Centralized world power and Net censorship

Centralized world power and Freedom of Speech cannot coexist!

We live in a small world where the actual power structure is hidden and centralized. On the other hand, the Net is all about freedom of speech. Clearly, centralized power and the Net cannot coexist. It is obvious that centralized power is well entrenched so naturally it is the Net that has to back off. This backing off manifests itself in many ways such as malware, P2P clogging, complexity and cost of Internet access, sluggish roll-out, non standard components, obsolescence, information overload, lack of customization and so on.

But the most sinister factor is Google's dominance. The lack of competition allows Google to stick to its keyword centric syntactic strategy where it is able to censor websites much more easily. This SIGNAL vs NOISE kind of censorship is able to confuse even the most determined searchers. In any case, Google is more about Ads than about Search.

The only way to bypass such censorship seems to be to search on the basis of authors as opposed to keywords. This is the only way to keep the SIGNAL NOISE ratio from getting out of control. What is more worrying is not ideology, it is spin. This is the reason we should give up even on authors and follow only individual commenters. The logic is that authors are looking for numbers and only spins see propagation.

To follow individual commenters, we can click on their names, which is usually a link to their website or a page containing other comments made by them. We can also try and Google their name. Savvy commenters pick quirky (hopefully unique) screen names for this very purpose.

But never mind, here too, our rulers have found a way out: botnets. The common perception is that botnets are moronic spreaders of spam and some of the less moronic botnets even try and phish out our passwords. To a certain extent this is true because email is the purest form of addressability so our rulers need spam to dilute it. And also financial scams and economic hardship have forever been used to keep people under control. That such actions keep the insurance and security companies humming is welcome too.

In actual fact, botnets are highly sophisticated networks which are not only able to unceasingly dodge detection but also troll ALL forums and add to the NOISE everywhere. Even complex captchas are no deterrents to these sophisticated bots. It is amazing how many of the comments posted are actually from sophisticated trolls that never be exposed because these behave like human commenters and come from innocent IPs. Recent studies have confirmed that botnets use SEO techniques to capture search engine traffic on controversial keywords.

Moral of the story: Suspect anything and everything because PERCEPTION CONTROL is the biggest game in town.

Internet Censorship Alert

Internet Censorship Alert: Alex Jones exposes agenda to 'blacklist' dissenting sites (March 14, 2010) As I predicted, the Obama Administration is trying to shut down the Internet - at least the parts he doesn't like. Barack Obamas regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein has stated that he wants to ban conspiracy theories from the internet. Think about what this means - Every video, every website, every blog, every email, that exposes or just criticizes the government for any reason whatsoever could be labeled a "conspiracy" and taken down. Your home could be raided in the middle of the night, and you could be carted of to jail for criticizing the government. All they have to do is call it a "conspiracy theory". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqAWmBLFodE

Sunday, September 28, 2008

Mark Cuban on the Financial Crisis

Mark Cuban on the Financial Crisis
Greta Van Susteren
Sep 25, 2008

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,427644,00.html

Self-made billionaire and entrepreneur Mark Cuban went "On the Record" about the economic crisis facing the nation.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, Mark, I want to start at the end and work backwards. What happens after the bail out?

MARK CUBAN, DALLAS MAVERICKS OWNER: Boy, that's a good question.

Let's just say we put $700 billion into the economy, we increase liquidity, and it all goes according to plan--except there's one problem. The people who will do the lending after the money is injected were the ones that were doing the lending before. These were guys who don't know how to bank the right way.
Related

So my guess is that they are going to be afraid to lend money. You're not going to see the effect of anybody being able to walk in, even with good credit, to borrow money for a house, to borrow money for a car.

VAN SUSTEREN: Does this financial crisis, for lack of a better word, that we're in--I know how it affects people who are lower income and middle income, but how about the rich guys? Does this have really any impact on you?

CUBAN: Oh, of course it has an impact, but we can rebound a lot more quickly. I had money in Lehman, and it's just gone.

VAN SUSTEREN: One of the things that sort of bothers people is it seems like the people that have a lot of responsibility in this are getting the bailout. Is there any other alternative that see instead of a bailout?

CUBAN: No. You're going to have to bailout, you're going to have to inject liquidity, you're going to have to take the bad loans and all the bad instruments off people's balance sheets.

All the social networking we talk about--we need to make sure that every transaction that takes place, wherever there is money injected, wherever there is a purchase made, all that is made available for all the citizens of the country to see.

Because it's not going to be an oversight board that catches problems. It's going to be the citizens of this country that go online and on a second by second basis that catch problems.

Because, I have to tell you, Wall Street is too smart. They can stay ahead of any board that any political entity appoints, but you are not going to be able to stay ahead of pure transparency, because the people of this country will get involved, pay attention, will realize $700 billion is at stake. And they'll also want to see if they're making money, because I think the second part of the fear is, yes, we may make money, but just like we don't know exactly where our tax money goes today, this money will go right in to the Treasury and somebody will earmark it, and it will be gone.
Posted by amolpatil2k at Sunday, September 28, 2008
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)