You don’t have to act that way.

On Slashdot, a technical discussion site, a poster tried to convince the readers that because the Free Software Foundation (which wrote the GNU GPL and is a big player in the free software movement) and the Motion Picture Association have the same power as licensors or defenders of licenses, one must see them the same way—oppressors that can squash your freedom to share and modify at their whim.

I don’t think so.

Continue reading

Japan bans American GM-tainted long grain rice.

The BBC reports on Japan banning American long-grain GM rice. The ban will remain in effect until the US can say the rice no longer contains the genetically engineered variety. This ban will not affect the majority of American rice imported by Japan which is short and medium-grain.

The US agriculture secretary Mike Johanns said: There are no human health, food safety, or environmental concerns associated with this (genetically engineered) rice.. Johanns replaced Ann Veneman as US agriculture secretary. Veneman received high marks from trade and industry groups and held the office during an outbreak of BSE or “mad cow disease” in the US. Japan reacted to mad cow by inspecting every imported cow destined for the food supply. The US declared it wasn’t much of an issue and shortly thereafter other cows were found to have mad cow disease. Johanns has his work cut out for him if he wants to make the USDA more than a mouthpiece for industry and corporate globalization efforts.

Getting back to the Japanese long-grain rice ban: Why are we genetically modifying rice? Is it ostensibly to get vitamins we could get by eating a better diet in the first place? Is it to grow enough food to prevent starvation? If so, that effort has failed; people lack food around the world including in the US. Where does one find the results of rigorously testing GM food to make sure we’re not eating things that will harm us?

You need to see “The Corporation”

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: The Corporation is one of the most underrated movies. I concur with C. Middleton who said

I believe this is one of the best and most important documentary films to be made in many years.

This is an extraordinary film about the creation of the American corporation, its legal organizational model, its global economic dominance and its psychopathic tendencies, and its incredible ambition to influence every aspect of culture in its unrelenting pursuit of profit.

After viewing this film, it becomes all too evident that these large corporations have too much power, whose mandate is not the common good of the people, and who will go to any lengths, legally and otherwise, in the pursuit of profit and the bottom line.

This is one of very few movies I can watch multiple times. When I return to it I find intelligent questions and responses. If anything, this movie (in its 3-hour form) is too short as some questions go unanswered. The movie holds my attention for the duration and I want to see more.

Continue reading

Apple building its iPod popularity on the backs of its abused labor force.

The BBC reports that despite Apple’s alleged zero tolerance policy for any instance, isolated or not, of any treatment of workers that could be interpreted as harsh, Apple has been found to support workers:

  • working more than six consecutive days 25% of the time,
  • working more than 60 hours a week a third of the time,
  • and suffering two instances of staff being made to stand to attention as a form of disciplinary punishment

I’d say at least two instances because Apple’s report was not independently verified.

I’ve covered why supporting Apple is a problem for the progressive Left. Apparently I was wrong when I said

If Apple’s workers are treated unethically, we can rally against their products […]

Will progressive Leftists care how Apple’s workers are treated?

Apple says the workload was excessive and will return to a normal 60-hour work week.

How about not giving the Democrats the power to screw you?

Molly Ivins urges her readers to get Bill Moyers into Democratic Party debates so that Moyers can not only show them what it [a spine] looks like and indeed what it is, but also how people respond to it. A guiding unstated principle of her article is that the Democrats can be reformed from within.

We’ve been shown time and again that this is how the Democrats end up getting votes. Here’s a better idea: stop buying into the corporate duopoly that screws you every 2 years. Stop believing that the Democrats will be your salvation. They depend on that to survive and pass laws which seriously adversely affect you. Stop giving the Democrats the power to railroad you into bankruptcy and get your kids killed or incarcerated in wars (including the ongoing “War on Drugs”).

Consider all of the candidates based on their voting records (or writings if they’ve never held elective office before) and their campaign funding (that tells you who their masters are). Write to them and complain about their stance when they don’t agree with you (which implicitly tells them that they are being watched).

Challenge the Democrats for overwhelmingly backing the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, backing away from universal single-payer health care, and supporting bad worker law (like the Taft-Hartley Act). Complain about how the Democrats and Republicans work to exclude competition from the so-called TV “debates” where third-party and independent candidates are kept from appearing by ridiculously high barriers to entry.

Apparently no country will fine Microsoft enough to change their ways.

Groklaw reports that Microsoft has been fined €280.5 million, the first time the EU Commission has ever had to do so. Neelie Kroes, EC rep, on the EU’s recent Microsoft fine:

“[…] it’s not the height of the level of the fine at a certain moment, but it is to give a clear signal to Microsoft that they have to deliver, that they have to stop their abuse of this situation.”

while trying to explain how a 3 million pound per day fine will give a clear signal to Microsoft which takes in 14 million pounds a day from Microsoft Windows client licenses alone. Microsoft is appealing the decision.

Phil Zimmermann: how the tables have turned.

Phil Zimmermann, initial programmer of “PGP”—Pretty Good Privacy—brought strong encryption to the masses. For three years ending in 1996, Zimmermann was under criminal investigation for violating export restrictions on strong encryption due to his work on PGP. Furthermore, PGP was not free software for everyone, only for those in non-profit organizations. Eventually GPG—the GNU Privacy Guard—was written by a completely different group of hackers and we no longer had to do without strong encryption or choose between giving up valuable freedoms in exchange for enjoying strong encryption.

Now Zimmermann has distributed Zfone, a program much like the PGPfone program years ago: encrypted voice communication in real time over the Internet. But there’s a huge catch: you give up a lot to get the software or (according to what the license tries to assert) use it. I only followed the registration procedure long enough to read the license, portions of which I quote below.

The Zfone software can only be copied “a reasonable number” (section 1a) of times, one is not allowed to make the software do what the user needs it to do (section 2a disallows modifications not specified in section 1), and one is disallowed from copying the software beyond what is described in section 1 (section 2b). Sections 2d and 2f prohibit sharing copies of the source code except in one circumstance.

Section 2e of Zfone’s license tries to set restrictions for merely running the compiled program (something the FSF once said couldn’t be done under American copyright law outside of a license manager or an encryption manager).

Section 3 of Zfone’s license tries to prohibit users from discussing “any security-related bug, problem, deficiency, or weakness in the Zfone software on any web site or other public forum, or otherwise disclose or provide any such information to anyone else” without Zimmermann’s permission.

Unlike PGP which at one time was considered semi-free software because it didn’t convey the freedoms to use, copy, distribute, and modify the program to all of its users, this program’s license tries to curtail one’s freedom of speech in addition to taking away one’s software freedom. Ironic that this should come from the man who was once under criminal investigation by the US Government (a time he refers to as “government persecution” on his website) in which he probably felt the loss of his civil liberties. I very much doubt that Zfone’s software would qualify as semi-free software. Zfone should be avoided. Instead it would be better to enhance free software VOIP (such as Ekiga) to do the job of sending and receiving strongly encrypted data, and making free software VOIP programs compatible with Zfone so that interoperability is possible without giving up valuable freedoms.