In memory of Aaron Swartz

Censorship: Internet vs "Real life"

Internet censorship and privacy by SMBC Comics

"You are all screwed."

Julian Assange warns users of mass spying systems being employed by governments on their citizens. Dictatorships and democracies alike spy on users of the most popular technologies, such as iPhone, BlackBerry and Gmail.



"What's wrong with surveillance? If you have nothing to hide, why do you care?", someone said looking at me as if I was some sort of terrorist. If you don't see the fallacy with this train of thought, first ask yourself why do you close the toilet door, then read Debunking a myth: If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Finally, have a leisurely stroll through this list of real life examples of Data Abuse... it might be quite a sobering experience.

Surveillance equals censorship

"The right to communicate without government surveillance is important, because surveillance is another form of censorship. When people are frightened that what they are saying may be overheard by a power that has the ability to lock people up, then they adjust what they're saying. They start to self-censor."

~ Julian Assange

Read more: www.rollingstone.com

RAP NEWS X - #Occupy2012

Rap News strikes the Zeitgeist once more, this time with the endorsement of Noam Chomsky and Anonymous.

Growing down

In 2010, four friend students concerned with the lack privacy of online social networks, such as Facebook, set out to create a decentralized, open source network, called Diaspora*. They quickly gathered enough support and donations to dedicate themselves to its full-time development. In November 2010 the first version of Diaspora* was released to the public.

In the evening of 12 of November 2011, one of the talented developers, 22 years old Ilya Zhitomirskiy was found dead at home! The following is one of the last posts that he shared on his Diaspora* profile... Rest in peace Ilya.

Us when?

Once a week, for the past few weeks, I've been hosting a documentary evening with friends and anyone interested in non-fictional "edutainment"... or a nap (you know who you are :). For a few hours we watch the movie, share food, have a catch up and sometimes a healthy debate about the issue at hand.

Decided by majority vote, this week's documentary was Us Now, which you can watch below. This one hour long, fast passed, picture from 2009, analyses online social networking and how this unprecedented amount of non-hierarchical collaboration threatens the millennia old pyramid shaped power structures still so prevalent today.

The movie goes on to explore the still untapped potential of this relatively new capability, such as to allow citizens to be more involved in their government's policy and decision making, by creating a system of direct democracy.

The audience of 8 agreed that the documentary put across an interesting argument but there was some scepticism as to the practicalities and the safeness of such direct democracy system. Some said they don't trust the general public with decision making, while others seemed to agree that a transparent and decentralised power structure is less corruptible and preferable to the current system. What do you think.

After a short discussion we ended the evening with a bit of classic George Carlin stand up comedy... or rather a wake up call disguised as comedy.


For more information, extra clips and reviews please go to usnowfilm.com

Watch Us Now in other languages here.

Buy the DVD here.

Voices of the occupations

A compilation of a few voices from the various occupations dotted across the world.

New York City

Toronto

London

Occupy demands and solutions

We are the 99%

As the occupy movement gathers momentum more and more aware people start believing in the strength of their voices (specially if in unison with others) as we create a human microphone that is drawing the image of the future as we speak.

However, despite the movement's relative awareness and clear dissatisfaction with today's systemic problems, as a whole, it appears to still not have a very practical list of demands. As we grow, it's important that we draft a set of solutions that will not just try to remedy the superficial symptom temporarily. In order to do this we must find the very root of the rot and inoculate the system against the greed and corruption viruses, for good.

Following are a bunch of suggestions (by a well seasoned researcher), which I feel would serve us very well indeed from the moment they're implemented. If you agree with them, please help bring the focus of the occupy movement to these demands by spreading them far and wide. Thank you for caring.

1. An end to creating money out of thin air on computer screens and charging interest on it (fractional reserve lending).
2. An end to governments borrowing fresh-air money called ‘credit’ from private banks and the people paying interest on this ‘money’ that has never, does not and will never exist. Governments (and that concept must change radically) can create their own currency – interest free.
3. An end to private banks issuing non-existent money called ‘credit’ at all and thus creating ‘money’ as a debt from the very start.
4. An end to casinos like Wall Street and the City of London betting mercilessly on the financial and commodity markets with the lives of billions around the world.
5. An end to all professional lobby groups that earn their living and their clients’ living from corrupting the professionally corruptible – vast numbers of world politicians and the overwhelming majority on Capitol Hill.
6. An end to no-contract government in which mendacious politicians can promise the people they will do this and that to win their support and then do the very opposite after they have lied themselves into office (see Obama).
7. An end to the centralisation of power in all areas of our lives and a start to diversifying power to communities to decide their own lives and thus ensure there are too many points of decision making for any cabal to centrally control.

99% too big to fail

Inspired by this years' Arab spring revolutions and sparked by the Occupy Wall Street protest, which started over a month ago, last Saturday 15th of October were launched synchronised protests in over 1500 locations worldwide! Many of which turned into full-time, long-term camps or occupations. There are currently over 100 cities in the United States alone and many other locations elsewhere.

The languages are many but the voice is the same. The 99% (referring to wealth inequality as owned by the 1% richest) is shouting; enough economic corruption and corporate greed! Following are a few pictures, of the Occupy London crowd, expressing the general sentiment permeating the global movement.

Occupy Wall Street Heroes

2nd time I've fought for my country. 1st time I've known my enemy.

The 99% are growing louder and larger everyday.

Scientists under attack

Scientists Under Attack is an investigation into the scientists researching the health impacts of Genetically Modified Food. This film is recommended for all those who love nature, and for everyone who eats. View the trailer here and buy the film here.

"When scientist Arpad Pusztai reported that genetically modified (GM) foods caused serious health problems in rats, he was a hero at his prestigious UK institute — for two days. But after two phone calls (apparently) from the Prime Minister’s office, he was fired, gagged, and mercilessly attacked.

When UC Berkely professor Ignacio Chapela discovered GM corn contamination in Mexico, he too faced a firestorm of distortion and denial that left him struggling to salvage his career. Find out how the biotech industry “engineers” the truth and what they are trying to hide from you."

How the world changed after 9/11

Ten years after 9/11, the main stream media is finally catching on. Hats off to the 9/11 researchers, writers, activists, for relentlessly waving the flag for so long... the flag of the false flag. Following is an excerpt of a refreshing article about 9/11, written by Charlie Skelton and published on The Guardian newspaper website.

September 11, he argues, was a coup carried out by a rogue network within the US military and government. A cabal of fascists, working with (and for) a banking oligarchy, "the old boys of Wall Street".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/sep/12/9-11-symposium-charlie-skelton

The unheard voice of the riots

When politicians claim there's something wrong with society, are they referring to the symptomatic riots or the real underlying problem?

While the political class chooses to worship the bankers and the elite and ignore the voices of those that are hurting and feel they have nowhere to turn to, the problem will not be solved. Here, an indignant Londoner speaks his mind and heart out, and gives his first hand view on the underlying problems that triggered the riots.

Regardless of time and age, history appears to keep repeating itself as if patiently trying to teach us a basic lesson; the bigger the inequality, the bigger the unrest... maybe one day we'll get it.

Another ingenius WikiLeaks move

O tabu emocional

A sociedade humana, em média, tem evoluído tremendamente nos últimos milénios. Os desenvolvimentos científicos e tecnológicos são inegáveis, assim como são os progressos gigantescos nos campos dos direitos humanos e da liberdade de expressão. Contudo, quando olho para toda esta passada [r]evolução, encontro uma área que me parece ser rodeada por um certo nevoeiro cerrado de tabu. Refiro-me aqui á evolução emocional, no contexto de liberdade de expressão. Enquanto que quase todos os aspectos intelectuais são encorajados na sociedade actual, a faceta emocional do ser humano parece-me extremamente ignorada, marginalizada e até mesmo reprimida.

Na escola aprende-mos a ler e a escrever, aprendemos matemática, história, geografia e biologia. Ou seja aprendemos tudo o que já para aprender acerca do mundo exterior. Mas quem nos ensina a nos compreendermos a nós próprios? Quem é que promove a auto-analise? Ninguém. O que não surpreende uma vez que o ensino escolar não existe com o intuito de criar humanos auto-suficientes (salvo seja!), mas sim humanos moldados e prontos a encaixarem na máquina de produção industrial capitalista. E assim passam gerações de humanos, muitos deles até relativamente cultos em matérias do exterior, inconscientes deles próprios, cada um lidando com crises interiores como pode.

Alguns contam com a ajuda, feliz ou infeliz, de um “perito” da matéria, o psicólogo da mente humana. Este analisa a superficialidade, em vez de compreender a profundidade. Distribui opinião, em vez de compaixão. Receita medicações, em vez de meditações. E assim pergunto-me, não seria o mundo mais sincero e mais saudável se a expressão de emoção fosse encorajada, suportada e conversada? Se berrar alto quando estamos furiosos; se chorar em bica quando nos sentimos fracos; se rir á gargalhada sem razão aparente, fosse não apenas aceite mas também celebrado no meio social? Isto, claro, desde que não magoe e de preferência que não ofenda ninguém, pois para isto se inventaram as almofadas.

Emoções ditas “negativas” não são bem vindas, são especialmente proibidas. Fúria, ódio, ciúme, tristeza, saudade, etc. Quantas vezes perguntamos “Como estás?” sem querermos ouvir a resposta realmente honesta? Quantas vezes respondemos “Bem, obrigado!” porque sabemos que se disséssemos a verdade, não seria apenas socialmente “incorrecto”, mas pior, levaríamos com uma carrada de julgamento (ainda que não expressado) que não ajudaria em nada como nos sentimos cá dentro. A verdade é que todas as emoções são validas. As razões porque nascem podem não ser lógicas mas não acredito que seja benéfico ignorar ou reprimir algo sob o qual parece termos pouco o nenhum controlo. E uma vez que “sou o que sou, por causa do que todos nós somos” porque será que não nos interessamos verdadeiramente com o bem estar do vizinho quando perguntamos “Como estás?”

Documentário "A vida fora de controlo"

"A engenharia genética, de certa forma, é um erro com cerca de 400 anos. Um erro que começou com a revolução Cartesiana e com a idea de que vida é uma máquina.

Decartes disse, basicamente, que os animais são máquinas. Os Cartesianos faziam vivissecções de gates e cães, e quando ouviam os berros, diziam "Ah! Isto é como as engrenagens de uma máquina a mexer. É de onde vem o barulho!" Era uma visão totalmente mecanicista.

Se analizarmos os últimos 400 anos, verificamos que tem havido, por parte da comunidade ciêntifica, não de toda, uma continuidade deste mito mecanicista muito perigoso. Portanto, agora veêm o mundo todo como simples máquinas e os genes como software. É por isso que acreditam na engenharia genética. Esles estão a "engenhar" vida como se estivessem a "engenhar" máquinas. É eficiência reducionista, justamente o mesmo princípio a que tentam reduzir a vida. Este é o erro fundamental da engenharia genética." (0:53:55)

Zeitgeist III: Moving Forward

The original Zeitgeist: The Movie (2007) is said to be the most watched online documentary ever. With over an estimated 200 million views, it joins the dots between religion, the 9/11 "attacks" and the economic system in a way unexpected to many and still unacceptable by some. This controversial documentary inspired The Zeitgeist Movement, a grass-roots social movement of activists. 

In 2008 Peter Joseph released the sequel, Zeitgeist: Addendum, which focuses in more depth on the intrinsic flaws of the monetary system and introduces The Venus Project, the birth child of Jaques Fresco, an engineer and self-educated inventor in many fields. At the end, The Zeitgeist Movement is formally introduced.

Today is an epic day for many as Peter Joseph steps up the tempo again. The third movie of the controversial Zeitgeist series has just released. Zeitgeist III: Moving Forward can be download or watched online for free. The full 2 hours and 41 minutes documentary film is available below. Are you ready?

Bertrand Russell: In praise of idleness

Bertrand Russell [1872 – 1970]

Ever had the feeling that work is overrated? That you live for the weekends, which never seem long enough and that Monday mornings are like torture? Have you ever wondered how wonderful it would be to have more time for yourself and all the things you would do with that valuable spare time? If you have had the fortune, or misfortune, of having a full-time job long enough, chances are, that these questions have crossed your mind. Or possibly not, since we have been taught to accept that the present lifestyle of over working is fair and even necessary for one's survival.

Back in 1937, Bertrand Russell had a different opinion and in his essay 'In praise of idleness' he points out the advantages, not just to the individual but to the society as a whole, of a four hour work day. Although, a bit aged in its vocabulary and the current affairs of the time, his core thought remains just as valid (if not more) today. The following is a compilation of what I see as the most relevant bits, of which you can read in full here.

I think that there is far too much work done in the world, that immense harm is caused by the belief that work is virtuous, and that what needs to be preached in modern industrial countries is quite different from what always has been preached.

I want to say, in all seriousness, that a great deal of harm is being done in the modern world by belief in the virtuousness of work, and that the road to happiness and prosperity lies in an organized diminution of work.

First of all: what is work? Work is of two kinds: first, altering the position of matter at or near the earth's surface relatively to other such matter; second, telling other people to do so. The first kind is unpleasant and ill paid; the second is pleasant and highly paid. The second kind is capable of indefinite extension: there are not only those who give orders, but those who give advice as to what orders should be given. Usually two opposite kinds of advice are given simultaneously by two organized bodies of men; this is called politics. The skill required for this kind of work is not knowledge of the subjects as to which advice is given, but knowledge of the art of persuasive speaking and writing, i.e. of advertising.

To this day, 99 per cent of British wage-earners would be genuinely shocked if it were proposed that the King should not have a larger income than a working man. The conception of duty, speaking historically, has been a means used by the holders of power to induce others to live for the interests of their masters rather than for their own. Of course the holders of power conceal this fact from themselves by managing to believe that their interests are identical with the larger interests of humanity.

The war showed conclusively that, by the scientific organization of production, it is possible to keep modern populations in fair comfort on a small part of the working capacity of the modern world. If, at the end of the war, the scientific organization, which had been created in order to liberate men for fighting and munition work, had been preserved, and the hours of the week had been cut down to four, all would have been well. Instead of that the old chaos was restored, those whose work was demanded were made to work long hours, and the rest were left to starve as unemployed.

The idea that the poor should have leisure has always been shocking to the rich. In England, in the early nineteenth century, fifteen hours was the ordinary day's work for a man; children sometimes did as much, and very commonly did twelve hours a day. When meddlesome busybodies suggested that perhaps these hours were rather long, they were told that work kept adults from drink and children from mischief. When I was a child, shortly after urban working men had acquired the vote, certain public holidays were established by law, to the great indignation of the upper classes. I remember hearing an old Duchess say: 'What do the poor want with holidays? They ought to work.' People nowadays are less frank, but the sentiment persists, and is the source of much of our economic confusion.

If the ordinary wage-earner worked four hours a day, there would be enough for everybody and no unemployment -- assuming a certain very moderate amount of sensible organization. This idea shocks the well-to-do, because they are convinced that the poor would not know how to use so much leisure.

The wise use of leisure, it must be conceded, is a product of civilization and education. A man who has worked long hours all his life will become bored if he becomes suddenly idle. But without a considerable amount of leisure a man is cut off from many of the best things. There is no longer any reason why the bulk of the population should suffer this deprivation; only a foolish asceticism, usually vicarious, makes us continue to insist on work in excessive quantities now that the need no longer exists.

For ages, the rich and their sycophants have written in praise of 'honest toil', have praised the simple life, have professed a religion which teaches that the poor are much more likely to go to heaven than the rich, and in general have tried to make manual workers believe that there is some special nobility about altering the position of matter in space, just as men tried to make women believe that they derived some special nobility from their sexual enslavement.

Manual work is the ideal which is held before the young, and is the basis of all ethical teaching.

In the West, we have various ways of dealing with this problem. We have no attempt at economic justice, so that a large proportion of the total produce goes to a small minority of the population, many of whom do no work at all. Owing to the absence of any central control over production, we produce hosts of things that are not wanted. We keep a large percentage of the working population idle, because we can dispense with their labor by making the others overwork. When all these methods prove inadequate, we have a war: we cause a number of people to manufacture high explosives, and a number of others to explode them, as if we were children who had just discovered fireworks. By a combination of all these devices we manage, though with difficulty, to keep alive the notion that a great deal of severe manual work must be the lot of the average man.

to the actual worker. If you ask him what he thinks the best part of his life, he is not likely to say: 'I enjoy manual work because it makes me feel that I am fulfilling man's noblest task, and because I like to think how much man can transform his planet. It is true that my body demands periods of rest, which I have to fill in as best I may, but I am never so happy as when the morning comes and I can return to the toil from which my contentment springs.' I have never heard working men say this sort of thing.

It will be said that, while a little leisure is pleasant, men would not know how to fill their days if they had only four hours of work out of the twenty-four. In so far as this is true in the modern world, it is a condemnation of our civilization; it would not have been true at any earlier period. There was formerly a capacity for light-heartedness and play which has been to some extent inhibited by the cult of efficiency.

The notion that the desirable activities are those that bring a profit has made everything topsy-turvy.

The pleasures of urban populations have become mainly passive: seeing cinemas, watching football matches, listening to the radio, and so on. This results from the fact that their active energies are fully taken up with work; if they had more leisure, they would again enjoy pleasures in which they took an active part.

University life is so different from life in the world at large that men who live in academic milieu tend to be unaware of the preoccupations and problems of ordinary men and women; moreover their ways of expressing themselves are usually such as to rob their opinions of the influence that they ought to have upon the general public. Another disadvantage is that in universities studies are organized, and the man who thinks of some original line of research is likely to be discouraged. Academic institutions, therefore, useful as they are, are not adequate guardians of the interests of civilization in a world where everyone outside their walls is too busy for unutilitarian pursuits.

In a world where no one is compelled to work more than four hours a day, every person possessed of scientific curiosity will be able to indulge it, and every painter will be able to paint without starving, however excellent his pictures may be. Young writers will not be obliged to draw attention to themselves by sensational pot-boilers, with a view to acquiring the economic independence needed for monumental works, for which, when the time at last comes, they will have lost the taste and capacity. Men who, in their professional work, have become interested in some phase of economics or government, will be able to develop their ideas without the academic detachment that makes the work of university economists often seem lacking in reality. Medical men will have the time to learn about the progress of medicine, teachers will not be exasperatedly struggling to teach by routine methods things which they learnt in their youth, which may, in the interval, have been proved to be untrue.

Above all, there will be happiness and joy of life, instead of frayed nerves, weariness, and dyspepsia. The work exacted will be enough to make leisure delightful, but not enough to produce exhaustion. Since men will not be tired in their spare time, they will not demand only such amusements as are passive and vapid. At least one per cent will probably devote the time not spent in professional work to pursuits of some public importance, and, since they will not depend upon these pursuits for their livelihood, their originality will be unhampered, and there will be no need to conform to the standards set by elderly pundits. But it is not only in these exceptional cases that the advantages of leisure will appear. Ordinary men and women, having the opportunity of a happy life, will become more kindly and less persecuting and less inclined to view others with suspicion. The taste for war will die out, partly for this reason, and partly because it will involve long and severe work for all. Good nature is, of all moral qualities, the one that the world needs most, and good nature is the result of ease and security, not of a life of arduous struggle. Modern methods of production have given us the possibility of ease and security for all; we have chosen, instead, to have overwork for some and starvation for others. Hitherto we have continued to be as energetic as we were before there were machines; in this we have been foolish, but there is no reason to go on being foolish forever.

Documentary "PsyWar: the real battlefield is your mind"

PsyWar is an incredibly provocative film that investigates how today's power structure of western society came to be and how the public is manipulated to believe it is the best option. This documentary will make you question what is happiness and why you do what you do. Is it because you love it or because you have to? A piece of advice, do not watch if you're happy with your own existence.


A few quotations from PsyWar:

"National security is one of the most powerful notions in modern times to swindle, I think, people to do things that are not in their best interest. And to support massive military complexes that are not in anybody interests but that are like cancers feeding on society." ~ Graeme MacQueen (28:30)

"Wars are an opportunity for the government to grow in power" ~ Howard Zinn (46:50)

"A shorter work week would undermine the work ethic and potentially ferment radicalism. If people had the time to stop and think, they might also take the time to rethink their position in life. The emphasis should be put on work... More work and better work, instead of upon leisure." ~ John Edgerton (1:10:20)

 And here's a short movie that I think complements the above fairly nicelly.