as i’ve expressed many times here, i’ve been struggling to find folk musicians to work with. so i decided to go in an entirely different direction. i bought myself a game boy, lsdj, a cheap mixer and have been doing folkore, a mix of folk and breakcore/chiptunes. this song is the first one i taped, it sounds poor because i’m taping it out of the shitty mixer.
i’m actually working on proper songs, this one was the first sketch for fun. i didn’t think it’d be as fun as it is. lsdj just sounds so good it’s ridiculous.
i still need to mod the game boy to have a backlight and the pro sound mod. there’s a lot of noise in that recording. the pipes are also very noisy, but i’m hoping to tape real pipes with a mic at some point in the future
truth be told, it’s a pretty silly song. but hey, it’s a pretty silly concept anyway!
it should be no news to most readers that i’ve been involved in communities for the best part of the last 4 years now. one thing i sought when i moved to my present community was to be in a situation where i would have no power whatsoever over what happens, and would merely become a member that contributes
though many opportunities have come for me to “pound my chest” and bite my way up the pecking order, i’ve been forcefully trying not to (even though sometimes it might happen). i was interested in seeing whether the same issues i encountered as a leader would emerge with someone else as a leader, and what other ways would emerge to deal with it
considering the current setting is very similar to at least two of my previous residencies, the expected behavior was remarkably similar to my past experiences. risking confirmation bias, what i isolated as fundamental issues regarding the setting and power structure as essential for the outcomes have proven to be very accurate in predicting outcomes of these communities
regarding the setting, the broken windows theory applied to these spaces becomes an equivalent “dirty dishes” theory of behavior, where the presence of one dirty dish creates a crescendo of mess, and cleanliness tends to preserve itself that way. again, an invisible leviathan makes itself visible by the apparent order of a space, and as its physical order decays, so does social order. this was particularly strong in parties, where the messiness and rowdiness didn’t have a law keeper counterpoint (like a bouncer in a club), causing an excessive abuse of the facilities. clearly even in a small community, there is a need for some kind of law keeping, even if the inhabitants themselves have to implement it. without it, there will be frequent incidents of organization collapse (for example, in an exponential crescendo of mess)
as for the power structure, one of the strongest things i’ve found is that the spaces become an expression of the leader’s values, vision and character. no matter how things are seen, these features will come through. in this case, the leader is exceptionally kind and non-confrontational. this has led to a natural attraction by gentle and artsy types that enjoy this kind of unauthority. unfortunately, it also has generated abuse, namely, by people who know they will not be confronted with their own actions, especially when taking advantage of the facilities (food, shelter, internet, drinks, etc)
this has been particularly obvious in instances where, thanks to overhearing, some of the abusers confided on their friends how they could take advantage of the place because nothing would happen. this is tied directly to the leadership not having any confrontational and authoritarian methods. truth be said, none of the issues are serious, but they are the initial symptoms of possible future crises
but what prompted this article wasn’t the power structure itself, but a side effect of the lack of lawfulness in a community and enforcement of its values. while dirty dishes might be a problem, it isn’t what i feel is the most important
given my personal choice of not fighting back and just sit back, my personal position has been significantly lower than usual in the local hierarchy. though that has been quite liberating in terms of personal responsibility (i can delegate everything to authority), i also lost with it the privileged position to prevent hurtful comments and other types of minor dominance establishing rites, not to mention the capacity to enforce discipline and order (e.g., expulsion of members, enforcing of cleaning, etc). the standard was set by the initial residents, which found it appropriate to make derogatory comments about my personal life for fun. while that is all fine since we were all friends, that soon spread to the newcomers that saw that as socially sanctioned behavior. and while i’m quite good at making fun of myself, i found it very interesting that soon, the jokes and ironies became stronger in the newcomers, that didn’t make an effort to know me, and took the jokes at face value as who i am. this fed back into a very interesting (albeit new) situation for me: i have been slowly pushed lower and lower on the pecking order of the house, to the point where not only i’m not asked for any advice or help anymore, but any thing i might want to say is attacked, or even myself personally. while some members might have previous grudges against me, what was very new to me was how new residents quickly absorbed these opinions on me without knowing me, and quickly proceded to step over to reach up in the pecking order. this is expressed in several ways: comments about me or my personal life, physical damages to my property, disrespect for my personal space, etc. none of these minor instances of “weak bullying” is ever dealt with, since it is not detected, or even observed, by the leadership. in fact, my decaying social status has only been visible to myself because i was, at a previous point in my life, part of leadership, and therefore more sensitive to these subtle changes
this has been an incredibly formative experience in that sense. i’ve understood how community power can break down and weaken its members into docility, not by direct abuse, but by merely tolerating it, ignoring it, or simply just not noticing it or knowing about it. obviously, i have seen myself as a leader in the past as having exactly the same problems and dealing with them exactly the same way, which means i’ve indirectly bullied countless people without knowing. this is very sobering and humbling, and i’m very happy i could go through this experience
transparency and communication are key to prevent this, but once docility of its members settles in, it is unlikely that they will report any abuse, if they see that the leadership is apathetic towards it or even for it. it means that rising in the ranks requires a type of ruthless docility that is otherwise invisible to the leadership, but powerful against competition
i have to say, after much long pondering of both situations, that being a leader is much easier than a regular member. while decisions are tougher, there is little to no strain on one’s own personal well being beyond the one caused by oneself (e.g., by worrying).
the pecking-order battles are much more subtle and ruthless under the shade of a benevolent dictator. and at the bottom will always lie the ones that seek virtue, for virtue is incompatible with such games. it seems virtuosity can only exist at the very top, or at the very bottom, just not in the brawling in-betweens
i decided to break a pattern here and added an audio song instead. fact is i’ve been less time online looking for videos and instead been mostly listening to random songs, so this is one on the uillean pipes, with several traditional songs which i think will be relevant for discussion
in the aftermath of the recent panic about censorship, driven by the big media companies wanting to filter all internet traffic to spot infringement, i feel that not everything is said every time. most arguments are passionate defenses of the ideas of commons (like the traditional song you just heard, which is anyone’s), or the defense of personal privacy as a fundamental right. while i agree with both concerns, the point i’ve been trying to get across is somewhat different
i’ve argued before that any idea of something out of nothing is preposterous, and with it, originality must be recontextualized. nothing is entirely new because everything is made of something that already existed. this works for art, ideas, languages, etc. while we might praise a poet for their highly original work, we certainly do not praise them for using words and ideas that we are capable of understanding. in order for an idea to be transmitted, the receiver needs a compatible set of symbols. in this case, the poet would write using most of the words they got from their cultural baggage. in that sense, all work is incremental, and the idea of “owning” a particular rearrangement of these cultural symbols is highly questionable
but this type of argument has been put forward enough times that i feel it would add nothing to the debate. on the other hand, the big free culture revolution seems to be completely ignored, hence my post on copyleft and copyright
first, a little background on what copyleft is and where it comes from. back when the first personal computers were built in garages by hobbyists, software was just something you’d write to make things work. but companies were also writing code and protecting it as intellectual property using the old copyright laws
soon the near-immateriality of software combined with the lossless copying that computers allowed meant that if you gave your own written software to someone and they changed it, passed it along or sold it, they would be breaching copyright laws
to prevent this from happening, licenses emerged that allowed you to use copyright as a way that would allow for this same incremental change. these licenses play a trick on copyright law, by using copyright law against itself, in a way, hacking laws against themselves. one of my favorites, the gnu gpl, solves this problem by saying: if you copyright this, you are breaching copyright (obviously with much more legalese). it also says that if you copy and change it, you cannot copyright it either. this is basically using copyright against itself, to prevent, in this case, software from being closed up in corporate intellectual property silos
this might seem too specific, but i’ll give a copyleft example that affects us much more. if you scroll down on wikipedia, you’ll find a license statement that says cc-by-sa, a creative commons license, a type of copyleft. what it says about documents is basically what i said above about software. but while coding was restricted to a few people with the skills, reading and writing about any topic you might know something about is not. the strongest point going for wikipedia is that it is free, not in the sense that you don’t pay to use it, but in the sense that you can download it, print it, use it in schools, for personal use and even write a spin off of it
this is the true power of copyleft, the fact that copyright is used as a way to guarantee that in the future, this information and the rights to modify it remain unchanged. i personally believe this is one of the biggest intellectual revolutions in history
copyleft has since expanded, thanks to the initiative of creative commons to simplify the license selection, that brought easy legalese to the average joe. and since then all kinds of artists have been publishing copylefted art. this means that you can copy and change (depending on the terms) the work provided without fears of infringement
now how is this relevant for the current issues regarding copyright and censorship?
i go under fire many times when i say that i don’t care about new laws protecting media companies and filtering personal transmissions. this might seem like i am on the media companies’ side, well, because i am! if an artist has the objectively ridiculous idea that they are entitled to copyrighting whatever work they have produced then they should enjoy that right. and use whichever means to protect it. and if they even go as far as giving their work to a bunch of talentless greedy suits so be it! the right to be an idiot or a sucker means we live in a healthy, pluralist society. it’s wrong to ban copyrighting in my opinion for the same reasons i believe banning extremist political media or religious media is wrong. provided a solid, critical citizenship, these issues become little more than sunday newspaper fait divers
the key issue here is that any artist (or engineer, writer, scientist, etc) that deliberately chooses to make his work protected for motives of fame or fortune should not be supported in the first place on an ethical basis. i don’t care if people get arrested for ripping beyonce or the latest commercial video game. if they are consuming and being brainwashed by that mind numbing shit, then they should be locked away. this will expose the truth behind the coolness and glitter of mass media: a bunch of blood sucking vampires playing with sexy puppets and a society based entirely on vampirizing creativity to feed the suited bourgeoisie
it strikes me as incredibly offensive for the idea of commons that freedom of speech is thrown around in conversations only when we can’t download another stereotype inducing blockbuster from hollywood. never mind wikileaks, never mind media censorship by governments. someone takes my arrested development away and riots ensue! like the london riots, the brainwashing of the masses by media corporations has succeeded in creating in us desire not to improve ourselves and learn, but to indulge in the shallow and barren fruits of mass media culture
so how does copyleft complement this picture? copyleft is the ethical way of producing cultural goods. there are licenses to suit every need, but mainly, the access and mashup rights allow for a speedier dissemination and improvement of things. copyleft artists understand the need for media and intellectual commons, and while the struggle against so called “censorship” to prevent copyright theft might seem like an important cause, we should see this as an opportunity to expand global awareness of the free culture revolution. lets cherish wikipedia, linux, open source hardware and all these new ideas for an open, free culture future
a yes to fighting for an open culture rooted in civilizational commons, a most definite no to using the very same laws that protect these commons to justify one’s own lust for mass consumerism
ironically, though i try to post traditional music (which is public domain for the most part), some of the media on this page is in a “gray area”. but in essence, folk music evolves thanks to the efforts of hundreds of unspoken musicians improving on an existing pool of cultural commons. maybe the answer to these media problems has been around longer than we think
the real title for this post should be “why i don’t give a fuck about SOPA, and why the american internet must come to an end” but it was too long.
if you follow any mainstream website like wikipedia, reddit, facebook, etc, you may have noticed a generalized panic around something called SOPA, the Stop Online Piracy Act. basically, some politicians in the united states want to change the internet context in a way that makes it very hard for website owners to accept user generated content. just go through the wikipedia article if you want to look more into it. explaining it is not the main focus of this post
just to contextualize, and help whoever doesn’t know how the internet works, i’ll do a short run-down about how things work, how they evolved, and why SOPA is basically irrelevant unless you’re living in the united states.
the internet is a collection of tubes connections arranged all over the world, connecting millions of computers. in order to know where something is, the internet we use (mostly, since i’m simplifying) uses a thing called TCP/IP, which is basically a little envelope with an address on it. that address is the IP address, which a huge number (232 addresses for the current version). since people aren’t good at memorizing big numbers, someone came up with DNS (Domain Name Service), which is basically a phone book with names (like google.com) and equivalent addresses (in this case, 74.125.237.147 for example). if you click that link you will still be taken to the google page.
it all works because at some point everyone agreed to use the same phonebook, the one provided by ICANN. here’s the catch: for .com, .net or .org, it is ICANN that controls the server (the directory with the addresses). now, ICANN is a non-profit corporation in the united states, which means it is governed by united states laws.
thanks to the nutty laws the united states have, the FBI and other entities can seize those top level domain names because the .com, .net, etc are united states domains anyway. here’s the catch though: if you use a domain from another country, e.g., .au, .pt, etc, the entities that assign and maintain the addresses are local to the respective country. this means that if your website is hosted in your country with your domain, you have nothing to worry about
these laws, if anything, will contribute to show that the internet as is is overly dominated by united states corporations and policies. facebook, twitter, google, etc, are all united states companies. but what if they were to be taken down by the new laws? what would happen? absolutely nothing. every other website that doesn’t run on an united states server would continue operating as usual.
recently we saw the power of this when the united states seized the domain names for wikileaks. they merely moved to a swiss domain name (from wikileaks.org to wikileaks.ch).
the software, the pages, content, etc, can be moved around the globe thanks to the distributed nature of the internet. the connections are owned by private companies, but these companies so far have kept from filtering any traffic, which means that it’s still possible, when faced with idiotic national laws like the ones in the united states, to move somewhere else.
this website however, has a .com domain, which means its address is under the united states jurisdiction. i might change that soon. let me just say i’m not happy about the way due process has been ignored in most of the recent cases, such as megaupload. my server is also in the united states, so moving all my stuff would be pricey, but worth it if these human rights issues remain unresolved
it is frequently flaunted by talking heads how the united states constitution is so unique in protecting fundamental rights. well, it most certainly isn’t the only one doing that, and this argument is usually one of pure ignorance. if facebook or twitter were to move to portugal for example, they would not only enjoy a better constitution without lobbying laws, but also be forced to comply with labor laws. if anything, tech companies love the united states because it allows them to make their own rules, their own labor laws, and their own censorship standards. in any civilized country, this would not fly.
this is why i don’t give a fuck about what the united states does or doesn’t in terms of their own internal policies. they are the worst example to follow.
i urge any netizen to look up their local internet and copyright laws and stay informed. during the next couple of years, we will see a deluge of changes in internet laws inspired by the united states debacle. it is essential that national policies aren’t drawn up out of united states fanboyism, but according to their people’s will and constitutions. and to do this, all we have to do is ignore the noise coming from the united states and beat to our own drum
it’s been a long time since i posted, fact of the matter is my computer isn’t working at the moment, plus settling down and what not. despite that, i finally found some time to post here
i hinted at it on my last post. as i noted previously, i’m now living in australia. one of the things i did once i got here was go to the local anarchist book store and visit one of their people’s kitchens.
and truth be told, anarchists everywhere are pretty similar. concerned about gender issues, equality issues, racial issues, etc etc.
but life here is too good. the mining money, which comes basically from pillaging the aboriginal land and sucking out all the resources, makes life too easy. this surplus of money allows for an incredible standards for living. food from all over the world, beaches, sports, access to all kinds of technology, healthcare, education and services. fact of the matter is life is so easy that not even the anarchists find in themselves something to complain about beyond stereotypical catchphrases copied from the latest north american chomsky approved fanzine.
but this is not something exclusive to australia. the real title of this post should be “on the impossibilities of living virtuously while being a citizen of a privileged western society”. big cities are a mecca for activism, for vegans, queers, fixed gear cyclists or generally people who have enough free mind space to reflect and reshape their lives according to a perceived (though most of the times via propaganda) better, more virtuous way of living out their lives. cities are full of clusters of exuberant idiosyncratic ideological niches
but i argue that it is impossible to both enjoy the pleasures of modern western society and have a lifestyle that somehow would offset it. sure, a punk might dumpster dive for food, brew his own, steal and shoplift. but the artifacts that s/he carries, like cellphones, laptops and even clothes, are most of the time, if not all the time, made by exploited workers far away from their own sight. and while caught up in privileged problem debates like gay marriage, the real issues fall into the backdrop, and the hypocrisy of being both an activist for labor rights and owning an iphone completely ignored
one of the most shocking examples for me since i got here is how little is discussed and done about the aboriginal situation in the northern territories. all anarchists and activists i spoke to about this said basically the same thing: “yeah, the aboriginal situation is fucked up.”. full stop. then resumed whatever rant was on about some minor gender / economic situation they might be involved in.
this to me speaks to a deeper truth about most activist movements: bigger issues, bigger ideas, are left for the aging left wing activists that keep waving marx’s capital. the new young activist cares about a million tiny things that no one knows about, and none of the big things everyone cares about. carrying around the iphone while trying to be an activist is the perfect example of the cargo cult activism i’ve been denouncing for quite some time.
but certainly i wouldn’t end on yet another rant about how individualism has eroded virtue in our every day life.
what, in my opinion, makes this cargo cult activism so appealing is that it is intelligible. gay marriage is easy to understand. drug laws are somewhat easy to understand. labor laws? not so much. economy, property laws, native rights, etc, are issues that require a deeper knowledge, a desire to dive deep into what is involved in all these issues. it needs deep thought and reflective critical thinking, if you will. but most of the things around us are unintelligible. it is impossible to fully grasp what an iphone implies as an artifact: the extraction, manufacturing, propaganda, consumerism, externalization of costs, outsourcing of labor, etc. how could something so small that fits on the palm of our hand bring up all these issues? certainly having one wouldn’t be a problem.
but this is where we become complete suckers. if presented with one of these artifacts and a price tag, we accept the price as representing its cost. this is one of the greatest tricks the globalized market has achieved. nowhere in the price is the ecological footprint, the human footprint or the societal footprint. since money has no morals of its own, existing in this supposed aether of value, we gracefully pay from what we earned to support this incredible web of dependencies.
i believe the only way of fully restoring sanity into every day life is to have realistic prices (if we still want to live with currency) that fully reflect the whole chain of production. through lawful action prevent money from obfuscating what we are really buying into.
certainly i could go into a post-capitalism scenario. but today, i chose to take capitalism for granted and explore a possible transition.
ideally, it is my belief that no artifact should ever be both unintelligible and mass produced. it created this schizoid lifestyle where we eat greet but blog about it on blood laptops and smartphones
and above every thing else, i still can’t deal with the punks with iphones. oh how the mighty have fallen (if they were ever mighty).
this is why i am leaning towards exploring ideas like the civilization starter kit, which give us transparency for the whole supply chain. we have enough stuff. now we just need to learn how to use it