Home
Krass Kommentator's Journal
 
 [Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View] [Friends]

Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in Krass Kommentator's LiveJournal:

    [ << Previous 20 ]
    Sunday, November 16th, 2003
    2:03 pm
    In which I tire, again, of die-hard republicans relying on extreme pedantry to exonerate Bush for his misleading justification of war to the American people. Not that I'm saying Bush is a liar:

    "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -Hanlon's Razor
    11:13 am
    Wednesday, October 15th, 2003
    10:45 am
    "It Works"

    What did I say, huh? What did I say? Did I say Bush's policies, however ill-intentioned and poorly-executed you may believe them to be, are working? Did I say that?

    Here's Reuters saying it:

    Palestinians Dread America's Wrath After Bombing

    By Nidal al-Mughrabi, 10/15/2003

    JABALYA, Gaza Strip (Reuters) - Palestinians said they feared retribution from the United States after three American security guards were killed in a bomb attack on a U.S. embassy convoy in the Gaza Strip Wednesday. The blast occurred on the edge of the large Jabalya refugee camp near Gaza City, a stronghold for Palestinian militants involved in a three-year-old uprising against Israel for statehood that began after U.S.-brokered peace talks collapsed.

    ...

    Bush's policy obviously wasn't effective at preventing this attack... but now tons of self-proclaimed "Palestinians" are rushing to make amends, to decry this action, to deflect Bush's wrath. Striking first might still qualify as "bullying" or "imperialism," but there's no question that it is still working. Some choice quotes:

    • "'I condemn the act completely and I believe all Palestinians are against it and reject it,' said Reyad al-Agha, head of Gaza City's al-Azhar University."
    • "Militant groups denied responsibility for the bombing... and it was condemned by Palestinian officials including President Yasser Arafat, who said he had ordered an investigation."
    • "'It (the bombing) could have happened by mistake. Maybe the target was Israeli tanks who frequently raid our areas. But we fear the U.S. will react through Israel's army,' said Mohammed Mesleh, a municipal worker among onlookers at the bombing scene."
    • "'It is not ideal to win America's enmity but unfortunately many people all over the world are extremely angry at U.S. policies against the Palestinian people,' said tailor Imad Taha."

    Now, I understand that being the biggest bully isn't going to work as a long-term deterrence. I certainly do not advocate reliance upon that technique only. I certainly have many complaints about the way it's been carried out so far. I believe "shock and awe" is terrorism. I think that violent enforcement must be tempered by careful targeting and accompanied by obvious humanitarian support of peaceful civilians. However, one would be foolish to ignore the reactions we're getting from Muslims all over the world who seek to distance themselves from the militant fanatics among them.

    Monday, October 6th, 2003
    9:40 am
    The Value of Deterrence

    From the next-to-last paragraph of this news story, "Israel Bombs Syria:"

    In recent months, Syrians have been worried about becoming Washington's next target for "regime change."

    While I still believe that imperialist policies aren't a good idea until we get our domestic situations straightened out, it would appear that Bush's policy buzzword is, in fact, having the desired effect. The "bad guys" are withering at a stern glance these days, it would seem.

    If I recall my history correctly, Israel's last incursion into Syria was a "best-defense-is-a-good-offense" attempt while they were getting their asses kicked. They marched to within a few miles of Damascus before Syria hollered "uncle" and pulled out of Israel. Thus, it seems a bit odd that Israel's bombing (northwest of Damascus, even!) hasn't erupted into all-out war.

    Except that Syria knows Bush has his eye on them. All he needs is one good excuse, and Syria becomes American Muslim Colony #3.

    Whether Bush's intentions are good or bad, whether one loves or hates him, one has to confess that his policy is proving effective. Some people like to make predictions and thrive on impending gloom and doom, presuming to see into the future. I think it's more fun to look at the past, and where we are now compared to where we said we would be.

    Friday, July 18th, 2003
    8:51 am
    Ray McClendon penned the following to Ilana Mercer, who is likely to be the object of my next celebrity crush:

    Makin' Bacon
    A Parson Mac Muse

    What's 3000 pages tall
    And eighteen inches thick?
    And guess who's given four whole hours to digest this fare and quick?!
    What has more fat, less lean than ever (And sure to make us sick?)
    Why, this year's annual slab of bacon
    Cured by Senators Harry, Tom, and Dick
    'Tis getting harder all the time
    To respect our "Fearless Leaders"
    Especially at budget time
    When they become our "Peerless Feeders"
    Their beady eyes grow close together
    Tailbones curl and noses flatten
    They crowd together at the trough
    And fatten fatten fatten.

    The latest Pork Barrel analysis
    Is bound to trouble you
    Just thank the Lord for consortiums like
    C.A.G.W.*
    Which yearly documents the facts
    In their yearly Piggy Books
    Recording all the mischief of
    Those D.C. Biggy Crooks

    Hope you're sitting down for this
    Exposure of Big Whig-lets
    Which show themselves for what they are
    Irresponsible Big Pig-lets
    And ponder massive irony
    Of lib tax cut complaint (the gall!)
    While they proceed to spend, spend, spend Sans fiscal restraint (at all!)

    What kind of leadership responds
    To terrorist-fiscal hardship
    To take advantage of increased need Like Sen. Harkin (His Lardship)
    A quarter million bucks to manage
    Preschoolers in anger mode?
    How to manage temper tantrums ?!?
    What a DIAPER LOAD !!!

    (You really must-you NEED to read
    This Oinker's Omnibus
    To see just how ELECTED ones
    Are boinking all of us)

    So as Uncle Sam responds to terror
    With exponential rise in spending
    Savvy porkers piggyback
    Pet porcine projects unending
    So order this year's piggy book
    (Which read will surely flummox)
    UnGODLY pork like this is bound
    To give us...
    ...Hasidic stomachs !
    (oy vey!)

    *http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer
    Friday, June 27th, 2003
    8:45 am
    More fun than those "how many differences do you see" drawings in the sunday comics!

    The goals of our coalition are clear and limited. We will end a brutal regime, whose aggression and weapons of mass destruction make it a unique threat to the world. Coalition forces will help maintain law and order, so that Iraqis can live in security. We will respect your great religious traditions, whose principles of equality and compassion are essential to Iraq’s future. We will help you build a peaceful and representative government that protects the rights of all citizens. And then our military forces will leave. Iraq will go forward as a unified, independent and sovereign nation that has regained a respected place in the world.

    The United States and its coalition partners respect the people of Iraq. We are taking unprecedented measures to spare the lives of innocent Iraqi citizens, and are beginning to deliver food, water and medicine to those in need. Our only enemy is Saddam’s brutal regime—and that regime is your enemy as well.

    In the new era that is coming to Iraq, your country will no longer be held captive to the will of a cruel dictator. You will be free to build a better life, instead of building more palaces for Saddam and his sons, free to pursue economic prosperity without the hardship of economic sanctions, free to travel and speak your mind, free to join in the political affairs of Iraq. And all the people who make up your country—Kurds, Shi’a, Turkomans, Sunnis, and others—will be free of the terrible persecution that so many have endured.

    Friday, June 20th, 2003
    8:42 am
    First-Amendment Rights, Occupation-Style
     Could this be Part Four?

    Homework lesson: read Coalition Provisional Authority Order Number 7, "Monitoring and Preventing Media Activity Inimcal [sic] to the Security of the Coalition Provisional Authority," and decide which of its principles are consistent with American constitutional concepts of liberty, and which are not.

    First, it should be noted that the CPA reserves the right to "license" the operation of all media in Iraq. This may be a perfectly good occupation strategy; I don't seek to debate that here. It's also important to note, however, the following activities prohibited by Order 7 (Section 3):

    Media organizations are prohibited from broadcasting or publishing original, re-broadcast, re-printed or syndicated material that:

    a) incites or has the potential to incite violence against the CPA;
    b) incites or promotes racial, ethnic or religious hatred;
    c) promotes civil disorder, rioting or damage to property;
    d) advocates support for the Iraqi Baath party;
    e) advocates alterations to Iraq's borders by violent means;
    f) advocates changes to ethnic, provincial or municipal boundaries by violent means;
    g) advocates alterations of Iraqi demographics by force;
    h) incites violence against any individual or group of individuals; or
    i) is patently false and is calculated to promote opposition to the CPA or undermine legitimate processes towards self-government
    Now, on the surface, I agree with most of these: they are prohibitions against inciting to violence or use of force, and as a believer in the non-aggression principle, it doesn't hurt my feelings too much. On closer inspection, though, I wonder about interpretations of these rules that could be contrary to the principles of free speech and press:

    a) has the potential to incite? This could easily be interpreted to mean any speech that disagrees with any policy of the CPA.
    b) promotes... religious hatred? Several on my friends list are harshly critical of popular religions. Could such speech be construed to "promote religious hatred" if a corrupt CPA official found it politically convenient? Absolutely, this prohibition would be a violation of the US Constitution.
    c) promotes civil disorder? Again, this could easily be construed to include any activity undertaken by those who disagree with the US, such as peacable assembly or petition. The prohibitions of violence I agree with, but this is simply too flexible.
    d) advocates support for the Iraqi Baath party? Again, no violence here; simply dissenting from the occupying force's viewpoint is good enough to get your newspaper seized.
    e, f, g, h) No problems with these, because they all hinge on physical violence, with which I disagree.
    i) is patently false? I believe that press should strive to report truth with accuracy, but of course, one has to question whether the CPA might interpret an editorial column with which they disagree to be "patently false" for politically convenient purposes. There's just too much latitude here.

    Of course, the real test of the utility of these prohibitions is, how are these prohibitions being interpreted today? The jury may still be out: we know that this order is being acted upon, and that newspapers are being shut down, and obviously the newspapers are claiming that they are being repressed for daring to publish criticism of the US. Without seeing the actual text that prompted the seizures, though, it's impossible to judge the integrity of the leaders making these decisions.

    I think it's wisest at this point to stop giving our administration the benefit of the doubt. Even in the US, the names "unpatriotic" and "anti-American" are becoming epithets to be applied to anyone who criticizes the government; I can't believe that our occupying forces are going to suddenly become men of integrity and strong moral character and always do the right thing just because they're far from home and can't be held accountable by their subjects.

    Part Four, out the door.
    Thursday, June 19th, 2003
    10:57 am
    Occupation Not Liberation, Part Three
     (Here are Part One and Part Two.)

    I'm going to post the rest of these to my own journal as they arise, because I believe I've beaten the point to death in [info]libertarianism. However, I'm going to try to restate concisely here, as the stories keep coming in and grabbing my attention.

    First, I think it's a good thing that Saddam is not in power any more. I also think it's good that the torture cells and rape camps have been emptied, and that the mass graves are being discovered and dealt with.

    I also think it's a good idea to give Iraqi people (all Iraqi people, not just those who seek the favor of the ruling party) greater liberty.

    I also think that it's a good idea to keep weapons (especially weapons of mass destruction) out of the hands of those who would use them to initiate violence against others.

    However: the intelligence used to justify the attack on Iraq to Americans and American allies has been demonstrated to be incorrect many times. Whether there are WMD's in Iraq or not, it's obvious now that all the satellite photos we saw on the news were interpreted incorrectly, and the reliable sources we were told we could not see were wrong, either through incompetence or malevolent intent.

    Also: the stated intentions for the people of Iraq after the defeat of Ba'ath leadership have not yet materialized, nor have we seen much demonstration that such processes are being pursued. In fact, attempts on the part of Iraqis to take advantage of their new liberation have been soundly thwarted. Today's article, Iraqis Were Set to Vote, but U.S. Wielded a Veto, is an example of just that:

    American marines had built makeshift wooden ballot boxes. An Army reserve unit from Green Bay, Wis., had conducted a voter registration drive. And Iraqi political candidates had blanketed the city with colorful fliers outlining their election platforms — restore electricity, rehabilitate the old quarter, repave roads.

    But last week, L. Paul Bremer III, the head of the American military occupation in Iraq, unilaterally canceled what American officials here said would have been the first such election in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein. Overruling the local American military commander, Mr. Bremer decreed that conditions in Najaf were not appropriate for an election.

    Now, this may also be a pretty smart tactic. After all, it's somewhat likely that if free elections were held everywhere in Iraq, some locations would elect Shi'ite muslim leaders that would impose Taliban-style religious rule rivalling Saddam's for totalitarianism, and some might even elect Ba'athist sympathizers to try to return Saddam to power. Could we have seen this coming? Perhaps.

    Should the Bush administration have told us that "liberation, not occupation" was their goal, when their actions indicate exactly the opposite? Clearly not.

    Once again, I'd like to hear the terms of the attack on Iraq debated again, as they were before the war, but this time considering not what the administration says in its speeches and to its allies, but considering only its actions, both abroad and at home. Are the remaining justifications enough to warrant the collateral damage caused? Do our actions support our intentions? Can we trust this administration to do what's right?

    Chapter three, out the door. I hope this is the last example, but if it isn't... you'll read about it here.
    Thursday, April 17th, 2003
    11:24 am
    Wednesday, April 16th, 2003
    12:26 pm
    Oh, those funny European anti-war protesters!

    Whether you were for or against the war with Iraq, you've got to get a chuckle from this:

    The ceremony was marred by protests against the war in Iraq, which has deeply divided the 15 current EU members. Thousands of anti-war demonstrators crowded the streets near the signing ceremony in the ancient Athens Agora.

    What began as a largely peaceful rally turned violent when several hundred protesters broke away, hurling gasoline bombs at police and smashing storefronts. They also set fire to a bank and threw rocks at the British Embassy.

    What's worse... this isn't the first time anti-war protests have broken out in violence. This incident is particularly ironic, though, in that the war is just about over. They've pretty much got their way already.

    Thursday, February 13th, 2003
    8:13 pm
    CNN cracks me up.

    A young lady just stood up on Talkback Live, asking Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical weapons "expert" guests which room is the safest in which to duct-tape-and-plastic-sheet herself in case of a nuclear attack. Yes, just a nuclear attack.

    Apparently the poor woman slept through high school, or has some other good excuse for not understanding the exact gravity of her situation in case of such an attack.

    Kind of funny... question after question of people wondering blindly what they should do, why the government can't keep them safe, whether duct tape will save them. Like they're wandering around in a dark room, bumping into each other, wondering where the door is.

    Shoulda bought stock in 3M and DuPont last week...
    Saturday, January 11th, 2003
    8:06 pm

    The RIAA's website at http://www.riaa.org/ has been cracked and defaced not once, but twice today. The first time, the typical front-page content was replaced with a list of P2P filesharing programs for windows, with a brief list of features for each and links to download the software... from the RIAA's website itself. Truly a clever hack.

    Now it's much more subtle, and even more clever: the front page is almost unchanged, except for the very first link at the top which reads, "A New Vision for the Recording Industry." The page it leads to (which might be down any second, if anyone at the RIAA bothers to actually read the text and report it) contains a manifesto several paragraphs long that, while not entirely the neatest English around, contains some of the most lucid prose on the topic of music industry abuses. It is a list of reforms the cracker says the RIAA is willing to make, and it's so brilliant in execution that I need to mirror the entire thing here for posterity:

    ( A New Vision for the Recording Industry )

    Ordinarily, I view website defacements as childish, trespassing, and damaging to property... but since this article is so much better than the original article it displaced, I'm more inclined to buy this website-cracker a beer.

    Wednesday, January 8th, 2003
    5:53 pm
    Propaganda
     Cute.

    First I heard that PsyOps were flying over Iraq dropping leaflets that told the Iraqi people how much money Saddam had, in contrast to how poor they were.

    Now a talking head on CNN is giving a description of Kim Jong Il, the resident badguy in North Korea, highlighting his exorbitant salary and his penchant for blowing it on good alcohol, in contrast to the poverty of his country.

    I'm starting to wonder if Net Worth Compared To Poorest Citizen is supposed to be the new metric of evil. I also wonder if anybody has looked at George W. Bush's net worth in comparison to the poorest in the US, and compared that to the ratios of other world leaders. There's got to be some meaningful trend here. Maybe the implication is that making more money makes one progressively more evil? Maybe the implication is that the folks in PsyOps and in popular media are conspiring to make poor people believe it, true or not?
    Thursday, January 2nd, 2003
    6:22 pm

    After picking a few fights about the Israel/Palestinian conflict in various communities, I wanted to save a few thoughts on another news story I encountered today:

    Israel raids Gaza camps

    Later in the Gaza Strip three Palestinian boys shot dead by soldiers after scaling a fence around Jewish settlements were buried in the Jebaliya refugee camp.

    The three - 14 and 15-year-old cousins Mohammed and Tareq Dawais and a friend, Jihad Abed - had left their homes in Jebaliya on Wednesday afternoon, said Mohammed's older brother, 19-year-old Fares said.

    Armed with a knife and two cutters, they talked about dreams of being killed in an attack on Israelis. "His only dream was to become a martyr," the brother said.

    Leaders of Palestinian militias said the boys acted on their own.

    In the US, when kids do stupid shit, there are usually two opposing viewpoints about what happened and what should be done. The mainstream media usually echoes the parents' lament about the influence of a movie or video game that promoted violence or stupidity, and sometimes a lawsuit against the "bad influence" ensues. The other viewpoint, which usually gets little airtime but is shared by most uninvolved people, is "good riddance... glad we got them out of the gene pool." The Israel/Palestine conflict is the only case in which I've seen the victims of the children's stupidity held responsible for their deaths.

    We don't hold cops responsible in the US when people commit suicide-by-policeman, do we? If people want to die, and they threaten innocent people in the process, I guess I simply fail to see what the problem is in helping them out.

    Monday, December 30th, 2002
    7:34 pm

    MSNBC reported on TV a little earlier that arms inspectors visited several sites in Iraq today, one of which was a factory in which the factory supervisor "complained about the arms inspectors' conduct."

    I got a chuckle out of that one. Apparently no one briefed the poor supervisor about the stakes of this inspection. Sounds like one of Saddam's henchman needs to pull this poor bastard aside and tell him, "look, if they're not convinced that you're not hiding weapons, if they have any reason to suspect that you're concealing anything from them... your whole factory is gonna get blown up, probably with you in it, along with the rest of the fucking country. So for Allah's sake, be nice to them!"

    Wednesday, October 30th, 2002
    3:26 pm
    Hatians oozing in
     Immigration seems to be a hot topic recently, covered by some in my friends list and on the news today, which contains reports about a boat full of Haitian refugees arriving and disgorging its contents onto the Florida shores. Of course opinions vary widely, but I'm intent on using the controversy to hone my fundamental beliefs upon which I base my opinions.

    As always, it's my thought that violent government prohibition of consensual adult behavior is a symptom of a problem. Forcing refugees (political or economic) back onto a boat to return someplace they don't want to live clearly falls into this category, as does the prohibition of Mexicans to get a job.

    Let me know if I'm setting up a straw man, but the loudest opposition to free economically- or politically-motivated relocation I've heard so far is concern for employment, welfare, and voting situations for current citizens. Everything else seems to be blatant racism.

    It seems plain to me that the employment situation should be a no-brainer in a free market; either you support the right to choose the best values from among all competitors in a free market or you don't. People who protest open immigration because it will "steal jobs" from American workers strike me as the same sort of people who would pass any law that decommoditizes their products and gives them an unnatural monopoly. Certainly I understand such greed, but ultimately it's wrong and detrimental to any country that plans to compete in a globalized economy.

    Welfare and voting are easy answers too, in my opinion: since the former is a creation of the government, and the government is a creation of the latter, just require proof of citizenship for either. If you move somewhere you are not a citizen, you're on your own. If you think you're getting a raw deal and wish to participate, either by receiving from the government or contributing to it, swear allegiance and become a citizen.

    And let's have a word about citizenship, shall we? I'm a big fan of not judging people or thinking less of them because of factors they can't control—race or sex, surely, but location of birth among them. Consequently, I'm freshly unconvinced that granting people privilege because of factors they can't help—location of birth primarily—is such a swell idea. Folks born in the US have never had to explicitly state their agreement to the jurisdiction of the government, nor offer service to the government, but still feel they have the right, through electing stupid leaders, to dictate the details of my life to me.

    These are the same people who are posting weblog entries and giving feedback to the news media to the effect that they don't think Haitians should be allowed to just show up and be allowed to find a job.
    Tuesday, October 1st, 2002
    12:29 pm
    Yeah... these guys deserve a government-granted monopoly! Yeah!

    Reuters: Music Cos to Pay $67.4 Million in Price-Fixing Case

    [...] In August 2000, 43 U.S. states and commonwealths said an industry practice called "minimum advertised pricing" (MAP), under which the labels subsidized advertising for retailers that agreed not to sell CD's below a minimum price determined by the labels, artificially inflated the price of CDs between 1995 and 2000, violating federal and state anti-trust laws.

    In August 2000, 43 U.S. states and commonwealths said an industry practice called "minimum advertised pricing" (MAP), under which the labels subsidized advertising for retailers that agreed not to sell CD's below a minimum price determined by the labels, artificially inflated the price of CDs between 1995 and 2000, violating federal and state anti-trust laws.

    [...]

    Brad Maione, Spitzer's spokesman, said the companies would not admit any wrongdoing.

    My ideas about intellectual monopoly have always been that any restrictions must be mutually agreeable to copyright holders and consumers. This settlement is obviously a symptom of a problem with the copyright holders' fundamental understanding of what copyright is for. With this sort of blatant disrespect for the consumer and the fair value consumers expect, should I feel guilty about not showing respect for their idea of value? I don't.

    Moreover, we're not even talking about people who create copyrighted works here... these are big corporations to whom copyrights have been transferred, and the constitutional ideal of "promoting science and useful arts" is completely wasted on them since they create nothing themselves.

    I don't believe one wrongdoing cancels out another, but obviously we disagree over what "wrongdoing" really is. As long as I as a consumer don't figure into their equation of ethical business in a free market, then I simply don't feel obligated to figure them into mine.

    Saturday, July 27th, 2002
    12:36 am
    Stop me if you've heard this one...
     President Bush and Colin Powell are sitting in a bar. A guy walks in and asks the barman, "Isn't that Bush and Powell sitting over there?" The barman says, "Yep, that's them." So the guy walks over and says, "Wow, this is a real honor. What are you guys doing in here?" Bush says, "We're planning WW III ". And the guy says, "Really? What's going to happen?" Bush says, "Well, we're going to kill 140 million Iraqis this time and one blonde with big boobs." The guy exclaimed, "A blonde with big boobs? Why kill a blonde with big boobs?" Bush turns to Powell, punches him on the shoulder and says, "See, smart ass?! I told you no one would worry about the 140 million Iraqis!"
    Monday, July 1st, 2002
    2:26 am
    Wednesday, April 3rd, 2002
    7:42 pm

    I just had a rather nice chat with Emmett, the CEO of xiph.org, the soon-to-be-non-profit organization that develops the Vorbis audio codec to compete with mp3... about economics and intellectual property.

    You see, he's just (and I'm very pleased to break this news before an official announcement is made) closed a deal with TheKompany, a proprietary software development firm that writes end-user apps for the KDE free software desktop environment, to provide working integer decoders for Ogg/Vorbis audio files which TheKompany can sell. This is useful stuff because portable devices generally do not have good floating-point performance, so this means portable Ogg players are right around the corner.

    First on the list is the Sharp Zaurus, a PDA that runs Linux.

    Now, Shawn Gordon and the folks at TheKompany take a lot of flak from free-software devotees for trying to sell proprietary software for a wholly free desktop environment... and as such, they've had to face some harsh criticism (often childish, from the Slashdot crowd) and have responded, unfortunately, with a childish retort that basically means they are no longer friends with free software and will not release any more free software under the GNU GPL. So the integer decoder they buy from Xiph.org will likely remain proprietary software.

    Emmett rather echoed some of Shawn's hostility today (to his credit, sans immaturity) and, as the CEO of an organization trying to pay rent (which non-profits still have to do), wondered aloud about Richard Stallman's free software "zealotry."

    I talked to Shawn Gordon today, he's actually a pretty cool guy. I think both he and I are very interested in not having RMS dictate how we do business. :)

    I have met RMS. I have spoken to him on many occasions. There is no reasonable man lurking inside of RMS. Why someone would pick 'software' as the 'this should be free for everyone, always' is beyond me. Why not bread?

    Seeing this, and having had this discussion many times before, I was more than happy to engage.

    He eventually conceded the differentiation between tangible forms of property, "services," and replicators, and acknowledged that trying to squeeze replicative goods into a rival-goods economic model was unnatural and doomed without the initiation of force to enforce it. I felt I had argued pretty effectively, but dropped the issue at that point.

    I was actually disappointed that he never asked me what economic model did apply to purely memetic/logical goods. I'd have given him several examples.

    The bad news, Emmett, is that I'd have told you not to expect a new car, or even to pay rent. The good news is that the value exchange is just as rich in the gift economy as it is in the capitalist one. No new cars, but when you give good memes, you get better ones back. I've encountered this several times in the last few weeks, and I'm psyched... several software projects to which I've contributed are blooming, and the results are fantastic. I'm proud of my investments in the gift economy; I can see now that it really does work. The problem with non-rival goods is not the economic model they follow by nature, but man's misunderstanding and misplaced expectations of it.

[ << Previous 20 ]
About LiveJournal.com

Advertisement