Going Dark to Protest SOPA & PIPA

Just announcing that Creatures of Prometheus will go dark tomorrow, January 18, 2012, along with Wikipedia, Google, Mozilla, reddit, and many other sites, to protest the Stop Online Piracy Act, and the Protect IP Act.

These two bills, now being considered in Congress, would represent a massive power grab by Washington, and would change the way the internet functions, forever.  If either of these bills becomes law, the government will have wide, new powers to shut down entire websites, immediately and without hearings, trials, or anything, based on simple (or wild) accusations of piracy or intellectual property misuse.  Apparently, you can even be shut down for linking to such alleged material - it doesn't have to be actually posted on your webpage.

This is NOT the way online piracy should be handled.

You can learn more here: http://sopastrike.com/

Educate yourself.  Write your congresspersons and tell them to oppose these draconian bills.  Lend your voice to the struggle.  Washington needs to know enough is enough!

-Earl

p.s. I'll be back later in the week, with an update on the new pup!

--------
UPDATE: I created this avatar for my facebook and twitter accounts; feel free to copy and use it!

Forget the Tea Party, I Want to Start the Lemonade Party

It's a horrifying development that one of the themes of the Summer of 2011 is the ongoing war being waged by local municipalities all across the US against kids and their lemonade stands. It's a regular occurrence to see outraged links to these news stories in my twitter and facebook feeds.

Over at Josh Blackman's Blog, he has a nice little post about a recent NPR opinion piece on the topic, which I recommend you check out. He starts out:

When NPR has an opinion piece in favor of the right to earn an honest living–let the kids have lemonade stands!–you know the statists went too far.

The NPR piece itself neatly captures the essence of the issue in its opening line:

If lemonade stands are symbols of the American dream, and if lemonade stands are under attack in the United States, then the American dream is under attack.

To be more specific, the lemonade stand issue represents the American dream under a 3-pronged attack by statists at all levels of government:

1. The ongoing erosion of Property Rights. A person has the right to use & dispose of his property as he sees fit, provided he does not violate the rights of others in so doing. If a person wants to invite others onto his front lawn for the purpose of selling them lemonade, its his right. For the police to show up, and prevent this harmless activity from taking place, is pure thuggery. The police officers who enforce these laws should be ashamed of themselves, and don't give me any of that 'he's just doing his job' crap.
   
   Let me say it again in a bigger font:
   
   The police officers who enforce these laws should be ashamed of themselves.
   
   
2. Denial of the Right to Contract. Parties have an absolute right to voluntarily enter into mutually beneficial agreements of their own choosing. If I have lemonade to sell, and you're a willing buyer, there is no proper role for government in initiating force against us to prevent the sale. Of course, you have the right to ask me all kinds of questions about the quality of my product, and even sue me in court if I misrepresent what I'm selling you. But, as long as the transaction is purely voluntary, the initiation of force by any outside party, government or otherwise, to prevent it, is immoral. Ayn Rand identified this concept as:
   
   The Trader Principle.
   
   
3. Attack on individuals' Right to Earn a Living.  Ever heard of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness? Ever thought about what that really means, in a practical, nuts-and-bolts way? I think most people hear this well-worn phrase and picture, in a very lofty and abstract way, that America was founded as the place where you could follow your dream and do whatever you want to with your life. This is certainly true, but try thinking about it in a more concrete way. How about: A person has a moral right to earn an honest living by the means of his own choosing.
   
   How about one more time, with feeling:
   
   A person has a moral right to earn an honest living by the means of his own choosing.
   
   Of course, this concept has been completely turned on its ear these days. The slew of regulations, at multiple levels of government, that act as barriers to entry for new businesses don't just prevent new businesses from opening. They kill peoples' dreams. They prevent people from earning an honest living by the means of their own choosing. If you think that those regulations are actually necessary to prevent people from harming each other, I would refer you to point #2 above. The vast majority of regulation today is simple denial of the Right to Contract in the interest of furthering some political ends. I think that formulation deserves a Big Font, too.
   
   The vast majority of regulation today is simple denial of the Right to Contract, in the interest of furthering some political ends.

I think that today, the most critically abused aspects of Individual Rights are these three. The War on Lemonade Stands is a horrific encapsulation of what goes on every day, at all scales, when government oversteps its proper role of protecting our rights, and instead becomes the violator of our rights.

Although the Tea Party movement had its origins in a reaction to government abuses not unlike those described above, I and many others fear it will be (or has been?) co-opted by the Religious Right and their anti-Individual-Rights social agenda. Of course, the only real way to combat government intrusion is a robust, moral defense of Individual Rights, which the Tea Party has yet to embrace, and which is largely antithetical to any mainstream political thinking today.

I say forget the Tea Party, let's start the Lemonade Party! And while most appeals to take action 'for the children' make me retch, this is one I could actually get behind and advocate for.

Do it for the children!

----------------------------------

Update: 7/20/11

It looks like it's on! Turns out that Judy over at Consent of the Governed wrote this piece with much the same sentiment, and suggested August 20 as Lemonade for Freedom Day. Robert Fernandes has created a website called lemonadefreedom.com and facebook event page, and word is getting out. This is great!

Please help spread the word!

Tuesday Night OLists Happy Hour: 2010 Election Special!

By the time our weekly #OLists Happy Hour rolls around tonight, the polls will have closed in the East and will be about to close in the West.  

Due to the timing of the polls closing, and to give everyone a chance to vote and still make it to Happy Hour, and because I think there could be some particularly interesting discussions, tonight's Happy Hour will be 2 hours, from 9-11 p.m. Eastern and 6-8 p.m. Pacific.


As the returns roll in, let's get a read on how things unfolded around the country, from a first-hand, #OLists Happy Hour perspective.  Join us and weigh in on the elections, the races, and share what was important to you in all of it.

Appetizer:  Did you vote?  What race/s were important to you in this election?  Were there any particular races you abstained from voting in?  How did your favorite candidates fare?

Drink Special:  Did you campaign for any candidates this year?  Whether or not you did, would you consider doing so in future election cycles?  Were there any particular aspects of this year's elections that impacted, changed, or challenged any of your views of our political system?

Happy Hour will take place from 9-10 p.m. Eastern and 6-7 p.m. Pacific, on Twitter.

For more info on the OLists, check out the OList Events page here.

New to Twitter and not sure how it works?  A simple tutorial on getting started can be found here.  

Your hosts for the Twitter OList Socials are @DianaHsieh, @laforgetm (aka William Green) and @Earl3d (that's me!)

Want to lurk and follow along with the discussion, without joining Twitter?  You can do that here.

My Letter in Opposition to AB48

I saw this item in my twittter and facebook feeds this morning:

@Rob_Abiera:  An End To Flight Instructors http://www.transterrestrial.com/?p=27353 Excellent comments.

Apparently the State of California has unleashed a whole new bunch of regulations and fees on private flight schools in response to the bankruptcy of one such enterprise and the (apparently) fraudulent loss of up-front fees paid by students. 

In typical fashion, this was stealthily smuggled into the somewhat routine re-authorization of an existing bill, and the flight instructors and schools were caught completely off-guard.  

They are now trying to play catch-up and salvage what they can of their livelihoods, before they are driven completely out of business (or out of state) by the onerous fees. I wrote the following to my representatives in Sacramento, and to Governor Arnold, this morning.

Dear _______,

This is in response to AB-48 which was passed and signed into law last year.  This bill imposed new regulations and fees on private flight schools in California.  Apparently this was done in response to the bankruptcy of Silver State Helicopters and subsequent loss of up-front tuition paid by students.

The proper response to a case of apparent fraud such as this, no matter how large, no matter how many victims, is to prosecute it vigorously as a case of fraud. 

It is horribly unjust to sanction an entire industry, simply because of the fraudulent actions of one party.  To do so is, in effect, to declare them all guilty.  The only people or corporations who should be the object of government action are those who have been proven guilty, in  a court of law, of a specific crime against another.  The idea that government is legitimate in taking regulatory action against innocent businesses, who have done nothing wrong, is the complete inversion of the American concept of 'innocent until proven guilty'.

The proper legislative response, if any, would be to examine the laws around fraud that exist already, in an attempt to determine if there are any legitimate failings, loopholes, or other weaknesses in the law, which might create difficulties for the investigation and prosecution of actual fraud.

Many flight schools will be forced to close as a result of this bill.  That this sort of action, which will cost hundreds of good jobs, and destroy the hard work and dreams of many individuals, is perpetrated by the State of California on its citizens during the worst econonomic downturn since the Great Depression, speaks to the viciousness of those in power.

This bill will do nothing to protect the innocent from the unscrupulous, and will only make it harder for honest, hard working people to puruse their own happiness.

I urge that this action be repealed immediately.

Sincerely,

Mohammed Boobquake Cartoon

Recently, over at Free Colorado, Ari Armstrong posted an excellent piece on censorship and the First Amendment.  After describing how Comedy Central caved and censored a recent South Park episode, he wrote:

Thankfully, not all Americans are prepared to cower in some corner as terrorist goons shred the First Amendment and impose theocratic censorship. Some Americans are taking a stand.

Dan Savage proposed May 20 as "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day." This idea has been picked up by Michael Moynihan at Reason and Allahpundit at Hotair.

I propose only a slight modification to the plan: to protest death threats made by freedom-hating terrorists, Americans should draw Mohammed -- and publish their drawings -- by May 20.

I was all set to draw up a little Mohammed cartoon and put it up in time for the event.

Then, from out of nowhere, we had the BoobQuake!  Recently, an Iranian prayer leader scolded women who dressed immodestly, claiming that it was the cause of earthquakes.  One Jennifer McCreight blogged about it and then created a Facebook event around the idea, saying:

Time for a Boobqauke.

On Monday, April 26th, I will wear the most cleavage-showing shirt I own. Yes, the one usually reserved for a night on the town. I encourage other female skeptics to join me and embrace the supposed supernatural power of their breasts. Or short shorts, if that's your preferred form of immodesty. With the power of our scandalous bodies combined, we should surely produce an earthquake. If not, I'm sure Sedighi can come up with a rational explanation for why the ground didn't rumble. And if we really get through to him, maybe it'll be one involving plate tectonics.

So, who's with me? I may be a D cup, but that will probably only produce a slight tremor on its own. If you'll be joining me on twitter, use the tag #boobquake! 

She wrote up a more lengthy explanation on her blog here.   You can also read a quick summary over on Mashable, which is where I first discovered it.  I encourage you to join the Facebook group if you haven't already.

There is so much to love about the whole BoobQuake phenomenon (even for a gay guy like me!)  I normally wouldn't consider such an absurd statement out of Iran to merit the dignity of any response at all.  Yet, to meet it with such an off-the-cuff, sarcastic bit of silliness, and then to have that response take off like wildfire, like a mass demonstration, like a virtual taking to the streets of women with their cleavage -- the whole thing just restores my faith in humanity in so many ways.

When I was preparing my cartoon, I did a google image search under the cleric's name, Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi.  It was actually really hard to find a picture of the guy amid all the cleavage that came up!  WooHoo!

So, I figured it was time to draw that Mohammed cartoon early, and incorporate BoobQuake at the same time.  If I can't go running around showing immodest cleavage, I can at least do this.  (I am wearing a v-neck today, but it seemed pretty clear that it was womens' cleavage that caused the quakes.  Oh well.)

So, without further ado, here are Mohammed and Sedighi discussing the events of today.  Somehow my Mohammed looks a little Jesusey.  Oh well.  It's kind of hard to figure out how to show him that anyone would get who he was. 

Anyway, I hereby grant permission to reproduce the cartoon online, provided that a link is provided back to this post, and that the cartoon is presented unchanged.

We Are All Coloradans

Recently, the Colorado legislature passed, and their Governor signed, a law that authorizes the state to collect sales tax from Amazon, based on their Amazon Associates program.  That is the program where bloggers have ads and links on their blogs, and if a click-through results in a sale, the blogger is paid a small commission. 

I haven’t had time to read all the analysis, but essentially the new law declares that the Amazon Associates establishes a business presence for Amazon in the state, making these sales subject to Colorado sales tax that Amazon would be required to collect.  There is apparently a huge amount of red tape holding the whole thing together.


Immediately, Amazon dropped all their Colorado Associates.  Can you blame them?  Why put your face intentionally in the way of a swinging fist when you can just leave and take your toys someplace where they place nicely? 

Also, how is the Amazon Associates program, which is essentially just an online advertisement, any different from, say, taking out a magazine or newspaper ad?  If Amazon decided to take out an ad in The Denver Post, would that give them a business presence in Colorado?  The very notion is absurd.  How is a blog that happens to be written by someone who lives in Colorado any different?

Now, the bloggers are fighting back.  Notably, Diana Hsieh and Ari Armstrong, two leading Objectivist intellectuals/writers/activists, have taken up the cause.  Ms. Hsieh has launched a website, Repeal The Amazon Tax, where they have begun a campaign to have the legislation overturned.  There is also a Google Group that you can join to get updates on the campaign; Mr. Armstrong has been heading up that front.  My hope is that they succeed.

Why should I care, sitting here at home in Los Angeles?  What dog do I have in this race? 

Here’s why I care:  Because the intrusion of government, (at all levels: federal, state and local,) into the lives of the normal, law-abiding citizenry, cannot keep accellerating.  It’s not just growing, it is accellerating.  It’s like a Prius, careening out of control (if you believe any of that hype.)

I have been doing a lot of soul-searching, as I watch, to my dismay, as my fellow Californians vote to pass stupid tax increases and pointless bond measures like it's nothing at all.  From sales tax increases for pointless mass-transit projects, to Governor Arnold and his complete inability to manage his way out of a paper bag, let alone manage such an enormous entity as the State of California.  Then you have the L.A. City Council and local government, wasting money and playing favorites left and right.  The City Attorney has found a neat way to quash both property and free speech rights by cracking down with his regulatory iron fist, upon those giant supergraphics that they like to wrap buildings with these days.  (That one is a real shame, since the supergraphics often improve the buildings' appearance too.)

Through it all, the voice in my head has been getting louder, asking with all seriousness:  do I really want to stay in California, if this is going to be how it's going to be?  But then, is it really going to be any better anywhere else?  Should I stay and fight?  But that is a another question for another time.

The issue at hand for today is:  Can a small group of dedicated, principled, freedom-fighting Coloradans  defeat this tax?

If so, then I might feel like there’s some hope for the rest of us.

And, I pledge my solidarity, by declaring that

We Are All Coloradans

or, at least, this blogger is.

Presidential Hypocracy

I was just driving home, half-listening to the news on the radio, when I was jolted to full attention by the following quote, spoken in the voice of President Barama:

“...because nothing should get in the way of a family and its doctor.”

As I said, I had only been half-listening, (maybe even only one-third-listening,) and the news broadcast switched to another subject after the quote ended.  Still, it didn’t take any effort at all for the news junkie in me to realize that he was talking about his latest efforts to get Congress to pass his healthcare legislation.

I wanted to jump up and point at the radio and shout “You Lie!” but since I was driving and it was raining, and driving in the rain in L.A. is pretty much like driving in an ice storm anywhere else in the country, I couldn’t really jump up and level my accusation.

Come on people, let’s do a little reality check here.  Is there not already a MASSIVE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY and ENDLESS REGULATORY RED TAPE bogging down our healthcare system (and getting right in the way of a family and its doctor?)  For the President to make this particular statement, on this subject, in the context of what he is trying to do with healthcare in America, is utterly outrageous.  You can see it on YouTube here and if you scroll to 2:57 you will get the quote.  It is preceded by a pretty standard rant against the evil insurance companies, which of course completely drops the context of all the regulation that has them boxed into the dreadful state they are in these days.

Back when my Mom was still working as a nurse (Hi Mom!) I remember how shocked I was to learn that it was about a third of the man-hours of a doctor’s office that was given to regulatory compliance.  I’m sure it’s much higher now, probably close to half (or more?) as that was probably about a decade ago. 

Do we really need more of this?  How much red tape is enough?  Is there EVER enough?  The answer (from those holding the tape dispensors) is:  Clearly Not!   The problem with red tape is that the more of it you have, the more you need, to try to fix the unexpected problems that inevitably spring up as a result of the red tape applied to the problem in the first place. 

The red tape must be unraveled, not augmented.

And, there are so, so, so many good ideas out there for reforming the system, from tort reform, to reducing mandates and allowing interstate insurance competition, and encouraging those medical savings accounts, and many others, that there’s really no excuse for pretending that expanding the existing MASSIVE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY and ENDLESS REGULATORY RED TAPE is the way out of this mess.  (Yes, I realize that if the RRT is really ‘endless’ then it is a logical contradiction to characterize it as ‘expandable’ but there are far worse contradictions at work in the halls of Congress, and believe you me, they will find a way to do it.)  And if you think this bill will somehow streamline things or pay for itself with its own efficiencies or some such nonsense, you are living in Fantasy Land.

I also fully realize that the kind of contradictory double-speak exhibited by President Barama in this example is the norm these days, and it practically comes out of just about every politician’s mouth all the time, but he is the President after all, and as such it makes him a pretty clear target for criticism.