TCLP 2011-08-07 News

This is a news cast, an episode of The Command Line Podcast.

In the intro, a recommendation for the Humble Indie Bundle #3.

This week’s security alerts are using science fiction to teach computer security and Android trojan records calls.

In this week’s news, nano-circuits that adhere to any substrate, 800Mbps wirelss network made using LED light bulbs, escaping from inifinite loops, and Mozilla’s vision of an internet life plartform.

Following up this week FOI requests reveal passage of the Digital Economy Act was a foregone conclusion and ripping CDs set to be legalized in the UK.

[display_podcast]

View the detailed show notes online. You can also grab the flac encoded audio from the Internet Archive.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

3 Replies to “TCLP 2011-08-07 News”

  1. Am I alone in thinking that “user-sovereignty” is a completely over a over-blown term for “customization.” I find Mitchell’s use of the term in his blog more then a little misleading, even in a technical sense.

    I ask this as a student of poltical science and government, after googling the sparse info on the subject (mostly Mitchells own blog posts) I must conclude that either Mozilla has a deeper vision for this term or else they’ve picked a pretentious and non-informative noun that just happens to sound cool.

    Either way, it should be expounded upon: does Mitchell accept or reject, “sovereignty’s” implicit association with governance?

    1. Perhaps self-determination would have been a better chosen term than sovereignty. I think there is something more to Baker’s point than “customization”. It resonates with Siva Vaidhyanahan’s contention that we lack true public spaces online. Exercising free online speech in the fora available to us is like assembling in shopping malls not village greens (or the modern/urban equivalent where appropriate.)

      I see the point of her writing as trying to find ways for ordinary users to exercise more independence in online interactions from which may flow more control or at least more leverage than they have now.

  2. Thanks for the clarification.

    I’ve dealt with similar idea’s in my own blogging (Geography of Main st. vs Internet) and I must admit I mostly see this issue as a social one, where-in the design of the internet only alows a very tightly controlled social forum to grow on an existing technological structure.

    And though I am sympathetic to the idea that technology might someday grant individuals “more leverage” online, I feel that it isn’t a realistic contention, as the primary issue is one of social behavior and not hardware or software re-structuring. The base analogy being, you cannot, through technology, morph a confrence call or VTC into a face to face meeting.

    No matter how you dice it you have the issue of an audience and the resulting large social distance among the particiapants. So more then likely the law of diminishing returns applies to any sort of user-oriented technology-driven self-determinism (I am thinking that true self-determinism via technology is reminiscent of the play-field in the movie TRON, and that is just simply not in the near future). The simple fact is that, currently, technology is great for established interests and groups and not so good at reconciling differences among those groups.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *