The Humanist's Commentary

This is a follow up blog to my original, The Nameless Humanist. I chose to focus specifically on politics and nothing else that would serve as a distraction.

Dear Congressman

Addendum: I wrote the following to several of the Congressmen in my state in hopes of making a difference:

I am writing to you as a software engineer, as an American, and as someone who has grown up with the internet and witnessed how much it has transformed society for the better. It’s very existence has increased the spread of ideas and fostered the creation of new ones - at an unprecedented rate.The dissemination of ideas today is greater than probably all of history before the internet combined.

It has also served as a beacon of freedom from which oppressed people around the globe were given a voice - from China to Iran to to Egypt. It was through mobilization on the web that jump-started the Egyptian revolution, and in turn, the Arab spring. And now we are seeing the flames of hope light up against darkness in Russia - with the internet serving as the spark yet again.

The internet has always worked under the principles of freedom.

It is because of these reasons why I ask you to seriously reconsider your support of both the Stop Online Piracy Act and PROTECT IP Act, and instead vote against both.Under the guise of protection of copyrighted material, an undue burden would be placed on thousands - if not millions - of sites both here and abroad to police themselves from user generated content while at the same time eliminating the long-standing Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act which provided a “grace” period for sites to take down copyrighted material while ensuring the site still functions - and only blocking the infringing content. Should these laws pass, entire sites would be blocked and they would be unlisted from the DNS registry. And they could be taken down because of a single infringing post or link. Long standing sites such as YouTube, Facebook, Reddit, twitter, tumblr would be taken down and unmake the millions-strong communities they have created - overnight. Even search engines like Google and Bing/Yahoo can be shut down due to the broad language used.

Furthermore, the lack of technical knowledge and the fact that no programmers, software engineers, network admins or other IT professionals were consulted is harrowing. Under these acts,  any site can be found “dedicated to the theft of US property” if the core functionality of that site “enables or facilitates” infringement. Websites dealing with user-generated content have a core functionality that fits the bills’ broad definition.

There is another dimension to this argument - that of job creation. By introducing such broad legislation, investment would decrease, innovation would be stifled, and job creation would be reduced. Currently, the internet adds $2 trillion dollars to the US GDP. This growth is largely created through small start-ups, as well as individuals with some initiative and innovation. The tech industry also enables jobs elsewhere - such as the near 200,000 jobs created via small businesses that operate through ebay. Or the thousands through Amazon.com. Or the hundreds of thousands who take part in the iOS and Andriod app markets. All of these jobs will be in jeopardy - as will the investment that comes with it. When laws such as this are passed and seem to hurt such emergent sectors, then their is a disincentive to invest int hose fields in the first place - potentially driving away billions of dollars.

Finally, there are technical limitations to consider - such as how passage of these laws and their requirements of DNS redirection will serve as a huge blow to internet security standards. There is a well-written paper on it by a collection of experts titled: Security and Other Technical Concerns Raised by the DNS Filtering Requirements in the PROTECT IP Bill. It is recommended that you take the time to read it and become better acquainted with yet another reason why these laws should be defeated.

Again, I urge you to reconsider your stance and vote against the passage of both Stop Online Piracy Act and PROTECT IP Act. I have voted in every election since I was legally able to and will continue to do so. If you want my vote, you must vote Nay.

There’s no question at times of my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate.

—

Newt Gingrich, explaining that he cheated on his second wife with his then-staffer and now-wife Calista, because he was so passionate for the country he worked too hard.

Which may be the most remarkable non-apology apology of all time. Indeed, it’s a meta-version of the classic answer to the job interview question, what is your biggest weakness, “I work too hard.”

(Source: politicalprof)

The cutbacks hurt more than just services. As Timothy Williams of The Times reported last week, they hit black workers particularly hard. Millions of African-Americans — one in five who are employed — have entered the middle class through government employment, and they tend to make 25 percent more than other black workers. Now tens of thousands are leaving both their jobs and the middle class. Chicago, for example, is laying off 212 employees in the upcoming fiscal year, two-thirds of whom are black.

That’s one reason the black unemployment rate went up last month, to 15.5 percent from 15.1. The effect is severe, destabilizing black neighborhoods and making it harder for young people to replicate their parents’ climb up the economic ladder. “The reliance on these jobs has provided African-Americans a path upward,” said Robert Zieger, an emeritus professor of history at the University of Florida. “But it is also a vulnerability.”

Many Republicans, however, don’t regard government jobs as actual jobs, and are eager to see them disappear. Republican governors around the Midwest have aggressively tried to break the power of public unions while slashing their work forces, and Congressional Republicans have proposed paying for a payroll tax cut by reducing federal employment rolls by 10 percent through attrition. That’s 200,000 jobs, many of which would be filled by blacks and Hispanics and others who tend to vote Democratic, and thus are considered politically superfluous.

—Pain in the Public Sector (via damekatharsis)

(Source: The New York Times, via stfuconservatives)

barackobama:

“The average income of the top 1 percent has gone up by more than 250 percent to $1.2 million per year … For the top one hundredth of 1 percent, the average income is now $27 million per year. The typical CEO who used to earn about 30 times more than his or her worker now earns 110 times more. And yet, over the last decade the incomes of most Americans have actually fallen by about 6 percent.”

—President Obama speaking in Osawatomie, Kansas, yesterday about what he calls a “make or break moment” for the middle class

(via thenamelesshumanist)

This is not just another political debate. This is the defining issue of our time. This is a make or break moment for the middle class, and for all those who are fighting to get into the middle class. Because what’s at stake is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home, secure their retirement.

Now, in the midst of this debate, there are some who seem to be suffering from a kind of collective amnesia. After all that’s happened, after the worst economic crisis, the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, they want to return to the same practices that got us into this mess. In fact, they want to go back to the same policies that stacked the deck against middle-class Americans for way too many years. And their philosophy is simple: We are better off when everybody is left to fend for themselves and play by their own rules.

I am here to say they are wrong. I’m here in Kansas to reaffirm my deep conviction that we’re greater together than we are on our own. I believe that this country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, when everyone does their fair share, when everyone plays by the same rules. These aren’t Democratic values or Republican values. These aren’t 1 percent values or 99 percent values. They’re American values. And we have to reclaim them.

Checking the Facts

I try and be accurate in regards to attributing quotes to people, listing surveys and facts, analyzing statistics, etc. The more accurate my information, the better my argument. Especially political arguments and commentary. Hailing from a science background (computer science counts, right?) I want to form cogent arguments with as much facts as possible.

I recently came across a quote attributed to Thomas Jefferson that had been circulating the blogosphere. The quote is:

The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.

It looks pretty legit, and is very relevant to today’s times. As much as I would love for it to be true, it isn’t. At least not entirely.

This website does a great job of explaining it:
http://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/end-democracyquotation

And this site allows you to scroll to the bottom and read the original letter he wrote.

http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=808&chapter=88503&layout=html&Itemid=27

For those that reblogged the fake quote, don’t feel disheartened. If you read the original letter by Jefferson, he very much does warn about the growing influence that economics has on government, although he does do it in the context of the growing power of the Federal Government and it’s role in diminishing states’ rights.