[olug] Fw: FC: Linus Torvalds on digital rights management in Linux kernel

[Brian Wiese]

On Fri, 2 May 2003 11:13:11 -0500 (CDT)
"William E. Kempf" <wekempf at cox.net> wrote:

|
|Brian Wiese said:
|
|> Just because something can be done, we need to question whether we
|> should.
|
|This is where our agreement starts to break down.  What's the "something"
|that can be done?  Why do you question whether it should be?  How does
|this relate in any way to the technology, or how it applies to Open
|Source or GPL.

For the sake of this argument, the "something" I guess would be trusting
the root keys of our computer with M$ instead of ourselves etc... "we"
should have the right to decide what we can and cannot do with our
technology.  This 3rd party trust takes the "trust" out of trustworthy
computing because we honestly cannot tell what it is doing.

In a broader note, its other applications of technology.  One of my
favorite quotes about technology and ethics is from Jurassic Park, where
the scientist guy says something along the lines, "You got so tied up in
thinking about if you could and how we can do this (bring back the
dinosaurs) with the science, that you that you never really questioned if
you _should_".  Other examples: 
Researching atomic energy ...try to create cold fusion and solve all the
worlds energy problems = ?good?.  ...trying to create weapons of mass
destruction that could blow up most of civilization as we know it as well
as the plant = ?bad?.   

Researching life sciences ...try to examine the way dna and our body works
to more accurately prevent and cure diseases = ?good? ...create life
(fertilized (human) eggs) simply to experiment with it and have many
thousands/millions die = ?bad? ...clone or genetically engineer humans
before they are born, placing orders on dna qualities like a grocery check
out line = ?bad? 
This examples appel more to humanity than personal freedoms and such, but
still it's a question of "should" we do something ... just because it's
"science" doesn't mean it is without ethics or bounds.  (I killed my
friend in the name of science to see what would happen?)  There was a
quote once, by some smart person, that said roughly "our technology and
sciences have advanced by leaps and bounds so far over the past years, but
our ethics have not".  Perhaps he was some ethicist.

|If the "something" is the laws... we're in violent agreement that we
|shouldn't be passing/enforcing such non-democratic and arguably
|unconstitutional laws.  If it's the use of the technology that some are
|trying to put it to use for, at the least we should be discouraging this
|as consumers, and at the most we should be trying to pass laws to enforce
|this.  If it's the development of, or use of the technology in general...
|then you and I are in violent disagreement.
|
|I don't have a fatalistic view of things here.  I'm more than concerned
|about the laws being passed... as they are removing my rights, and will
|be difficult to overturn once passed.  For the rest of it, I expect
|"right" will prevail.

On this last part I'm strongly there with you... it seems like our laws
some days take one step forward, then two steps back!  It's scarry
sometimes...  the one thing people have been fighting and dying for over
the longest of time has bee one simple thing, "freedom".  Hopefully there
will always be enough good people around to defend that freedom, so that
evil will not triumph (or the self interests of a few, the corporate
monopolies, the powers that be, etc..)

|-- 
|William E. Kempf
|
|
|_______________________________________________
|OLUG mailing list
|OLUG at olug.org
|http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
|


  Brian Wiese | bwiese at cotse.com | aim: unolinuxguru
------------------------------------------------------
  GnuPG/PGP key 0x6BFF6681 | "FREEDOM!" - Braveheart 
------------------------------------------------------  
This is not about Napster or DVDs. It's about your Freedom.
  I'll see your DMCA and raise you a First Amendment.
              http://www.anti-dmca.org