8151354
submission
headkase writes:
Ask Slashdot indeed. If you travel by plane then you have a vested interest in this story. The terrorists are winning. The purpose of terrorism is not to kill as many people as possible but rather to disrupt the systems of your enemy. In the United States terrorists have succeeded brilliantly. The main agency formed to combat terrorism, the TSA, is a reactionary organization. It does not operate by logic but rather operates by "theater". Its purpose is to say that "something is being done" is more important than actually doing something. The TSA is being manipulated by terrorists. Terrorists are succeeding is disrupting the lives and quality of life of millions of Americans daily. Jerks. This "Ask Slashdot" is to generate ideas and seed them into the wider Internet community so that the purposes of terrorism can be more effectively negated. Please contribute any suggestion, criticize and build on any others, and in general act like a Citizen instead of a sheep. Thank you.
7274644
submission
headkase writes:
Recently I conducted an experiment on slashdot. I started with an issue that has relevance to this community and I sought a community validation for a definitive truth on it. The experiment was to explore whether or not social networks could be used as vehicles of debate to collect, refine, and present opinion. I believe it was successful as I encountered someone who was able to present, and validate to me, a position that was the absolute pragmatic approach that should be taken for the issue in question. If you would like to jump straight to what I believe to be the authoritative answer then please see this: link. The debate in general was about the importance of the public domain, see the instigation of the discussion: here. Now that I have defined global issues in my mind I need mechanics who dwarf my abilities. I have outlined some basics of how to manage a forum that seeks truth through discussion but as an individual compared to the group it could be developed much better by an "us." If you would like to contribute to the mechanics of such a forum, please see a feature request on the Facebook developer forums: here. If you would like to discuss the values associated with it then please see this group: here.
Individually we are relatively intelligent. As a whole we are a juggernaut. Please contribute.
7237436
submission
headkase writes:
Instead of using machines for the intelligence could social networks be used as an artifact to store and organize intelligence for humans? Along the lines outlined here.
I place this firmly in the public domain. If your nation does not permit a public domain then I grant you an unlimited license to use this in any manner you see fit with or without attribution.
As we enter the Information Age I am outlining a method here for harnessing our plurality, creativity, values, and intelligence to manage the issues of the day that relate to public importance.
Social networks have risen in popularity in the last few years and while they are excellent methods to maintain contact with your friends and acquaintances they could be dramatically improved by adding an agenda driven, truth seeking through adversity, and hierarchical organization of discussion, where you drill down and bubble back up. Closing deeper levels of conversation with truth. You may also support your position by linking around to more comprehensive arguments.
While seeking truth, bias is permitted to cover areas of opinion but prejudice is forbidden as this covers areas of fact.
Anyone may start a agenda/topic/issue to be managed. Topics are tagged, You have your "watch" topics, when your interests appear you are notified and you have the opportunity to go there and be either a proponent, opponent, or authority.
When you contribute something new you have the option to link back to your agenda to support it.
Some mechanics could include: At the root in a social network, general categories exist for discussion. Moderators manage here but they are not permitted to be proponents or opponents, only authorities. These authorities also may place any other authority at any sub-branch in their domain. Every reply is a branch, and drilling down, moderators get to manage branches they are responsible for. Creating a branch makes you its primary moderator and gives you the ability to add or remove others with this status. Your record of truth contributes to your rating of authority in their respective tags. As truth is established it moves back up the hierarchy to support or detract from those parents. Various opinions are collected to be used for different ratings — from a vote up/down to categorizing a comment.
As an agent everyone may attach their own opinion of reputation to any branch and these may be collated and shown for everyone. Reputation may also apply to individuals, if someone abuses, lies, vandalizes, and is pointless they can be filtered out. Being linked to your account this would sort out the majority of abuse only leaving new users to contend with.
Comments may be subversive, inflammatory, misrepresentations, and outright lies. Most of this could be minimized using keyword filtering, approval, and moderation systems if desired.
This outline takes work to pull off in a traditional forum setting and some functions have no equivalents but if purpose-built into social networks the kludginess could be minimized while maximizing efficiency and effectiveness — it is a prototype after all.
Please respond to this post by understanding the issue, adding your own ideas, contributing to the strengths, and criticizing the weakness'.
7226698
submission
headkase writes:
I place this firmly in the public domain. If your nation does not permit a public domain then I grant you an unlimited license to use this in any manner you see fit with or without attribution.
I have an agenda. I want to improve the lot of humanity as a whole.
As we enter the Information Age I am outlining a method here for harnessing our plurality, creativity, values, and intelligence to manage the issues of the day that relate to public importance.
Social networks have risen in popularity in the last few years and while they are excellent methods to maintain contact with your friends and acquaintances they could be dramatically improved by adding an agenda driven, truth seeking through adversary, and hierarchical organization, where you drill down and bubble back up. Closing deeper levels of conversation with truth. You may also support your position by linking around to more comprehensive arguments.
While seeking truth, bias is permitted to cover areas of opinion but prejudice is forbidden as this covers areas of fact.
Anyone may start a agenda/topic/issue to be managed. Topics are tagged, You have your "watch" topics, when your interests appear you are notified and you have the opportunity to go there and be either a proponent, opponent, or authority.
When you contribute something new you have the option to link back to your agenda to support it.
Some mechanics could include:
At the root in a social network, general categories exist for discussion. Moderators manage here but they are not permitted to be proponents or opponents, only authorities. These authorities also may place any other authority at any sub-branch in their domain. Every reply is a branch, and drilling down, moderators get to manage branches they are responsible for. Creating a branch makes you its primary moderator and gives you to ability to add or remove others with this status. Your record of truth contributes to your rating of authority in their respective tags.
As an agent everyone my attach their own opinion of reputation to any branch and these may be collated and shown for everyone.
As an example, and I apologize if I turn some of you completely off while I was establishing the topic, fending off the trolls, and getting other general formalities out of the way. Read this: branch of a thread. Be sure to adjust the display slider as successive comments are continuations of the previous. Jump straight to the chase: here . This outline takes work to pull off in a traditional forum setting but if purpose-built into social networks the kludginess could be minimized while maximizing efficiency and effectiveness — it is a prototype after all.
Now I do have an obligation to that thread. I didn't jerk people around, I have to spend some real time and effort there defining the finer points of why the public domain is important in an adversarial setting. I also have the commitment to do what I said and pay more attention to slashdot so that when those relevant stories appear I do go in an contribute something while linking back and rewarding the efforts of everyone who helped with the consensus. Its a social contract, I hope the social networks don't take too long to adapt to issue management.
Please respond for this post by understanding the issue, adding your own ideas, contributing to the strengths, and criticizing the weakness'.
7138050
submission
headkase writes:
I'll tell you what I think and it is in the public domain for anyone to use. If your nation is too backwards to allow a public domain then I grant you an unlimited license to use in any manner you see fit with or without attribution.
I'm a privateer. I decided to become one recently. What sparked this decision is the fact that content industries are stealing from me. When copyright was first introduced it was for a period of fourteen years which allowed the creator time to make a profit off of their work even with primitive dissemination systems of the time. After that period it expired and entered the public domain where it would join other works in a rich mosaic for future works to draw from. This is dead. Over the years copyright terms have been extended to the point where there effectively is no public domain anymore. The content industry plays lip-service to the issue, they insist that there is a public domain but when every work is at least life of author plus seventy-five years or so there is in reality no public domain from my life's point of view. I will never see Alien (1979) enter the public domain. I will never see a new original movie based off that setting and characters. I will never see the iron grip of control loosened and in fact I'm sure content is planning more extensions to the terms. Government is complicit in this, politicians have accepted bribes, er.. campaign donations, in exchange for listening to these idiotic and greedy lobbies and passing the appropriate legislation right on cue like their training taught them. Even if magically there are no more extensions to copyright by the time current terms expire the works in question will be irrelevant. No one will be interested in them any more as their times have passed. This gutting of the copyright agreement between publishers and citizens has resulted in copyright not being copyright anymore: it is now a form of property and you will pay for every single last use. In response to this wholesale theft from me I have decided to liberate what I see fit. Go to hell content. I will take whatever I like as you are raping and pillaging through my cultural tapestry. The day I stop will be the day there is an actual agreement restored. I would be willing to settle for twenty years for a copyright term which is even more generous than the original fourteen. With a twenty year period I would also like to see as a punishment for twisting our heritage that only copyrights younger than ten years would be protected from the start. In another ten you'd be up to your twenty. Bite me content you're a parasite and you are stealing from me directly. Anything 1989 and older is a moral right to me and until you stop reneging on the social contract everything newer is as well.
7018966
submission
headkase writes:
I'd like to preface this with the fact that I have a working prototype that performs well. What has the MPAA prevented in their quest to control how citizens interact with their entertainment media? Right now my setup consists of a "video jukebox". It is composed of a PC networked with an Xbox 360 which is connected to an HDTV via HDMI. Two pieces of software work together to provide the primary functionality. They are "Fair Use Wizard 2" and "Tversity". This is Windows-centric but the organization applies to all systems. Fair Use Wizard 2 is used to rip my DVD collection to the PC. The MPAA is preventing innovation at this point because they have successfully lobbied to categorize the act known as "ripping" a DVD an offense under legislation called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act or DMCA. Fortunately I don't live in a Nation that subscribes to this particular idiocy. So, from there. TVersity then handles streaming the video over my home network with the origin of the media being a general purpose PC and the destination after decoding on the Xbox 360 is the HDTV. Tversity not only streams but will transcode on-the-fly if needed to greatly mitigate the formatting issues that could arise. The organization of PC, 360, and Network defines this "video jukebox" as a concrete example of innovation that the MPAA has retarded.
Please add your own examples ideally using no more than two words in combination to describe the purpose of the device.
