erroneous thoughts

A post from this blog tries to argue that DRM is not evil. After much discussion, the author conceded that while DRM still is not evil, it does get close. The comments to this second post illustrate quite well why, in the end, no matter how you want to see it, DRM has but one fate: oblivion.

Both posts and respective comments make for very good reading for anyone wanting recent arguments for an old discussion.

É a primeira vez que vejo um detentor de um cargo público dizer isto:

“Pouco a pouco há uma espécie de pequeno cerco a determinadas liberdades individuais, que o cidadão em nome da segurança aceita”, acrescentou Pinto Monteiro. “Penso que é um perigoso ir por aí”.

Oxalá seja apenas a primeira de muitas.

And money. Lawrence Lessig gives this talk about how money breeds mistrust. And one of the first examples he gives is the spectacularly increase in the number of parents that refuse to vaccinate their children. And why? Essentially because from their point of view, the doctors prescribe the drugs subject to the money they receive from pharmaceutical companies. Even if the doctor is completely unbiased, if he receives that money, the patients’ trust in the doctor is undermined. And without that trust, the number of children without vaccination will keep rising. Others examples are given.

And then the same argument is applied to politics. In order to find out if money was influencing policy makers’ decisions, he tells the story of a bill proposing copyright extension: +20 years. The question in this case was quite simple: can this extension of copyright increase the public good? The government said the answer was ‘yes’, they (Lessig et al.) said the answer was ‘no’. And in that answer, they’re were joined, Lessig tells, by a right-wing conservative economist, who said he’d only joined them if in their report they included the words no brainer. So the government got the answer wrong. Why? Either because there really are no brains in the government, or the brains in there where influenced by money. Considering the dimension of the copyright industry, on which one would you bet?

For many years, and for many different reasons, I’ve been supporter of the idea that smoking in closed premises (bars, coffees, whatever) should be prohibited (we are talking about public places, or special places, like hospitals, schools, or similar). Well, now, in Portugal, in effect since January 1st 2008, it has become law. And I make no effort to conceal my joy with it! In my case, this has another advantage: a lot of my friends are smokers, and despite not liking hanging in “foggy” environments, truth is, I was (still am) the minority, so I did an effort to endure the smoke… Well no more! And the same can be said for my clothes too: I just hate getting home, late at night, and have that pesky tobacco smell entangled all over my clothes!!

If you’re curious as to my arguments, a non-exhaustive list can be found in this discussion.

Being someone that so harshly criticizes Portuguese politicians, for this one they earned the right to a loud praise!

Note: I have been pointed to some abuses, namely places that were not allowed to have a smoking area because there were no bathrooms in it… Well this is an abuse, that should be corrected, but still it does not diminish the merits of this law.