Politics – Mike Linksvayer

Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

A Toolkit for Anti-SOPA Activism: #13 (or #0?)

Monday, December 12th, 2011

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has an excellent checklist of 12 things you can do to fight the U.S. Congress’ attack on the Internet. Most of them are tiresome rearguard actions against this particular legislation (though most can have secondary long-term effects of educating policymakers and the public about the harm of attacking the Internet). All this is necessary, please take action now.

Action #12 is long-term: contribute financially to the EFF so they can continue “leading the fight to defend civil liberties online, so that future generations will enjoy an Internet free of censorship.” Indeed, please do this too. I’ve recommended becoming an EFF member in the past, and will continue to do so. Actually I’m even more enthusiastic about donating to the EFF in 2011 than I was in 2005. In addition to playing an absolutely critical role in fighting SOPA, PIPA, and their ilk, the EFF’s small technical staff is working on some of the most important technical challenges to keeping the Internet open and secure. They are awesome!

There’s one more item that needs to be in every responsible digital freedom activist’s toolkit: the digital commons, meaning free and open source software and their analogues in culture, knowledge, and beyond. Using and consuming free software and culture is crucial to maintaining a free society. There are many reasons, some of which I mentioned recently at OWF, and with a bit more focus in a FSCONS 2008 presentation (slideshare, .pdf, .odp), but here’s one: imagine a world in which most software and culture are free as in freedom. Software, culture, and innovation would be abundant, there would be plenty of money in it (just not based on threat of censorship), and there would be no constituency for attacking the Internet. (Well, apart from dictatorships and militarized law enforcement of supposed democracies; that’s a fight intertwined with SOPA, but those aren’t the primary constituencies for the bill.) Now, world ~~domination~~liberation by free software and culture isn’t feasible now. But every little bit helps reduce the constituency that wishes to attack the Internet to possibly protect their censorship-based revenue streams, and to increase the constituency whose desire to protect the Internet is perfectly aligned with their business interests and personal expression.

Am I crazy? Seriously, I’d like to make the case for the commons as crucial to the future of free society more compellingly. Or, if I’m wrong, stop making it. Feedback wanted.

…

Relatedly, the English Wikipedia community is considering a blackout to protest SOPA. Here’s the comment I left at the request for comment:

Support doing something powerful. I blackout would be that. I do have some reticence though. Making the knowledge in English Wikipedia and maybe other sites inaccessible feels a bit like protestors who destroy their own neighborhood. Sometimes necessary to gain attention and perhaps justice in the long run, but always painful and with collateral victims. Sure, visitors to Wikipedia sites can come back later or find a mirror, but just as surely, the neighborhood will recover. Maybe. Admittedly the analogy is far from perfect, but I wish there were something the Wikimedia movement could do that would have power analogous to a mass physical action, but avoid costs analogous to the same. Long term, I think fulfilling the Wikimedia vision is exactly that. In the short term, maybe a total blackout is necessary, though if there’s a a way to equally powerfully present to viewers what SOPA means, then let them access the knowledge, I’d prefer that. UI challenge? Surely some A:B testing is in order for this important action. I’d hope that at least some messages tested convey not only the threat SOPA poses to Wikimedia, but the long-term threat the Wikimedia movement poses to censorship.

Posted in Creative Commons, Economics, Free Speech, Intellectual Protectionism, Open Source, Politics, Wikipedia | 4 Comments »

Occupy 980

Wednesday, December 7th, 2011

I’m in agreement with Timothy B. Lee’s posts a month ago that urban freeways are not needed and harmful, but whether any particular urban freeway ought be actively taken down depends. (Of course no more ought be built and nearly all existing ought not to have been built.)

Lee’s posts got me thinking about which of Oakland’s freeways ought be torn down first.

The map above gives a pretty good idea of Oakland freeways. Clockwise from the top there’s 80/580 going north into Berkeley, 24 into a tunnel through the hills, 580 and 880 continuing on for a long way to the southeast and into San Leandro (there’s also 13 in the hills connecting 24 and 580, the only segment completely off-map), and 80 across the bay to San Francisco. Then there’s 980 connecting 24 and 880. 980 is the obvious segment to go:

Traffic volumes on 980 are less than any of the others (excepting 13).
980 cuts West Oakland off from downtown, and causes the former to be completely encircled by freeways.
Despite being relatively low traffic, the real estate used by 980 is a city block wide. About 29 core city blocks could be freed for other uses.
980′s primary purpose is apparently for providing access to downtown Oakland. A freeway through downtown is not needed for downtown access. Drivers wanting downtown access need to drive on downtown streets, and can do so just a tiny bit sooner. Downtown Oakland streets have lots of capacity and are rarely congested.
In the next decades, autonomous vehicles will push “not needed” to the extreme, as such will enable much, much higher capacity on the same roads. Oakland, like all cities, ought to be planning for autonomous vehicles now.

Before last month, I had not realized that 980 was not completed until 1985, which by itself does not strongly support my understanding of the local narrative (which I must have heard by 1995) concerning the extent to which 980 negatively impacted West Oakland. But apparently construction started in 1964. Planning was underway in the 1950s. I’m don’t know when about 29 blocks were destroyed to make way for 980 (I’d appreciate pointers), but it could have been 20 or more years before completion, and even if not, the knowledge that they would be destroyed must have contributed to isolation.

Perhaps Occupy Oakland ought move to some of the greenery along 980, or Grove-Shafter Park, which is more or less under the interchange where 24, 580, and 980 meet — more than symbolic, a physical barrier separating the poor from the powers that be. They wouldn’t need to make any specific demands about what would come after destroying the segment of the system that is 980. 29 blocks of vertical hemp farms? Mixed income housing? Art studios? “Occupy Park”, a grand urban park named for the movement? Skyscrapers? Ironically nostalgic monorail line? No need to decide now, dream on!

Posted in Economics, Oakland, Politics | 4 Comments »

Election methods illustrated

Monday, December 5th, 2011

Before more abominable people drop out, making this even less interesting:

Approval	Range	Preferential	First	Candidate
Y	99	1		Johnson
Y	70	2		Paul
Y	60	3	X	Huntsman
	20			Gingrich
	10			Romney
	2			Perry
	1			Bachmann
	0			Santorum

Notes:

My preference for voting systems expressed left to right, for GOP nomination candidates, top to bottom.
A preferential system could involve ranking all candidates, but it seems the most common implementation has voters rank their top 3.
I prefer random selection and/or futarchy to any of the listed methods in many democratic contexts, but will consider them beyond the pale for just this post.
Candidate preference largely based on impression (I haven’t studied any of them closely) of “foreign policy” because that’s where the U.S. President can make a huge impact. I’d be happy to also consider positions on executive power, though I have even less data on that, and have no hope, considering that Obama and Biden had some of the better positions on that in 2008 and their administration’s record is abominable.
I liked a former New Mexico governor in 2008 as well. What are the chances the current NM governor will turn out not to be an imperialist torturer and run in 2016?
Paul is embarrassing, which shows just how bad the field is.
Huntsman is the only acceptable candidate that is in theory electable.
The rest advocate torture and are clearly militarists and nationalists who put the world in grave danger.
I prefer Gingrich to the other torturers because his administration would be wracked by scandal, hopefully enough to damage the imperial presidency.
I prefer Romney to the theocrats because as a religious minority, he isn’t likely to be one.

Posted in Politics | 2 Comments »

Tiresome rearguard actions

Wednesday, November 16th, 2011

Watch out 2024!

Incorporates North Korea Mass Games by Peter Crowcroft and Hollywood Sign by Oreos, available under BY-SA (questionably in former case), but I’m claiming fair use. Result dedicated to the public domain.

Posted in Creative Commons, Free Speech, Intellectual Protectionism, Peeves, Politics | 3 Comments »

No more child veterans

Saturday, November 12th, 2011

Yesterday was Veteran’s Day. In support of that, I donated to the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers.

In the U.S. (as in most jurisdictions), people have an odd attitude toward military veterans. Even those who generally condemn the activities and costs of the (especially U.S.) military as stupid and counterproductive, or much worse, fall into the grip of nationalist religion and “honor” people who directly participated in mass murder. Those who generally support the activities and costs of nationalist armies go out of their way to signal how much they honor and support mass murderers. But, apart for the most compassionate of the former, most zealous of the latter, and some veterans and their lobbyists, generally military veterans are kicked the the curb — thanks for murdering for the nation-state; good luck on the streets and in our fine institutions!

Fortunately, there is a way out of this hero/murderer/reject paradox (other than ceasing U.S. military interventions; yes I want that, but I’m not that ambitious today) — recognize that most U.S. soldiers are children. As such, they should be pitied and rehabilitated. Furthermore, the minimum age for joining the U.S. military ought be raised to at least 21, and a 4 year college degree required (up from 17 and high school, with caveats). Never again should a child be forced to choose between murder and no money for college.

Posted in Economics, Peeves, Politics | No Comments »

Commons experts to develop version 4.0 of the CC licenses

Thursday, November 3rd, 2011

As described on the Creative Commons blog some initial discussions were had at the CC Global Summit about 6 weeks ago in Warsaw. I’m looking forward to the start of in depth discovery, analysis, and debate of pertinent issues on the cc-licenses list, the CC wiki, and elsewhere over the coming months. Please join in, commons experts.☺

I gave a brief presentation on one of those issues at the summit, on the “NonCommercial” term of some CC licenses (odp, pdf, slideshare). [Addendum 20111104: This talk was not recorded. Only slides are available. Don't watch the videos below if you're only looking for a talk on NC!]

More relevantly (to 4.0; yes, NC is pretty relevant, becoming less so, the commons is super relevant, indeed all important) though more abstractly, I also organized a session on “CC’s role in the global commons movement”. I’m very happy with how that turned out, but it is only a tentative beginning, about which I will write further. For now you can read Silke Helfrich’s summary post and slides, Tyng-Ruey Chuang’s presentation text, Leonhard Dobusch’s slides, and Kat Walsh’s presentation text and download or watch at archive.org or YouTube:

Because I may never get around to blogging it separately, I also gave a presentation on “what’s happened in Creative Commons and the open community over the last 3 years.” You may recognize one slide from an earlier post. View slides (odp, pdf, slideshare) or video at archive.org or YouTube:

Posted in Creative Commons, Economics, Peeves, Politics, Public Domain, Public Goods, Wikipedia | 3 Comments »

Dear Jean Quan,

Sunday, January 2nd, 2011

Congratulations on your election and tomorrow’s inauguration as Oakland mayor.

I ranked Rebecca Kaplan ahead of you, but in truth my expressive rationale for doing so could just as well have favored you: a progressive Asian American woman represents a defining characteristic of what makes Oakland special and its future just as much as does a green lesbian (who is also an American and a woman, but such is identity politics).

Expressiveness aside, expectations for positive outcomes from your term as mayor are pretty low (note emphasis on outcomes; everyone knows you’ll put in more hours than recent Oakland mayors). Oakland still has a terrible crime problem, and city finances are beyond terrible. I suspect if there were betting markets on outcomes related to these problems, current prices would predict that under your leadership crime will get worse (relative to comparable cities; of course national trends may determine absolute direction of change), chief police Anthony Batts will quit, the city will teeter on bankruptcy, your response will be to ‘social program us to death’, and you will be a one term mayor, succeeded by Kaplan, Joe Tauman, or John Russo.

Low expectations can be a blessing, if you’re willing to take steps to smash them and secure your re-election and legacy as Oakland’s most successful mayor in decades.

First, crime. Blaming the problem on poverty, racism, poor schools, unemployment, etc., isn’t going to cut it, neither as discourse nor as the stereotypical actions resulting, loosely characterized as “building youth centers”. Most voters aren’t that stupid (well, they are, but in other directions when it comes to crime). Fortunately, one can be a good progressive, acknowledge that crime is a major problem, especially for the disadvantaged, and take smart, progressive-compatible steps to smash crime. Check out Progressive Change Campaign Committee co-founder Aaron Swartz’s essay on crime:

Such things are a frustration for white suburbanites, but for poor people stuck in the ghetto, they’re a nightmare. Crime is yet another disadvantage and a particularly noxious one at that. Even aside from all the other indignities suffered by the poor, just imagining life in a crime-ridden neighborhood is enough to make your skin crawl.
…
So there’s the question: How can we have less crime with less punishment?

Here are the no-brainer steps you can take on crime:

Do not get caught saying anything that could be construed as “blaming society” for the problem or that the solution consists of “building youth centers”.
Work with Batts to actually fight crime; defer to his expertise at every opportunity.
Provide high-minded leadership on protecting civil liberties; on this defer to nobody. However, limit riot-bait to national and global issues. For example, city proclamations calling for bringing George W. Bush to justice and the like will only cause rioting on right-wing talk radio, leaving Oakland neighborhoods and businesses unscathed.

Next, finances. Similarly no-brainer suggestions:

Repeat early, loudly, and clearly that Oakland has an unsustainable spending problem, and everyone, especially your loyal allies in and funded by city government, are going to feel immediate pain.
Immediately push through cuts, primarily to areas you favor politically, sparing police and maintenance as much as possible.
Immediately push through efficient revenue increases, e.g., tackle mis- and under-priced parking.

Beyond the above mandatory issues, a few less pressing but visionary actions for you to consider adding to your mayoral legacy:

Do everything you can to signal (and perhaps do a little of substance too) that you believe Oakland is the eco-city of the future, urban permaculture doers are heroes, and Oakland should be the world leader in marijuana business and education. Each of these increases Oakland’s specialness, and eliminates any future challenge from Kaplan. (If you’re moderately successful on the two major issues above, you also eliminate any traction Tauman or Russo might otherwise gain during your first term.)
Make Oakland the leader in “open” policy. There are obvious opportunities around city data, software procurement, and open licensing of city publications. The last would even help improve the article about you on Wikipedia. ☺ I and many other technology professionals and advocates of openness who live in Oakland would love to help. Some of us work for Creative Commons and other organizations with deep expertise in this area.
In another decade, autonomous vehicles will reshape cities. Establish some kind of an unpaid citizens committee to investigate how Oakland can prepare.

Here’s to great outcomes for Oakland, and your incredible success as mayor!

Mike Linksvayer
Golden Gate District, Oakland

Posted in Creative Commons, Economics, Oakland, Open Source, Politics, Prediction Markets, Wikipedia | 1 Comment »

Yet Another Biaxial Political Spectrum

Sunday, November 21st, 2010

state-market skepticism-confidence biaxial spectrum

SVG

Thought of while microblogging (emphasis added):

@glynmoody … I find it nice that movement gelling on both govt-skeptic and market-skeptic sides eg c4sif.org and p2pfoundation.net

As one moves toward increasing skepticism of both mechanisms, one might focus more on institutional design (wherein there is a huge space for exploration: two areas I’ve occasionally rambled about are commons and futarchy, both applicable to arrangements across state and market), as everything is broken and needs fixing. If one is much more skeptical about one mechanism than the other, one will assume the more confidence-inspiring mechanism will adequately check any problems of the other — e.g., so-called Masonomics:

At the University of Chicago, economists lean to the right of the economics profession. They are known for saying, in effect, “Markets work well. Use the market.”

At MIT and other bastions of mainstream economics, most economists are to the left of center but to the right of the academic community as a whole. These economists are known for saying, in effect, “Markets fail. Use government.”

Masonomics says, “Markets fail. Use markets.”

Presumably the prototypical Masonomist on the above spectrum would be far on the left (extremely skeptical of the state) and in the middle (somewhat skeptical of markets), leading such a person to always favor market solutions (the state being a lost cause), with more emphasis on the design of market institutions than someone merely confident in the market and skeptical of the state might. Schools of socialism that roughly mirror Masonomics must exist — “Governments fail. Use government [carefully].” — I just don’t know their names, so I put “rational socialism” on the spectrum.

It seems that from many places on the spectrum, one might beneficially increase skepticism of one’s preferred mechanism, so as to focus on making that mechanism work better, and thus “win” more in the long term. Admittedly, this might seem an awful tradeoff for an activist focused on bashing (whatever they see as) evil in the short term. Further, one genuinely interested in improving the world as opposed to making ideological points might focus on improving mechanisms that make criticism and improvement of all mechanisms easier (nothing remotely new about this observation) — these are public goods that facilitate the provision of more public goods.

Completely coincidentally (noted while writing this post), David Nolan died today. His name is associated with a fairly well known biaxial political spectrum. Nolan also founded the strategically unsound U.S. Libertarian Party. If it mattered at all, and weren’t in bad taste, I’d suggest it die with him!

Posted in Economics, Free Speech, Politics, Prediction Markets, Public Goods | 5 Comments »

19th & Kaplan

Tuesday, November 2nd, 2010

Only two endorsements this (U.S.) election, mostly because I haven’t been paying very close attention. Most importantly, for California Proposition 19, the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010. Stop throwing people in prison over this. Full stop.

Unfortunately recent polls indicate fading support for the initiative. Presumably this is mainly what is reflected by traders, among whom the consensus seems to discount a “Broadus Effect”:

Sadly no contracts are conditioned on the outcome.

Choices in the Oakland (where I’ve lived for almost exactly two years) mayoral race are underwhelming. “V Smoothe” of the excellent A Better Oakland blog (recommended for residents; the only Oakland-centric blog I’ve followed for any length of time … for that matter, the only Oakland-centric news source, not counting a neighborhood mailing list and the only somewhat Oakland-centric East Bay Express) has posted take-downs of leading candidates Rebecca Kaplan (ineffective), Jean Quan (I’d bet on increased probability of bankruptcy), Joe Tuman (ignorant), and is supporting the frontrunner, Don Perata, a leading symbol of corruption in the Bay Area, and a lobbyist for California prison guards, roughly on the grounds that only he can get stuff done and his faults can be explained away.

I don’t have much confidence that Perata would “get stuff done” and even lower confidence that whatever he got done would have good outcomes. Given lack of anyone with an obviously stellar, or even realistic, policy portfolio, I’m discounting projected ability (or lack thereof) to “get stuff done” and rationally indulging in an expressive vote, for Kaplan — simultaneously the most unusual, and most stereotypically Oakland, of the leading candidates — lesbian, green (formerly Green), and for marijuana legalization.

Oakland has more lesbian couples per capita than any other big city in the U.S. (though Oakland isn’t exactly big) and if Kaplan were elected would as far as I know one of a very few lesbian mayors of significant cities in the U.S. (though way behind the actual big city of Houston), and is known for being a center of environmental activism of both the political and urban homesteading sorts and as Oaksterdam.

I have a weak preference for a jurisdiction to accentuate whatever distinguishing characteristics it has, excepting wholly negative ones (e.g., crime, and gross corruption and incompetence). Kaplan will best accentuate (or rather signal; remember this is an expressive vote) the relatively neutral to good qualities of Oakland (yes, the whether is fantastic, and out of mayoral control) and doesn’t seem likely to cause exacerbation its wholly negative qualities.

(I haven’t investigated closely, but at a glance there doesn’t seem to be a worthy protest vote among those with almost no support in polls — to the contrary, they seem to be a rouge’s gallery of idiots, liars, and stooges — worse than most of the leading candidates. 19th & Kaplan doesn’t seem to exist anywhere, but it’s a plausible intersection in a fictional Oakland.)

Posted in Oakland, Politics, Prediction Markets | 2 Comments »

54% chance of marijuana legalization, what chance of crime wave?

Monday, May 17th, 2010

My favorite local weekly, the East Bay Express (I loved their print design and long-form stories in the 1990s; after a couple ownership changes they are still good for other reasons, e.g., prolific reporter Robert Gammon) has a story (actually a blog entry, hopefully something of it makes it to print) that very concisely describes prediction markets and states that “TaxCannabis2010 is currently predicted to win” by traders at Intrade.

I’m happy to see EBX cite Intrade and that the initiative is predicted to win, with two caveats.

The market currently gives the initiative a 54% chance of winning. That means a 46% chance of losing. Not remotely a sure thing. Closing prices chart below.

It’s utterly ridiculous to put marijuana users, farmers, sellers, etc. in jail. But this is not obvious to a number of people, or marijuana would not be illegal. I will be surprised if anti-initiative ads will claim that marijuana legalization will lead to an increase in cocaine use, a crime wave, decrease in test scores, and more. So what would really make me happy with regards to prediction markets and citation of the same would be contracts on cocaine use etc. in California conditioned on whether the initiative wins.

Posted in Economics, Politics, Prediction Markets | 3 Comments »