Hacking is Activism, But Can't Ignore Politics (Score 1)

I agree with the article that hacking, like art, promotes ideas that challenge that status quo, and is therefore an effective form of activism. However, it's not enough to promote new ideas if those who are benefiting from the status quo you are challenging have the power to suppress them. Should artists who create controversial work which other people then want to ban just stick to creating the best art they can and let the "experts" decide whether anyone should be allowed to see it? Obviously not, artists sometimes need to be advocates for their work, and so do geeks.

The problem is, politics is selfish and irrational, while geeks as a whole tend to be an altruistic, reasonable bunch. The same qualities that make a good geek make a bad politician, which is a compliment to geeks. Look at our main advocacy organization, the EFF, they are too nice! They concentrate on grassroots education, not on lobbying. Meanwhile, the RIAA and MPAA are holding a financial gun to the head of Congress. It's not because there's any public support for the RIAA / MPAA position, there isn't even any public awareness of it, which is the problem. The RIAA / MPAA would never be able to generate public support for their position, but they can generate large checks that can buy elections.

I would not want the EFF to stoop to those tactics, but someone needs to stoop to them if we want to counter the RIAA / MPAA. Unfortunately, the closest thing I've heard of can't be taken seriously, if only because it's called GeekPAC. It sounds like some kind of a joke, and if you present yourself as a joke, you shouldn't be surprised if you're not taken seriously. So, I would like to say to the GeekPAC people, change your name, and get serious. Either that, or someone needs to start a serious, technology friendly, thouroughly disgusting lobbying organization.