95 Theses of Geek Activism
by Devanshu Mehta
Geek activism has not taken off yet, but it should. With the gamers recognizing the need for a louder voice, EFF gaining momentum and Linux taking on the mainstream on the one hand and recent severe losses in privacy, freedom of speech and intellectual property rights on the other, now seems to be the best time to rally around the cause.
Geeks are not known to be political or highly vocal (outside of our own circles)- this must change if we want things to improve. So here is my list of things people of all shapes, sizes and sides of the debate need to know. Some of these are obvious, others may not be meant for you. But hopefully, some of these will inspire you to do the right thing and others will help you frame the next discussion, debate or argument you have on these topics.
# *Reclaim the term ‘hacker’*. If you tinker with electronics, you are a hacker. If you use things in more ways than intended by the manufacturer, you are a hacker. If you build things out of strange, unexpected parts, you are a hacker. Reclaim the term.
# Violating a license agreement is not theft.
# All corporations are not on your side.
# Keep in touch with everyone you can vote for and make sure you know where they stand on the issues you care about.
# More importantly, make sure they know where you stand on the issues you care about.
# Everything will enter the *public domain* some day- even Mickey Mouse.
# Read the original 95 theses. Yes, they are irrelevant to these causes. Yes, they are religious- and not even close to my religion. And yes, they are 500 years old. But they do demonstrate how stating your beliefs clearly, effectively and publicly to *challenge the status quo* can change the world. Of course, I have no delusions of grandeur!
# Use TOR for privacy and anonymity.
# Trusted computers must not be trusted.
# Democrats may seem to be on your side, but keep an eye on them. They may only be the lesser of two evils.
# Republicans may seem to be the enemy, but that is only because they are in power now. The true enemy is a lack of accountability.
# Read Eric Raymond’s The Cathedral and the Bazaar.
# Why do I have to jump through hoops just to get video off my own home movie DVDs?
# Know the DMCA so you know what you are up against.
# The true enemy is the line: “If you haven’t done anything wrong, what do you fear?” The problem with that line, as Schneier has said, is that it assumes that the desire for privacy implies wrong-doing.
# Proprietary data formats must never store public information.
# Some corporations are on your side- find them and reward them.
# No one has ever told me where I could play my 45 RPMs. Why are my MP3s any different?
# The _analog hole_ is not a hole. The world is analog.
# If you are in the US, let your Senator know what you feel.
# Treating your customers like criminals- or potential criminals- will turn customers away.
# This bears repeating, treating paying customers as potential criminals is a losing strategy.
# Some corporations may seem to be on your side, but are not.
# Fair use is a good thing.
# *Use multiple operating systems* regularly so you truly understand interoperability.
# Write to your local newspaper- they can shape the opinions of the people do not understand the issues we care about.
# Do not follow the Electronic Frontier Foundation, *participate in it*.
# Read of Thoreau’s words on civil disobedience.
# Data mining will not stop terror.
# *Express your opinion in public*.
# Blog.
# The GPL is not gospel, but it comes close.
# Use multiple MP3/music players so you truly understand interoperability.
# If you are in the US, let your house representative know how you feel.
# Those in favor of suspending some liberties for security, answer this: “Who watches the watchers?”
# Except for extreme cases, the *government* should not be in the business of *parenting our children*.
# When arguing with people who disagree, *be polite*, but not condescending.
# RFID is just a technology- its existence does not make us more secure.
# Now and in the future, presence of encryption implies *nothing*. In fact, whatever it does imply is *none of your business*. Without any other probable cause, the user must not bear the burden of explaining reasons for use of encryption.
# Flame wars help the other side.
# New technologies to promote and develop media will prosper because of computers and the Internet, *not inspite of it*.
# Security is a trade-off- what are you willing to give up?
# Calling Microsoft evil buys you nothing- it only polarizes the argument.
# Holding Google to its “Don’t do evil” mantra buys us a lot.
# Read of Gandhi’s actions in civil disobedience. Discover Satyagraha.
# Use Creative Commons.
# Understand the difference between civil disobedience and breaking the law.
# Can’t find anything to watch on network TV? Watch Democracy TV.
# Frame the argument in terms of the average person, not the edge-case geek. These problems affect geeks first, but *will affect everyone in the future*.
# Privacy, civil liberties and civil rights are a slippery slope. The reason we continuously fight for them is not that we all seek a utopian society where doves fly free- in fact, I seek a perpetual ‘tug-of-war’ where the rope gradually slips in the direction of my beliefs.
# Users do not want the permission to use digital media; they want to *own* digital media. This means using them as they choose, where they choose, in the device of their choice without fear of litigation or sudden inactivity. These users are customers- treat them with respect.
# Support the free, public domain archives of information.
# *Undermine censorship* by publishing information censored in oppressive countries.
# And then, there is the 12-step plan for the games industry.
# Corporations and producers of digital media _must_ trust their own consumers. Sales will reward trust.
# Breaking the law because you disagree with the current law is not the way to solve the problem in a democratic society.
# *ID cards* do not make us more secure.
# Voicing your views in a Slashdot comment thread is good, in your own blog is better, but in places that non-geeks frequent is best.
# DRM does not work because the customer/user has the key, cipher and ciphertext in the player. (thanks Cory Doctorow)
# Bloggers have rights– be aware of them.
# Find out why electronic voting machines are regulated less than casino gaming machines.
# Find out about Spimes– they are in your future if things go well.
# Have a global perspective in ideas of geek civil liberties, intellectual property rights and so forth. Do you like your country’s policies in this respect? Can you help people from another country?
# Geek activism is not all about extreme positions. There is a gradient- find your position on it.
# Read the PATRIOT ACT– know what you are _really_ up against.
# In the US, put a few technologists in power in Washington. Abroad, do the same for your own seat of government.
# Write to mainstream media- they have more mindshare than they are given credit for.
# Read what your founding fathers said before taking someone’s word for it. Quote the founding fathers back at them- there were so many of them, and they said and wrote so much, that you will find a quote for each situation. Try this one for starters, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” – _Benjamin Franklin_. Read more Bejamin Franklin. Read “more cool quotes”:http://www.scienceaddiction.com/2006/04/25/outrage/
# Read more.
# Mixed tapes are legal. Time-shifting TV is legal. Regardless of the media.
# Decide what is offensive for yourself- don’t let the government decide it for you. If you do not, pretty soon, you may only see one side of every argument.
# Music purchases should not be governed by determining which seller has the most clout among the player manufacturers.
# We do not lock the door to our bedrooms or bathrooms because we have something to hide. We do not secure our networks, conversations, emails and files because we have something to hide.
# Make sure that if a vendor locks you in, you lock them out.
# 80% of games are *not rated M*.
# You may agree with Richard Stallman, but make sure you understand the opposing point of view.
# An email tax to certify that it is “legitimate” is an awful idea.
# Know your rights and be prepared to defend them.
# *Open source is not free*.
# *Free is open source*.
# The ESRB game rating system exists for a reason- so that parents can be parents and the government can get on with more important stuff.
# Do not allow corporations to get away with assisting oppressive regimes. Let your voice be heard.
# *Linux is no longer a philosophy*- it is a good piece of software. Use it if it fits your needs.
# There are reasons based in mathematics that establish the NSA wiretaps and other similar brute data mining ideas do not work.
# Multiple nag screens that warn us of possible insecurity do not make us more secure.
# More information available to the most number of people is a *good thing*.
# There are DRM free alternatives for music you can play anywhere.
# *Vote*.
# Free as in free lunch is good. Free as in a free people is even better. For software and for everything else.
# Quoting Schneier’s blog: Cardinal Richelieu understood the value of surveillance when he famously said, “If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged.” Watch someone long enough, and you’ll find something to arrest — or just blackmail — with. Privacy is important because without it, surveillance information will be abused: to peep, to sell to marketers and to spy on political enemies — whoever they happen to be at the time.
# Read our modern geek philosophers- read Bruce Perens, Cory Doctorow, Bruce Sterling and even Richard Stallman. Read Schneier to find practical reasons why stupid security mechanisms are stupid. Read them even if you disagree with them- it will help frame your point of view.
# DRM only keeps *an honest user honest*.
# You have the right to anonymity on the internet.
# *Be proud of being a geek*, a gamer, a privacy advocate, promoter of free speech and an innovator without fear of litigation, of government or restrictions on liberties- a geek activist.
# Most of all- have fun.
If you disagree with any or all of what I have said- good for you. Let me know how. Let me know why. Let us argue, let us debate. But, in the end, let us get stuff done.
UPDATE: Thanks to BoingBoing and so many others for the inbound links. And keep the comments below coming.
UPDATE #2: And now digg-pwnd too (just discovered that word). The site is dying under the weight of a thousand blog links, but we shall overcome. Some day. Expect a follow-up on the numerous comments below (thanks!), the numerous comments on Digg and the many dozen blogs around the Internet who have commented on this story. So far I have been told that I have inspired people to start blogs, to revive their blogs, to donate to the EFF, to write open letters and much more. This is all fantastic news, but it cannot stop here. It will not- stick around and we will make things happen.
UPDATE #3: This story was later picked up by Wired Magazine for the December ’06 issue (the one with lonelygirl15 on the cover). It also made its way in to many online editions of offline publications as well. I am about to start (July ’07) a series expanding on many of the thoughts from this original article and clarifying/amending things that have been questioned since.
Hi!
I only disagree with point 86, because nummber only has one m.
There’s nothing else I could find fault with! This is awesome – you’re gonna be famous!
Al
Excellent!
I am not a geek, or a hacker. I use things the way they were intended.
However, this may not always be the case, and I have just joined EFF (after reading this) and wholeheartedly agree with you.
[…] This morning I’m reading through 95 Theses of Geek Activism and Eric Raymond’s The Cathedral and the Bazaar. Every word I read makes me think about opensource church. I will have to put all those thoughts into writing soon. Should I do it as one big piece or let it run for a while and then pull all the pieces back together? These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. […]
This is great!
But there’s something wrong in the sentence in thesis number 83:
“Linux is no longer a philosophy- it is a good piece of software. Use it because it if it fits your needs.”
Should it be “because OF it”?
[…] http://www.scienceaddiction.com/2006/07/23/95-theses-of-geek-activism/ […]
Devanshu: Learn the difference between a hyphen and a dash. Learn the difference between an apostrophe and glyphs that look similar, but are something else, such as a prime symbol. Justified paragraphs without proper line breaking are bad for legibility. Learn the difference between “its” and “it’s”. Keep up the good work.
[…] And going by this list, we’re all just a buch of hackers, reclaiming the term. […]
Next time someone asks you “If you haven’t done anything wrong, what do you fear?†ask them why they are wearing clothes. Have they done something wrong to their body? (Confused the hell out of a cop once)
Excellent and thought-provoking. Not necessarily complete, but a significant – and important – amount to chew on.
Oh, and it’s ‘awful’, not ‘aweful’ (point 77).
If the actions that qualify as “violating the license agreement” also result in loss of revenue, then it may be equivalent to theft. Granted, most shrink-wrap license agreements are unenforceable, but duplicating content outside of “fair use” without paying for additional licenses (or consent of the creator) IS almost certainly theft. It’s more accurate to say “Violating a license agreement is not ALWAYS theft.”
Sound bites are just as dangerous when they come from geeks as when they come from politicians or theologians. They SOMETIMES distill valid points down to ambiguity (or worse, nonesense), particularly when they’re read in isolation. Sadly, the whole point of the sound bite is just that… to be read in isolation and summarize the thruth. -Tim
[…] If the 16th century belonged to the protestant and the 20th century to the industrialist, then the 21st century belongs to the geek. But if geeks will claim their rightful post, they must learn to speak and be heard; to recognize those things that bind them together. In that vein, Devanshu has published 95 Theses Of Geek Activism. […]
should’t “understanding a hacker” as published at http://web.demigod.org/~zak/geek/hack.shtml
be on the list somewhere?
Thanks so much for sharing this, Devanshu! So true and so inspiring!
Be proud of your geekness.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/10/04/o_geeks_what_has_become/
“The truth is that over the last decade geekdom has gained a baggage of beliefs about the world which are much narrower than that which used to unify us.”
A pre-augmentation of your article. Nice piece though.
95 ideas para un activismo geek…
"Los ‘geeks’ son conocidos por no tener repercusión polÃtica fuera de sus cÃrculos. Esta es mi lista de cosas que todas las personas que toman parte en el debate deberÃan saber, si quieren que ese debate mejore. Algunas son obvias, otras qui…
[…] 95 Theses of Geek Activism http://www.scienceaddiction.com/2006/07/23/95-theses-of-geek-activism/ […]
Nice theses, though many of them apply to the US only.
Their cause could fail because of the same reasons governments fail to control the free market: corporations got bigger than countries. That being said, RIAA and MPAA are cooperating with similar institutions in other countries, e.g. the reformation of the copyright in germany contained 3 clauses almost literally translated from the DMCA and the new french copyright will be even worse.
I would like to see the line “geeks of all nations, unite!” somewhere in there.
Greetings, Alex
Sorry i fail to see the point of #1? i’m a hacker, and i agree with everything (and do everything) else you wrote? and just because i tinker with the big corperations servers and disclose information they wish to hide i’m evil? i dont think so. You seem to be mixing me up with something you heard in the media. hacker do not write viruses, send spam, attack personal computers…. the only people doing that these days are fraudsters…. why because these fraudsters are using a computer does it automaticly become hacking? Both the Hacker community and the community which you describe here are on the same side… don’t let the media fool you into think otherwise.
[…] Science Addiction har skrevet ned nerdeaktivistenes 95 teser. De har ikke blitt spikret opp pÃ¥ noen regjerings dør ennÃ¥, og det er fullt mulig Ã¥ komme med kritikk og forslag, men jeg føler at det er veldig mange gode og viktige poenger her. Her er et lite utdrag: […]
[…] … […]
[…] 95 theses of Geek Activisism. (via) […]
One to add:
“Not technology nor corporations nor law can define ethics or decide ethical actions; only people can. To do otherwise cedes one’s human obligations and humanity to the inaniminate.” – Jeff Gruszynski
If you are unsure of how to make ethical decisions go to the Markkula Center for Applid Ethics web site (http://www.scu.edu/ethics/) for their Ethical Decisions brochure.
How about
“DRM keeps an honest user honest, in the same way that DRM keeps a tall user tall.” for 92. Then it would resemble a quote from
http://www.dashes.com/anil/stuff/doctorow-drm-ms.html
[…] Being a geek and a flaming liberal myself (not really, but I do lean a tad to the Left), I’m extremely interested in fighting abuses of our Fair Use rights. I was very happy to find this: The 95 Theses of Geek Activism. I’ve perused the list and it’s a pretty good list of social, corporate, and political abuses of Fair Use, as well as just things that every person (not just geeks) should know about their electronic rights. People who aren’t following the different fights might find the list confusing, but feel free to post a comment here or on the site. Someone will help explain them. […]
[…] Link […]
Daniel, you’re a hacker, yes, but the better word would be “cracker”.
1. Who cares? There are far more important battles than quibbling about this terminology.
2. If it results in loss of revenue, yes, it is theft.
3. Sound advice, though a bit obvious.
4. True for anybody.
5. Also, true for anybody, geek or not.
6. Maybe, although the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 extended copyrights 20 years, and there’s no reason to believe that they will not be extended again in another 20 years.
7. There are many examples of people expressing their beliefs clearly and effectively, from the Declaration of Independence to the Communist Manifesto to the Seneca Falls Declaration to thousands of other documents. I’m not sure why you’d focus on Martin Luther.
8. Not a bad idea, and while you’re at it, think about contributing to its development and to the work of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
9. True–and geeks are in the best position to challenge trusted computing.
10. Yes, but this is true of all parties and of poltics and politicians in general. Never trust the government; always be willing to challenge it when necessary. However, it is also true that the nature of politics is compromise, and dogmatic adherence to principle can sometimes cause more harm than good.
11. True, a government should always be accountable to the people it governs. That is why a strong, independent media is so important.
12. True, if you’re interested in the Linux movement–however, it would also be worthwhile to read the responses to the work, such as those by Nikolai Bezroukov. It’s also worthwhile to note the flaws (and there are some) of the Linux development model.
13. This is due to the strong potential for copyright infringement. Until another model for compensating artists for the creation of their work has been developed, the hoops will continue to exist.
14. Again, until another method of compensating artists for their work has been developed, the old copyright model will have to be enforced.
15. True, and very important in this time of wire-tapping and internet monitoring.
16. True, alhough any format, proprietary or not, must also be easily and securely played by anyone, geek or not.
17. No, they are not. Corporations by their nature are on the side of making money. As with governments, never trust a corporation, whether Apple, Microsoft, General Motors, or Sanrio.
18. Yes, but you also always had to pay for your records. Here is the problem.
19. True, it is impossible
20. True, although given #4 it may be unnecessary to repeat.
21. True–if they have anywhere else to go.
22. Maybe–but if a customer does not trust a company that customer cannot expect trust from the corporation in return, and one should never trust a corporation.
23. Again, true–never trust a corporation.
24. True–assuming the use is fair, and not simply an attempt to circumvent copyright.
25. Good idea, although some operating systems are better for some purposes than for others.
26. True for anybody–the media can shape public debate.
27. Good idea, and consider supporting it financially as well.
28. Another good choice of literature.
29. True–but it could help. Blanket statements of this sort are not a good form of argument, when they are potentially proven incorrect, or at least flawed. A better argument is that while giving up our rights may prevent some terror attacks our rights are worth some loss of life, as our founding fathers understood.
30. True for anybody.
31. See previous.
32. Under some circumstances, yes. Others, no. As with other models, it has flaws.
33. True, but see 25.
34. Again, true for anybody–these could really be combined in one.
35. Very true.
36. True, within reason.
37. True for anybody.
38. True–but it could help. However, see 29.
39. True–but covered by the argument concerning privacy in general.
40. True, but could be combined with 37. Also, flame wars can be fun.
41. Possibly true, depending on the media. Unproven, however.
42. Again, see 29.
43. True, demonizing a specific corporation under all cirumstances is counterproductive.
44. True, although Google is hardly the only company that must be held to that principle.
45. Another good choice of literature.
46. True, and a good way of working within the copyright system. It is voluntary, however, and some means of rewarding artists and engineers must exist.
47. There isn’t necessarily a difference–but breaking the law can sometimes be for the good, if the law being broken is bad.
48. True–or simply not watch TV. . .
49. Very true–ivory tower elitism rarely works when shaping public policy.
50. True–although it doesn’t necessarily matter whether the rope moves in your direction slowly in a tug-of-war, or quickly.
51. True–as long as those rights do not include redistribution. Some means of rewarding artists for the production of their work must still exist. Not all, in fact not most, owners of copyrights are millionaires like Britney Spears.
52. Good idea.
53. Also, good idea–and support Amnesty International’s efforts in this area as well.
54. Good idea, although perhaps it should not be confined to just video games.
55. Maybe, although again unproven. I’m not sure that endless repetition of this point proves it.
56. Interesting, although possibly contradictory with 47.
57. They might–but see 29.
58. True–but just a combination of the “voice your views in public” and “elitism is bad” points.
59. True, but not exactly a statement of belief.
60. True–but true for all forms of media and public expression.
61. Falls under the issue of public accountability–although manual machines and results can be manipulated as well.
62. True, although spimes are not necessarily all good–see the privacy implications of related technologies such as RFID tags.
63. True for any issue.
64. True–and politics is compromise.
65. True, and see 29.
66. True, depending on the technologist. It’s rarely good to be entirely a one-note candidate.
67. Should be combined with 26.
68. True–nor should what they said over 200 years ago always be considered gospel.
69. True for anybody.
70. Depends.
71. True for anybody.
72. True.
73. True, but covered previously.
74. Not always practical.
75. Interesting fact, but not a statement of belief.
76. It is always good to understand all sided of an issue.
77. Bad and impractical, yes.
78. True for anybody.
79. True.
80. Not necessarily true–many free software programs choose not to reveal their source.
81. True, although a rating system like that can frequently be arbitrary, and many parents may not agree with the classifications.
82. True, although previously covered.
83. True, if it does actually meet your needs.
84. Maybe true, but a better argument is #29.
85. True–but nag screens are a minor inconvenience.
86. True, within reason.
87. A statement of fact, not of belief.
88. True for anybody.
89. True, although the implcations for software are less clear.
90. True.
91. True.
92. True, although most users of media are not geeks, and may not be able to easily circumvent DRM.
93. True, within reason.
94. No, do fear litigation and government harassment–but proceed anyway.
95. Not necessarily “most of all”; fighting for what you believe in is frequently not “fun.” It must be done, however.
Thanks, Pope Guilty. By “reclaiming the term hacker”, I meant that the term has an original, positive connotation that should be regained. Yes, by using it in that way it may still include malicious ‘crackers’, but they are not the issue at hand.
Also, for those pointing out my sp. mistakes- thanks. For those pointing out major grammatical errors- thanks. For those pointing out punctuation issues- differences between hyphens and semi-colons- are missing the point.
What possible good can it do to “reclaim the term hacker”? I fail to see any, if all it means is that pseudo-geek tinkerers can get off on saying “i’m a hacker y’know” to anyone stupid enough to listen.
[…] just read 95 theses of geek activism. it is a refreshing reminder of the issues i thought a lot about while at berkeley. however, now that i am in china, many of these concepts seem rarified, almost irrelevant. because the problems in china are at such a basic level – people do not have access to information and the education system and culture do not nurture creative thinking and problem solving, much less critical thinking. a censored country creates people who are limited in their ability to imagine an alternative. the most striking thing to me about the 95 theses of geek activism is that it is the product of a free country. […]
Sorry, #19: True, it is impossible to plug the “analog hole”; however, this does not mean that unauthorized duplication is necessarily morally justified, nor does it mean that companies cannot make exploitation of this hole difficult for non-geeks.
I think Paul Graham deserves to be in 91. too (http://www.paulgraham.com).
Oh, and a continuation of 19: just saying “the world is analog” does not deal with the underlying problems that the analog hole represents. Until a better system of rewarding artists is developed, copyrights are necessary, and some means of protecting those copyrights must exist. The current efforts to “plug the hole” may be misguided, but the problem still exists.
Prof. Lessig isn’t in #91?
96) Take the Scientific Method and apply it to areas outside of science, like society. i.e. find a problem with society (local or at large), gather data on it, and draw a logical conclusion. Then go one step further and do something to fix the problem.
in re #6: Copyright only lasts for so long (currently life of author + 70 years or 95 years from publication), but Trademarks can last forever. So while the old Mickey Mouse cartoons will fall into the public domain, Mickey Mouse as a trademarked character will not unless Disney allows its TM protection to lapse. E.g. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle didn’t get TM protection for Sherlock Holmes, so anyone can use that character, but Tarzan is protected. Maybe you should say “even Mickey Mouse cartoons.”
Devanshu wrote:
For those pointing out punctuation issues- differences between hyphens and semi-colons- are missing the point.
Not at all. Reread #7—”stating your beliefs clearly, effectively and publicly” requires that you pay attention to details of punctuation and grammar. People will take your ideas less seriously if you don’t demonstrate that you know the difference between “it’s” and “its”; there is no need to slavishly adhere to the rules, but learning them and using them is going to make more people listen.
Most of your ideas are good however.
17. Some corporations are on your side–find them and reward them
This may be true for any given moment but corporations are legally obliged to make money for their shareholders. According to American law, corporations are required to do only one thing, make money in the short (or long) term. The law requires corporations to suffer a form of psychopathy.
Watch the documentary “The Corporation”, http://www.thecorporation.com
86. More information available to the most number of people is a good thing.
This is probably not a good thing for most “normal” people. Most people don’t have the depth of knowledge to make sense of the incoming data, the time to injest it, or the processing power to use it. People are not all born with IQ’s of 135 with memories like a one-way valve. What we all need, genii and all, is more RELEVANT information.
I wish someone would take the time to do something similar for *ignorance*, especially related to race, gender, sexual preference, and true religious freedom (the ability to practice no religion at all). This ignorance is the realest evil of our world.
So if we [the geeks and hackers] are really to change the world with our minds and our technology, we should focus on big issues like these.
[…] Actualización (20:44, 23 Julio 2006): Acabo de encontrar en Microsiervos una lista de 95 tesis de activismo geek/hacker, aunque buena parte de ellas no son solo aplicables a geeks/hackers, pero son el punto de partida. Con muchas coincido plenamente, algunas no las habia pensado y en unas pocas o no coincido o lo matizarÃa. La pena es que hay unas cuantas repeticiones y varias tonterias que hace que sean muchas menos. […]
[…] 95 Theses of Geek Activism. Good stuff. […]
[…] I stumbled upon this article and thought I should repost it. The original is at http://www.scienceaddiction.com/2006/07/23/95-theses-of-geek-activism/ […]
[…] 95 Theses of Geek Activism. […]
[…] 95 Theses of Geek Activism This is a great list. Making activists out of us instead of passive users of the net. (tags: geek activism blog scienceaddiction theses) […]
56 is not true. the modern labor movement exists because workers illegally went on strike. it requires discretion to ethically break a law, but sometimes it is the only way to resist in a meaningful way. in a democratic society, disciplined law-breaking can create illustrative enforcement situations that make the electorate more sympathetic to a cause.
I generally applaud the sentiment and many of the specifics that you advocate, but I take issue with number 56, “# Breaking the law because you disagree with the current law is not the way to solve the problem in a democratic society.”
While you advocate civil disobedience, which actually -usually- amounts to law breaking, it seems as though you believe that the solutions are available to the citizens of the US through electoral politics. While there is a -chance- that this is true (although I doubt it), I don’t believe we should write off law-breaking. When laws contradict our own ethics and sense of freedom, it is important to break these laws. First of all, this can be true in a legal sense – only through breaking laws and challenging them in the judicial system can unjust laws be declared unconsitutional. Secondly, unjust laws need to be broken so as to mantain individual liberty.
This is not to say that people shouldn’t try to work within the system to bring about the changes they feel necessary. Simply that, when the problems are overpowering, a variety of tactics need to be considered, and different people will have different ideas of how to undermine, subvert or destroy an oppressive system.
Interesting. And a number of these can be applied to (how about that) daily life and business.
[…] Science Addiction » 95 Theses of Geek Activism Everything will enter the public domain some day- even Mickey Mouse. (tags: nerdism) […]
#35 Those in favor of suspending some liberties for security, answer this: “Who watches the watchers?â€
For this I’d like to also raise the point that when we are in favor of suspending our own liberties for the sake of security, we are undoubetdly forfieting those liberties for generations until society has forgotten them. One step in the wrong direction and we inevetably wind up with Alice in Wonderland, wondering how we got there with the cheshire cat staring us right in the face.
Your initial premise (“Geek activism has not taken off yet”) is incorrect, I think. There was plenty of geek.activism in the 90s: EFF, of course, but also EPIC and CDT, CPSR and NetAction, GILC, the Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy, 2600, Wired Mag’s activist days, netizen, Jon Katz’ Geek Force, my own Electronic Frontiers Forum at HotWired, etc. That said, there’s good stuff in your theses… I might disagree with a few. For instance, there’s no guarantee that we’ll still have a public domain in the future… legislators have talked seriously about permanent copyright. Proprietary data formats can store public information as long as the information remains public and is stored in other formats that aren’t proprietary (but I know what you meant). I’m not sure that spimes are a sign that things are going well… spimes have a sinister side (read Everyware).
A couple of suggestions. One is to read Extreme Democracy (http://extremedemocracy.com), a book that Mitch Ratcliffe and I edited. This may be seen as a shameless plug, but it’s a pretty good anthology of geek activist writings.
The other suggestion is to consider going to the League of Technical Voters programmer lock-in October 13-15 (http://www.leagueoftechvoters.org/drupal/). That’s a good way to be both geek and activist.