Posts Tagged ‘video’

MP James Moore: Please Drop the Rhetoric

June 23rd, 2010

We tried to be civil. Unfortunately, Conservative Heritage Minister James Moore has decided to take the battle over Bill C-32 to a new low:

In the video, Moore frames all opposed to his precious copyright reform bill as fear mongers and evil doers who are against any kind of copyright reform. This kind of false rhetorical framing will not result in a copyright solution that benefits all affected parties. Instead, it just muddies the waters and makes it tough to have a real discussion about the important issues that are at hand.

As many have probably guessed from the contents of my website and twitter stream, I am against the current iteration of Bill C-32. That said, I believe strongly that copyright reform is necessary in this country. Our current laws were written before the internet really took off, and need to be modernized in order to effectively deal with new technologies and situations. Most of the proposed bill is quality content, but the Section 41, Technological Protection Measures and Rights Management Information, is not.

Mr. Moore needs to step down from his high horse, cut out the rhetorical bullshit, and join in on the discussion that we are having about his proposed bill. Plugging your ears and screaming ‘na-na-na-na-boo-boo’ just doesn’t cut it when you’re an elected representative of the people.

Michael Specter: The Danger of Science Denial

April 12th, 2010

Just wanted to share another fantastic TED talk, this time from Michael Specter of The New Yorker.

In his talk, Specter argues that by any metric, we are currently living in the greatest time in which anybody could ever have lived throughout the entire history of the world. He then qualifies that claim by stating that if we don’t change popular opinion on the issues currently facing modern science, that state won’t last. In particular, Specter has beef with what most people call ‘junk science,’ including homeopathic medicines, herbal remedies, and the batshit-crazy beliefs of Jenny McCarthy. It is his belief that in order to solve the important problems that are facing modern science, we as a people must overcome our superstitious distrust toward the scientific method, and the gifts that it has brought humankind.

Enjoy.

Videos that You Should Watch (So that I Can Justify Procrastinating)

February 16th, 2010

I have never understood how some students can justify going away for reading week, while I inevitably spend the week in the library, writing papers and studying for the next big test. But then I figured it out – if I simply took all of the time that I spend procrastinating throughout the school year and compressed it into a single week, I would have all the time in the world. Alternatively, I could have majored in communication studies.

Since this is my last reading week ever it’s a little bit late to try either of those approaches, and so I stuck with the tried and true, and spent an evening surfing the ‘net instead of doing my school work. Luckily, while squandering my precious time, I found a few excellent TED talks that I think that everybody should take the time to watch.

The first is by American author Michael Pollan, the guy who brought us the Omnivore’s Dilemma, a great book that discussed the many problems inherent in the way that we eat, as well as a few strategies for getting back to the basics and disarming the epidemics of obesity and diabetes that will become a major concern within my lifetime. He also had a big role in Robert Kenner’s Food Inc., an eye-opening documentary about the current state of the industrial agricultural system in America, Canada, and most of the western world. Together, these two works have really changed the way that I look at my food, and have influenced many of the decisions that I’ve made to try and change my diet, and to spread this message to the people that I care about most.

This talk in particular is a thought exercise that challenges the viewer to take another look at our place in nature, and to use that new view to reevaluate the decisions that we make when choosing what we eat:

For those interested in more of what Pollan has to say, Democracy Now! recently did an excellent interview with him that runs about 40 minutes, but is worth every second of that time. It is available as free streaming video on their website.

The second talk that I’d like to share comes from England by way of Chef Jamie Oliver, who most people have heard of, especially if they’re of the female persuasion. He is on a serious mission to change the world through a better understanding of food. It is his dream to see a reality in which every kid is taught what they need to know about food and is armed with the education required to make healthy life choices about what we put into our bodies. And they really are life choices – the vast majority of deaths in the western world are caused by entirely preventable diseases related directly to diet and lifestyle decisions that we make every day. This talk won him an award at the most recent TED sessions, and is generating a lot of buzz right now:

Finally, I found an older talk by teacher turned slam poet Taylor Mali entitled What Teachers Make. This is an interesting attack at the old adage that “Those who can’t do teach,” that eloquently explains in only three minutes exactly why our teachers deserve more respect than they get in everyday society:

Who ever thought that not doing anything of value could be so educational?

Charlie Brooker: How to Report the News

February 4th, 2010

That about sums it up.

The Muppets Take on Bohemian Rhapsody

November 26th, 2009

This is just plain genius:

Edit: Now that I think about it, one of my favourite Sesame Street skits from childhood is equally incredible (even though I don’t recognize the vast majority of the 80′s celebrities in it):

They Just Don’t Get It

July 31st, 2009

This quote from MPAA & RIAA lawyer Steven J Metalitz is why I get so worked up about DRM systems:

We reject the view, that copyright owners and their licensees are required to provide consumers with perpetual access to creative works. No other product or service providers are held to such lofty standards. No one expects computers or other electronics devices to work properly in perpetuity, and there is no reason that any particular mode of distributing copyrighted works should be required to do so.

To recognize the proposed exemption would surely discourage any content provider from entering the marketplace for online distribution… unless it was committed to do so… forever. This would not be good for consumers, who would find a marketplace with less innovation and fewer choices and options.

The quote is taken from a discussion about whether content providers who coat their wares with DRM should be required by law to ensure that purchased media continues to work for perpetuity. Their argument of course is that no piece of machinery can be expected to work forever, and so bully to the customer who purchased DRM’d music or video. However, with all of the major online music retailers selling DRM-free Mp3s, many honest people (read: people who didn’t say fuck it to DRM and pirate all of their music – the very people that allowed big content to continue to survive in the digital era) are left with a significant amount of media that cannot be unlocked due to anti-circumvention laws, and must now be replaced as the old DRM servers are slowly taken offline.

Even after all of this time, the big content owners still don’t understand the digital age. Back in the era of physical media, when formats changed, customers had to purchase their existing media in the new format if they wanted to be able to continue to use it. Because physical media costs money to research, manufacture, and distribute, this makes sense – the customer was simply paying the cost of the record companies developing and manufacturing a better sounding medium. However, where digital music is concerned, none of these costs exist. There was no research to develop Mp3, because it is ready to be licensed. There were no manufacturing costs, besides the few CPU cycles that it took to re-encode the existing media. Likewise, distribution is essentially free, because in most cases, it is third-party retailers who host and sell the content, not the rights holders themselves, and it costs exactly $0 to make a digital copy of a song file. So what exactly are consumers paying for when re-purchasing their previously DRM’d content? The luxury of not being limited in where and how they can use their purchased content? Oh thank you Mr. Rights Holder, thank you! thank you! thank you!

You know how this issue should be handled? Every song that was sold with DRM is now sold without, right? Then a tool should be written and distributed that allows customers to strip the DRM from every file in their collection. For free.

Edit: Comment from Slashdot:

Ah, but a chair only has a finite lifespan. So if it falls apart after 3 years of normal use I would probably not be responsible for fixing it. Although you may tell all your friends that I make crappy chairs. On the other hand YOU can buy a screwdriver at any hardware (or most dollar stores even) to fix the chair.

The real issue is that I have persuaded congress to make it illegal for you to buy the screwdrivers that fix the chairs I sell. And now I am saying that I should not be expected to keep any of the screwdrivers around either. And even if no one has the right tools to fix the chair YOU still can’t build one.

On the Topic of TED

February 28th, 2009

A few more excellent TED talks that I’ve recently stumbled on:

Malcolm Gladwell on what we can learn from spaghetti sauce: As per usual, Gladwell challenges the idea of “common sense” and gets you thinking in ways that you normally don’t.

Barry Schwartz on the paradox of choice: Does freedom of choice really make us happier as a people?

Bill Gates on what we can do right now to change the world: As a lifelong believer of giving people the tools to solve problems well within their reach, Gates poses simple solutions to seemingly complex problems. His argument is that some problems don’t get solved simply because the market is not motivated to tackle them. What can we do to change that?

If you have a few minutes to be challenged, do drop by the TED website and listen to some smart people.