Strike is Over…For Now

An Eclectic Mind and Maria’s Guides are back online.

Stop SOPA / PIPA
CC0 Image: KSimmulator

Yesterday, Wednesday, January 18, 2012, this blog, An Eclectic Mind, and my other main site, Maria’s Guides, went “on strike.” Like so many larger and more influential sites — such as Wikipedia, Craigslist, Reddit, and Boing Boing — I’d decided to help spread the word about the potential implications of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) by giving site visitors an idea of what things could be like if SOPA or PIPA became law. While I don’t claim that either I or this site have the ability to sway public opinion, I believe that a strike can be most effective when everyone participates. I was just doing my part.

(To be accurate, I need to point out that my sites were still accessible after seeing the initial information screen. I’ve worked very hard to build readership on The Eclectic Mind and Maria’s Guides and didn’t want to completely alienate visitors who were looking for specific information. (At least 75% of traffic to my sites comes from search engines.) But in order to see the content, visitors had to look at the Strike message and find the “Continue to Site” link. Or visit it more than once during the day. And judging from the site stats for the day, I can only assume that many people did not take that extra step — which doesn’t surprise me, given the extremely short attention spans of people these days.)

Amazingly, there are many Americans who don’t realize how SOPA and PIPA could affect them. And, as evidenced on Twitter yesterday, there are a surprising number of people who have never heard of either one. (If you’re one of these people, you might want to watch this video, which explains it using a whiteboard and a discussion of the actual wording of the legislation.)

So I’m glad I participated. I helped spread the word. I hope a lot of people did and that awareness for the potential problems was raised. With the participation of over 6,000 sites, I was one of many.

Did the January 18 Blackout/Strike help? This Forbes article certainly makes it seem as if it did. PC World confirms this. And Wikipedia reports lots of support from users.

But the fight is not over. Many Senators and members of Congress still support SOPA, PIPA, or both — including, embarrassingly, BOTH of the idiot Senators from my home state of Arizona. Although the vast majority of informed Americans area against SOPA/PIPA, our elected lawmakers apparently don’t remember who they are supposed to serve: the American people — not special interest groups. The only way they can be reminded is if we remind them — by contacting them and letting them know what we think.

I’m doing my part. Are you doing yours?

Because if this legislation passes, sites like mine — and so many others across the web — might go dark forever.

Stop SOPA/PIPA. Stop Internet censorship.

Why Isn’t “Childhood’s End” in my Local Library?

But boatloads of religious and mystical crap are?

Sir Arthur C. Clarke died in 2008. He was an award-winning science fiction author — and that’s an incredible understatement given the number of awards and his impact not only on science fiction but science itself. Most people know him for his novel 2001: A Space Oddyssey, which was made into a ground-breaking science fiction film in 1969.

Childhood's End CoverOn the day he died, Twitter was filled with commentary about his work. But it wasn’t 2001 that came up again and again. It was his 1953 book, Childhood’s End.

From Clarke’s Wikipedia entry:

Many of Clarke’s later works feature a technologically advanced but still-prejudiced mankind being confronted by a superior alien intelligence. In the cases of The City and the Stars (and its original version, Against the Fall of Night), Childhood’s End, and the 2001 series, this encounter produces a conceptual breakthrough that accelerates humanity into the next stage of its evolution. In Clarke’s authorized biography, Neil McAleer writes that: “many readers and critics still consider [Childhood’s End] Arthur C. Clarke’s best novel.”

Indeed, Childhood’s End is so outstanding among Clarke’s work that it has its own Wikipedia entry.

I’m pretty sure I read the book, but I honestly don’t remember it. My science fiction reading was done mostly in my late teens and I consumed a lot of Clarke’s work. Rendezvous with Rama remains my favorite of his books. But when so many people on Twitter were raving about Childhood’s End, I made a mental note to track it down and read it (again).

Time passed. I’ve halted all book buying in an effort to stem the tide of incoming clutter at my home. I wanted to read something other than the books on my reading pile. Something to escape the real world. And I remembered Childhood’s End.

So I visited Wickenburg’s Public Library to pick up a copy.

And was surprised to learn that they didn’t have it.

Not that it was simply out on loan. They just didn’t have the book in the library.

They had 2001, 2010, 2061, and even 3001 (which I didn’t even know existed). And there was another Clarke title on the shelf — although it wasn’t listed in the computerized card catalog. But no Childhood’s End — which many consider his best work. No Rama, either.

I was disappointed, but not terribly surprised. They didn’t have Carl Sagan’s Contact, either. That book had been made into a movie starring Jody Foster. You’d expect it to be present on the shelves, but … well, I’ll get to my reason why in a moment.

I looked around the library for what they did have. The New Arrivals section bore little resemblance to the New Arrivals tables at the Barnes and Noble I visit near our Phoenix place. Those were new, noteworthy books. I only found one of them in Wickenburg: The Murder of King Tut by James Patterson. I grabbed it. There was very little fiction and much of the fiction they did have had Christian crosses on the binding. That’s Wickenburg’s way of noting that a book is Christian literature. They do the same thing with mysteries and science fiction, but the New Arrivals area had far more crosses on bindings than other symbols.

I wandered back to the paranormal section of the nonfiction shelves, hoping to find some of the books I’d seen listed on various skeptics sites. To their credit, they had Flim Flam! by James Randi — an excellent read that I reviewed here. But that was the only title for skeptics. Meanwhile, they had over two dozen titles by Sylvia Browne. And the health section was stuffed with books about unproven remedies and health regimens.

I wandered back toward fiction and started actually looking at the bindings. That’s when I started noticing that there was an unusually high percentage of books with that Christian cross on it. Christian fiction. The library was full of it.

But it only had four books by Arthur C. Clarke.

I looked around. Other than a young woman surfing the net on her MacBook Pro, I was the youngest patron in the place. I’m in my 40s. The rest of the patrons were 60+.

I went to the desk and asked if the library could get books from other libraries in Maricopa County. I was told no, the library is run by the Town of Wickenburg and is separate.

I asked why the library didn’t become part of the Maricopa County library system. I was told that then Wickenburg would be told what books it had to carry.

“Maybe that wouldn’t be such a bad thing,” I said.

“Yes, it would,” the librarian replied. “We know what our patrons want to read.”

They do? Sure fooled me.

I’m a patron, but I don’t want to read any of the Christian fiction and pro pseudoscience crap that fills the shelves. I want to read bestsellers, the classics, and award-winning fiction. I want to read non-fiction that educates me about science and philosophy and opens my mind to critical thinking.

Clearly, I’m not going to get any of that at Wickenburg Library.

And that brings me back to my suspicions on why Contact and more books by Arthur C. Clarke and other thought-provoking authors are not in the library: the themes of these books have the audacity to suggest that there might not be a God. That the meaning of life might be something beyond what’s in the Bible. That science and a reality based on known facts are important to our survival as a species or civilization, more important than man’s religions.

Censorship at our local library? I’m convinced. Why else would they refuse to be a part of one of the biggest library systems in the state?

And my tax dollars are paying for this?

When I asked whether I could get a Maricopa County library card, the librarian confirmed that I could — but not there. “Aguila has a branch,” she told me.

Aguila is a farming community 25 miles west of Wickenburg. I’d estimate that at least 25% of the population doesn’t even speak English. Most people live in trailer homes. It’s a sad, depressed community with nothing much to offer. The possibility that it might have a better library than Wickenburg boggles my mind.

“If you get a Maricopa County library card, it’ll cost us money,” the librarian said. It was almost as if she were asking me not to, just to save them a few bucks.

What she didn’t realize was that she gave me even more reason to get one. I think my husband will have to get one, too.

Fortunately, there’s a branch of the Maricopa County Public Library walking distance from our Phoenix place. I guess I’ll be getting my reading materials there, on Wickenburg’s dime.

On Censoring Dictionaries

Why?

This morning, one of my Twitter friends @mjvalente linked to an article on John Gruber’s Daring Fireball blog, “Ninjawords: iPhone Dictionary, Censored by Apple.”

As a writer, I’m bothered by most forms of censorship, so I read what Gruber had to say. He described Ninjawords, an iPhone dictionary application, and had all kinds of glowing praise for it, followed by the meat of the problem:

It’s a terrific app — pretty much exactly what I’ve always wanted in an iPhone dictionary, and, yes, with both a better user experience and better dictionary content than the other low-cost dictionaries in the App Store.

But Ninjawords for iPhone suffers one humiliating flaw: it omits all the words deemed “objectionable” by Apple’s App Store reviewers, despite the fact that Ninjawords carries a 17+ rating.

Apple censored an English dictionary.

Gruber goes on to point out just how idiotic this is and, frankly, I can’t disagree with anything he has to say. Dictionaries should include all words in common usage; the words that were removed — words like shit and fuck — can be heard daily on cable television and in schoolyards.

My question is this: By removing them, are they trying to pretend that these words don’t exist?

Whatever.

This morning, I used the Dictionary widget, that’s part of Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard on my Mac. I use this tool often throughout my work day to make sure the words I’m using in my work are the right words or to look up words I’ve heard but am unclear on meaning. With Gruber’s post fresh in my mind, I decided to see what would happen if I looked up shit.

Shit in the Dictionary WidgetGuess what? As you can see in this screen shot, it was there.

So was fuck.

So Apple makes a dictionary with “objectionable content” available as part of its operating system, which can be used by anyone — including school children! — but will not allow an iPhone (and iPod Touch?) app with the same content?

You might argue that the Dictionary widget and application in Mac OS X are protected by Parental Controls. But how many kids who are unfamiliar with these words are likely to be buying dictionary apps? And with these words in common usage throughout the U.S., how many kids do you think have never heard them? And isn’t there some educational value to understanding the true meaning of a word and its usage? I don’t know about you, but I find the Dictionary Widget information shown here quite illuminating. I especially enjoy the “unobjectionable” explanations of the phrases.

This all goes back to George Carlin’s routine “The Seven Words.” The whole routine — not just the words. (If you follow that link and watch the clip on YouTube, watch the whole thing, including his reasoning. George Carlin was a genius.) They’re just words, people. They’re not going to bite you or make you immoral or cause you to want to kill someone. They’re individual words — not even used in sentences to communicate a message. Just plain words.

Sorry, but it just doesn’t make sense to cut them out of the dictionary.

And removing other words with perfectly acceptable meanings — words that even appear in the Bible! — just because they also have “objectionable” meanings only makes matters worse. A cock is a bird. An ass is a donkey. (Gruber’s post lists more of them.) Should kids be kept in the dark about these meanings, too?

Apple, you know I love you — I’ve been using Macs and writing about them since 1989 — but you’re being silly. Cut it out. You’re embarrassing us.

Digg and the HD DVD Key

A few thoughts about the recent goings on at Digg and elsewhere.

Last week, the hexadecimal key code that is used for copy protection on HD DVDs appeared in a blog. The key code is a 16-digit string of two-digit numbers and letters — if you spend more than an hour a day on the Web, you must have seen it by now. I won’t repeat it here because, frankly, I don’t have to. It’s easy enough to find online. Just Google HD DVD Key.

And that brings up the main point of this post: the so-called Steisand Effect. In 2002, Barbra Streisand sued a photographer who included a photo of her Malibu estate on the Web. He was doing an aerial photography research project about coastal erosion and the photo was one of hundreds of others that were published on the Web. In the publicity that followed, the photo was copied and reproduced thousands of times all over the Web. If Ms. Streisand had just kept quiet about the whole thing, it probably would have gone unnoticed. Instead, the information she wanted removed spread like a virus and received a huge amount of publicity, thus becoming far more known than she wanted.

And, of course, she had this effect named after her, which further brings up the subject (and photo links) every time someone else tries to suppress information on the Web.

That’s what happened with this HD DVD key. It appeared on a blog and someone dugg it. It soon got lots of diggs. The folks at Digg, acting on a cease and desist order (or rumor that they were about to get one) decided to be proactive and remove the references on Digg. Digg users saw this as censorship and immediately went nuts, posting more blog articles and references to the offensive key code — many of which used the code in the post title. When the Streisand Effect entry was updated on Wikipedia (yesterday, perhaps), the updater noted that there were currently more than 280,000 references to the code, a song, and multiple domain names with variations on the code.

Grant Robertson‘s post on DownloadSquad.com, “HD DVD Key Fiasco is an Example of 21st Century Digital Revolt” said it best:

As Joe Rogan’s character on Newsradio once quite accurately quipped, “Dude, you can’t take something off the Internet.. that’s like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.” The content providers have attempted to do exactly that, remove pee from the proverbial swimming pool that is the Internet and, as we’ve witnessed so many times before, they’ve failed miserably.

If the AACS Licensing Authority would have kept out of this, the code probably would have come and gone like most material on the Web — within a few days. Instead, the 16-digit number has become “the most famous number on the Web” and is everywhere. What’s worse is that while a week ago, only a few hackers might have known what to do with it to unlock or remove protection from HD DVDs, now it’s likely that someone will go through the bother of writing a software program that does the work for everyone. If that software isn’t already out, I expect it to appear any day now. And I’m sure its location will be dugg so everyone knows about it.

What can we — and others — learn about this? With the Web, nothing is private. If information can be known, it will be known on the Web. But it can remain obscure if — and only if — the owner of the information does nothing to hide it.

What should the AACS Licensing Authority have done? Quietly recall the key code and start using a new one. Or, better yet, just ignore the whole thing. Millions of people would not have known about it at all if AACS had done nothing.

But what this also brings to light is the public’s feelings about DRM. Consumers don’t want it. And now consumers are starting to fight back.

Blogging Courtesy

Why I think people should use some common courtesy on the Web.

Maybe I’m old fashioned or naive, but when I visit someone’s blog and read what they have to say, I would never consider posting a nasty comment that belittles or insults the author or another commenter.

But apparently, I’m among the minority. People will say anything they like in the comments, no matter how rude or crude it is. They use foul language, they insult the author of a post in no uncertain terms, they do their best to make it clear to other readers just how stupid they think the post’s author or another commenter is. I believe they do this for kicks and to make themselves seem more important. But what they really do is show how little self control and maturity they have.

Your Blog is Your Living Room

Here’s how I see it: A person’s blog is like their living room. By putting it on the Web, they’re opening the door for visitors. They share their opinions in their blog posts. They open comments to get feedback from visitors, to start discussions about the topic. Visitors can come and go as they please, they can participate in discussions by posting comments, they can share their insight to add value and help others learn or see another point of view.

I would no sooner post an insulting comment or perpetuate a heated argument in a blog than insult my host in his home.

If I read something in a blog that I don’t agree with and I want to comment to present my point of view, I’ll word my comment carefully as not to be insulting. This is how mature, educated people start discussions, the way ideas are shared in a friendly, non-offensive environment. This is how we learn from each other.

(A perfect example on this blog is the incredible string of informative comments for the post “Podcast Playlists No Longer Play Continuously.” I posted my solution to a problem and dozens of other people came forward with their comments and solutions. We all learned from this.)

If I find something in a blog so offensive that it makes me angry, I will simply stop reading that blog. Let’s face it: there are millions of blogs out there. Why should I waste my time reading the ones I don’t learn from or enjoy?

Bloggers Have a Responsibility

Bloggers, of course, have a responsibility. Allowing rude, insulting, and offensive comments to remain on their blog only invites more of the same. It’s like allowing the riffraff of the Web to take over your living room.

There’s been a lot of talk lately about at least one female blogger being threatened on her blog, in other blogs, and by e-mail. The threats are nasty and explicit, and to an intelligent person, would seem to be the work of deranged minds. They’re certainly not funny and, if taken seriously by the authorities, would probably lead to arrests.

My question is: how could a blogger consider himself responsible to the blogging community by allowing such comments to appear and remain on his blog?

The comment feature allows moderation. It makes it possible to clear offensive comments from a blog — like wiping dog crap off the carpet in your living room.

You might call this censorship. I don’t. I call it keeping things under control, respecting your fellow bloggers and visitors, taking responsibility for what goes on in your living room.

I Keep My Living Room Clean

I’ve had offensive comments appear on this blog. Some have been directed at me, others have been directed at other commenters. The comments were removed as soon as I saw them — normally within a few minutes of being posted.

But it bothers me that they appeared in the first place. That people can’t embrace the value of the blogging community and participate in discussions as mature and responsible adults. That they spend more energy typing in verbal abuse than actually thinking about what they’ve read and how it might apply to their lives — or not. That they’re willing to waste more time typing in a nasty comment than just moving on to a Web site that’s more in line with their own personal taste.

One thing’s for sure; their efforts will always be wasted here.