Protecting Parody

The white house has asked the Onion to not use the presidential seal on its website. Evidently, there's a law (signed by Nixon, I believe) that the presidential seal can only be used:

Use by way of photographic or electronic visual reproduction in pictures, moving pictures, or telecasts of bona fide news content

...among other accepted exemptions. This seems to be an exceptionally odd case, as parody and the use of government materials is permitted in cases where there isn't a law like this. It sounds like the Onion is playing along for now, but I for one think this would make an excellent First Amendment case--at least it might make a fun hypothetical to discuss in class. There are just so many interesting ways to look at this case:

• does the Onion contain bona fide news content?
• What is the role of First Amendment exemptions for laws like this...is it news or parody?
• (What context was this law passed in the first place)

More on University Networks

It looks as though the new FCC rules on wiretaps are being primarily fought by Universities (Colleges Protest Call to Upgrade Online Systems). At issue is the fact that Internet hardware must be upgraded at great cost to allow for authorities to monitor the traffic of those who are under subpoena. While it looks like the Universities are not overly concerned with civil liberties violations (they contend the cost is unjustified, since the existing system of monitoring works adequately), but perhaps there is some element to be concerned about. The Times reports:

...the federal law would apply a high-tech approach, enabling law enforcement to monitor communications at campuses from remote locations at the turn of a switch. It would require universities to re-engineer their networks so that every Net access point would send all communications not directly onto the Internet, but first to a network operations center where the data packets could be stitched together into a single package for delivery to law enforcement, university officials said.

This has the potential to undermine one of, what I believe to be, the greatest characteristics of the Internet: end to end architecture. By placing a machine between the user and the Internet, the free and open nature of the net could be put at risk. Even with the barrier of a judge/subpoena in the way of the "switch," there is little telling what is stopping the operations center from becoming a communist-style firewall. Even if this possibility is a gross exaggeration, I would argue that any move away from content-neutral packet routing is out of sync with the spirit of the network.

G-Men in the Ivory Tower

Thanks to the British news media (with a little help from the Google desktop news ticker), I learned of a meeting between the FBI and higher-ed representatives to exchange "advice on the culture of higher education." Included in the talks, and quoted in the article below was UW-Madison's own chancellor Wiley. At the moment, local and student media don't appear to be interested. I'm not quite sure what to make of it either. FBI Works on Its Image on College Campuses (Guardian Unlimited)

Flockin browser

I just received access to try out a new web browser called "Flock." While it's built on Firefox (my browser of choice), it is enhanced by a number of "social" features such as blogging, photo and bookmark sharing. Being on a social-networking kick lately, I'm glad that I'll get the chance to check it out. So far, it's crashed whenever I've tried to post to my blog. In its defense, it is only on version 0.5 :)

The copyright commons

I was contemplating the nature of copyright as a commons today (not that I'm the first), and it occurred to me that it might make more sense to think of copyright as a technology policy. This may make it possible to equate it to other cases of information/transportation commons structures. If copyright is thought of this way, perhaps we can re-think how our we might transform the subsidizing of creative work. Taxing the gas that goes into cars (and the cars themselves) might be equated to mandatory licensing or taxes on blank media. Users and creators both benefit from this commons, and questions of lost revenue and easy/cheap access to entertainment media might be answered if we think of how information can be best fit to our media landscape. Technological locks are a possible way to enforce the law, but this idea seems eerily like putting speed regulators on our cars. We could try to change the norms of copying, so that the law is more respected, but this could be nearly unworkable given current technology and copying habits. My first thought is that this leaves only the tax option. It's not one that anyone would like, but at least it's a compromise. This issue certainly deserves some creative thinking.

Burden of multitasking

I take it back... A couple of posts ago, I partially retracted my feelings on the effects of computer-mediated distractions in light of greater research (finally got that link too). I've come to a point where I can't deny the fact that the news scrolling by on my Google Desktop 2.0 sidebar, the urge to peak at e-mail, the urge to start a chat, the need to check a random fact I'm wondering about on the web (or do ALL of these at the same time) is still putting a crimp in productivity. And there is at least one study on the ill effects of multitasking to back it up. And yet, with Expose on a Mac, multiple desktops on Linux, and well, whatever on Windows, our operating systems just make it easier to fall into the trap. If anyone is interested in writing a multi-platform "lock" on multitasking (something to make it harder to switch applications or fire up the web browser), my switch to paperless could desperately use it. Edit One way that appears to work fairly well in Windows is to do an "end process" on explorer (start explorer again by using "new task" and typing in "explorer"). I'm thinking in KDE, one could just collapse the panel (not the same as quitting it altogether, but perhaps enough to put one in the mental mode of not multitasking). And for OSX, it looks as though it's also possible to quit the Finder. While these solutions are by no means perfect, it may be enough to just remove initial temptation. It seems as though putting the mind in a context of concentration (like you might when sitting in a comfortable chair with an engaging book) may be possible...perhaps there are additional technological answers.

Apple Store Genius Bars: the best support out there

Regular readers (are there any) might know that I've had a lot of trouble with my iBook in the past. A recent "repair" fixed a hard drive crash, but weakened wireless reception. I decided the other day that this was worth the hour drive to the Milwaukee Apple Store, knowing that the Genius Bar people are always happy to solve a problem (that's been my experience any way). Well, after all of this trouble, I'm finally getting a new iBook. Leaving the other one is like loosing a member of the family, but hopefully the new one will have less trouble. The Genius Bar folks are one of the reasons why, even after all the headaches, I'll stick with a Mac. The support is second to none!