, institutional, and organizational diversities. But knowledge willcome only if economics can be reoriented to the study of man as he is andthe economic system as it actually exists."There is also an article on all this in Businessweek last November, "urgingeconomists to step away from the blackboard" http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-11-29/urging-economists-to-step-away-from-the-blackboard.