Raw Thought: The Weblog of Aaron Swartz

1059 Pages·2013·3.7 MB·English

Raw Thought: The Weblog of Aaron Swartz
aaronsw.com/weblog
1
What’s Going On Here?
May 15, 2005
Originallink
I’m adding this post not through blogging software, like I normally do, but by
hand, right into the webpage. It feels odd. I’m doing this because a week or
so ago my web server started making funny error messages and not working so
well. The web server is in Chicago and I am in California so it took a day or
two to get someone to check on it. The conclusion was the hard drive had been
fried.
When the weekend ended, we sent the disk to a disk repair place. They took
a look at it and a couple days later said that they couldn’t do anything. The
heads that normally read and write data on a hard drive by floating over the
magnetizedplatterhadcrashedrightintoit. Whilethecomputerwasgivingus
error messages it was also scratching away a hole in the platter. It got so thin
that you could see through it.
Thiswasjustinonespotonthedisk,though,sowetriedcallingthefamedDrive
Saverstoseeiftheycouldrecovertherest. Theyseemedtothinktheywouldn’t
have any better luck. (Please, plase, please, tell me if you know someplace to
try.)
I hadn’t backed the disk up for at least a year (in fairness, I was literally going
to back it up when I found it giving off error messages) and the thought of the
loss of all that data was crushing. I broke down crying and couldn’t function.
I’ve since been trying to piece things together from the old backup and the
Google cache and so on, but it’s a painful and time-consuming process, and
even without this on my hands I am extremely lacking time. I’ll try my best,
though.
Thanks to everyone for their kind words and support. If you have some files
youthinkI mightbemissing, let meknow. Ifyouhavesomedisposable income
and want to help fund the purchase of a new server and perhaps the recovery
of the old disk, you can make a donation.
Sorry for screwing up.
2
Getting Back On Track
June 1, 2005
Originallink
Just how crazy am I? Well, tonight I wrote my own weblogging system. One of
the silver linings of losing a server is that you get to rebuild things just the way
you like.
Anyway, this might mean I’ll start posting more. Or maybe not.
Either way, this site is now proudly powered by good old make.
(For those who are interested the code is now up but it’s probably not easily
usable by most.)
3
The God Who Wasn’t There (And The One
Who Was)
June 1, 2005
Originallink
“I was doing some research into the idea that Jesus never existed. When I first
looked into it, I thought it was just a crackpot theory and I was curious why
anyone would believe this,” explains Brian Flemming. “To my surprise I found
the evidence kept stacking up. The more I looked into it, the more that the
facts aligned with those who said Jesus was just a legendary character. The
shaky evidence and the poor reasoning were actually on the side of those who
said that Jesus did exist.”
AndsoFlemming(BatBoy: TheMusical,NothingSoStrange,Fair&Balanced,
and all-around digital rights supporter) decided to make a movie. The result,
which is currently being screened across the country in theaters and at atheist
organizations and will be released on DVD soon, is a shockingly good film.
Flemming begins at the beginning: the popular story of Jesus. In a hilarious
montage of old footage taken from the Prelinger archives underneath deadpan
narration, he tells the story in six minutes. And then it’s on to debunking it.
Throughinterviewswithvariousexperts,illustratedwithentertaininggraphics,
he tries to reconstruct the historical evidence for the story…only to find there
isn’t much and a lot doesn’t add up.
Convinced the story is wrong, Flemming takes aim at the right-wing Christian
fundamentalistswhoactbasedonit,thewishy-washyChristianmoderateswho
enable them, and the rest of the system. He concludes by heading back home
to the fundamentalist Christian school he attended as a child to confront the
principal about what he’s teaching children.
Flemming’s previous film, Nothing So Strange (which I also reviewed) was in-
teresting but, in fairness, rather amateurish. No such criticism can be made of
this film, which has some of the best graphics I’ve seen in a documentary and a
brilliantscorecomposedfromtheCreativeCommons-licensedWiredCDbythe
hertofore-unknown DJ Madson (a nom-de-plume of Flemming, I’m beginning
to suspect) by remixing popular artists. The whole thing, from the interviews
downtothepromotionalposters,hangstogethersowellthatit’shardtobelieve
Flemming is doing this all himself, but apparently he is, with no liberal atheist
conspiracy to back him.
(Although, in full disclosure, Larry Lessig and former Creative Commons exec-
utive director Glenn Otis Brown receive special thanks in the credits. And in
a remote Q&A via iChat after the screening here at Stanford, Flemming was
4
wearing a Creative Commons shirt. So if you want to investigate a conspiracy,
that’s where I’d look.)
On the other hand, Flemming has always had what Bill O’Reilly might call
a “parasitic” sense of self-promotion. His film Nothing So Strange received
press largely because it included scenes of Bill Gates being assassinated. And
during the California Recall, Flemming jumped into the fray on the platform
“If elected, I will resign.” (Thus making Lt. Governor Bustamante governor,
since at the time he was refusing to run, thinking he’d draw support away
from the actual governor.) When FOX sued Al Franken for using the phrase
“Fair and Balanced”, Flemming wrote a play with the name. When Arnold
Schwarzenegger sued the makers of a bobblehead version of him, Flemming
posted a photo of Arnold’s penis.
Both times, he insisted the works were a form of political protest, but he still
charged money for the products. He did the same when he released portions
of Nothing So Strange under a Creative Commons license. It’s one thing to
support free speech; it’s another to try to make money off of other people’s
support for it. What’s unsettling about this film is not how Flemming is using
various atheist groups to screen and promote it — that’s perfectly reasonable,
especially since he’s giving the DVDs to the groups at outrageously low prices.
No, what’s unsettling is a hidden feature on Flemming’s site called the Grass-
roots Promotion Teamor GPT. In general these things are nothing new— just
personally, I remember volunteering for Apple when the iMac came out and
joining a “Street Team” website to promote a Buffy DVD. The idea behind
such sites is that your particular group of obsessive lonely fans will spend their
free time promoting your products on various forums and websites in exchange
for a chance to win some lame prizes.
It’s sad when big corporations do this, but when independent political folks
like Flemming do it, it becomes a little creepy. It’s also problematic. Take
the movie’s soundtrack, which is sold on Amazon. Normally such obscure CDs
have hardly any reviews. But this one not only had 11, but they were all
amazingly glowing. “Wow, this CD must be really good,” I thought. But when
IsawFlemmingwasawarding100“points”foreachAmazonreview,itsuddenly
made sense. If everyone plays this game, Amazon reviews will quickly become
meaningless, which is why I don’t think it’s a very good idea to start.
The film is valuable and grassroots promotion of it is certainly a good thing.
I just wish it felt a little less like using well-meaning people to make money
for Flemming and a little more like a cooperative community with the aim of
spreading the Real News.
Brian Flemming responds:
5
Thanksforthekindwordsaboutthemovie. Iagreewithsomeofyourcriticism
of the street team, but I think your aim is off the mark with much of it.
1. AMAZON REVIEWS. There’s an old phrase in publicity, “I don’t care if
the review is positive or negative, just put the title in the headline.” As
an indie filmmaker always struggling to get the word out against compet-
ing messages backed by tens of millions of dollars, I definitely subscribe
to this philosophy. It was never the design of the movie’s street team to
loadupAmazonwithpraise(frankly,amixofangryone-starreviewsand
passionate five-star reviews would be better). It’s no secret that authors
and their publishers and friends stack the Amazon book reviews (as has
been documented), but I don’t wish to add to that clutter. I’ve never
askedanyonetopostnicethingsonAmazonaboutthesoundtrackCDfor
The God Who Wasn’t There, or to withhold negative statements (and I
have not posted a review myself). Street team members are given a free
(digital) copy of the soundtrack and encouraged to go to Amazon and
post a review of the music—that’s it. About 5% of them do. There’s no
incentive to make the review positive or negative. However, while I think
the street team members’ reviews of the soundtrack CD on Amazon are
sincere, and no harm has been done, this particular sample does natu-
rally skew positive—if you’re on the street team, you probably like the
film/soundtrack you’ve decided to back with your time. But then again,
reviews are inherently biased—and fans tend to be more motivated than
others in posting. Most reviews on Amazon for most media products are
positive for that reason. I’ll freely admit to sending people to Amazon—
but my goal is battling obscurity, not battling negative opinion. And I
certainly can’t stop anyone from posting a negative review.
2. THE STREET TEAM ITELF. A “street team” is a group of volunteer
supporters who distribute flyers and stickers and otherwise spread the
word about a band or film online and offline. You say, “It’s sad when big
corporations do this, but when independent political folks like Flemming
do it, it becomes a little creepy.” Here’s where I think your aim is consid-
erably off the mark. To be opposed to a street team is nearly tantamount
to being opposed to the very idea of promoting indie artists. I believe
promotion should be honest and ethical, but promotion itself is not an
evil. And organizing promotion is not an evil. To eliminate street teams
would be largely to give up and turn over the marketplace to those who
havethemoneytopromoteviaadvertisingandotherexpensivemeans. It
wouldstrengthenmessagesbackedbymoneyandweakenmessagesbacked
by passion. I think the street team for The God Who Wasn’t There is
a great example of passion being organized into action, and I’m proud of
it. I give theatrical rights away for free—and then a group like SF Athe-
ists holds a screening and earns upwards of $1000 to help their extremely
important efforts. Volunteers go to a website where grassroots action is
made easier—and conversations all over the web get started over whether
6
Jesus really did exist, a very legitimate question that is nonetheless the
third rail of mainstream-media conversations about Christianity. Street
teams aren’t “creepy,” and this one in particular is doing some very real,
verifiable good.
3. MONEY. You write that when I attacked Arnold Schwarzenegger and
Bill O’Reilly via Fair Use Press, I “insisted the works were a form of
political protest, but [Flemming] still charged money for the products.
He did the same when he released portions of Nothing So Strange under
a Creative Commons license. It’s one thing to support free speech; it’s
anothertotrytomakemoneyoffofotherpeople’ssupportforit.” Really,
I’m just shaking my head in wonder at this accusation. I have never
made any profit whatsoever from any of my Fair Use Press e-books. The
Schwarzeneggerattackwasgivenaway,withahigh-res“premium”edition
sold at first for $1 (both editions are free now and have been for about
a year). I added a $1 price to that specifically to demonstrate fair use—
that I wasn’t taking a “noncommercial” copout, so Schwarzenegger and
his attorney couldn’t claim that’s why they didn’t sue. That’s what my
activism through Fair Use Press is about—demonstrating the limits of
fair use. I want people to look at what I do, see that I got away with
it, and then do more of the same. The commercial marketplace—where
messages like Bill O’Reilly’s already live—is an important battlefield in
this fight. Just because I fight in that space doesn’t mean I’m making
a profit from Fair Use Press. I don’t, and it certainly isn’t part of the
plan(IspendfarmoreonpromotionandadvertisingthanItakein). And
my best-case scenario for The God Who Wasn’t There is to break even
on marketing expenses (production costs are already written off, gladly,
as a loss). All of my indie-film work and free-culture activism operates
in the red, subsidized by the Hollywood work-for-hire assignments I take
that also pay my rent. I’m not, as you say, “using well-meaning people
to make money.” I’m putting in my own money and time to the same
purpose as the people I’m working side-by-side with. The fact that we
earn revenue to try to keep the project somewhat self-sustaining cannot
reasonably be termed exploitation.
Criticismisagoodthing,Aaron,andwefree-cultureactivistsofcoursedoneed
to criticize each other where criticism is justified. And I certainly should be
held publicly accountable for anything I publicly do. But in this case I really
think you’ve gone overboard and made accusations that have little merit.
Aaron replies:
Thanks for responding. I can’t say I’m glad to hear you don’t expect to turn a
profit on any of this, but it certainly allays any fears of exploitation.
7
But I feel like you missed my main point about the street team — the one I
ended the article with: “I just wish it felt … a little more like a cooperative
community with the aim of spreading the Real News.” There’s nothing wrong
with telling people about music or movies you like, or even putting up posters
to promote them. Where it gets creepy is when this natural enthusiasm is co-
opted and channeled into a structured, top-down sort of system. Now I’m not
just expressing my opinions, I’m following orders so I can get goodies. That
fundamentally changes things.
Maybe an analogy will help. My mom likes telling people about interesting
things I’ve done. There’s nothing wrong with this — the people she talks to
like knowing this stuff. But you have to admit it would be creepy if I started
providingmymomwithalistofmyachievementsandawardingherpointsevery
time she found a way to mention them. Mom begins to feel used, her friends
begin to feel duped, and I look like a narcissist.
There’s no need to get rid of the promotion system, just scale it back a little.
Provide a list of suggested actions, a forum where people can talk about what
they’re doing, and then offer to mail a t-shirt or something to people who work
hard.
You see, contrary to popular opinion — even in the free culture community,
oddly enough — rewards are incredibly destructive. Study after study shows
they actually demotivate people, encourage people to cheat and lie, and cause
them to make stupid decisions about trade-offs. For an excellent book on the
subject, see Alfie Kohn’s Punished By Rewards.
• Official site
• Flemming’s post on independent distribution
8
Stanford: Season Finale
June 4, 2005
Originallink
June 3
Nobodylikesbeingcalledtotheprincipal’soffice. Eveninhighschoolwhenthe
principalwas“cool”—I’dtellhimschoolwasharmfulandshouldbeabolished,
he’dagree,andwe’dtalkaboutit—itstillfeltwrong. Anditalwaysfeltworse
when, as surprisingly often was the case, the powerful man in the big chair
talked about how powerful you, the puny little pushed-around student, were.
I remember the time in 7th grade that the teacher told me to leave the room
and fill out one of his “dispute resolution forms” — his method of classroom
discipline. I resisted by filling out the form in an absurd manner, because the
whole thing was just so degrading. Then the teacher complained that I was
beingcondescending! (Afewyearslater, afterthe7thgradeteacherhadmoved
out to a cabin in the Pacific Northwest with my 6th grade teacher, he came
back to school and seemed much cooler, so I don’t think it was really his fault.)
You sure weren’t rich, didn’t live in the city
Didn’t whisper sweet nothings, never told me I’m pretty
AllthisbywayofsayingIreceivedaratherdiscomfittingfeelingwhen[unnamed
authority figure] sent me a cryptic note saying she wanted me to come see her.
I asked her about what but she never replied. (She later explained that she
meant to but it just got behind.)
Worried,Iaskedafewpeopleaboutwhat[unnamedauthorityfigure]did. “Have
you committed any crimes recently?” asked one. “Not that I know of,” I said.
“Maybe I kill people in my sleep?” But how do I dispose of the bodies? The
lake’s already run dry! Another, always optimistic, insisted it must be a good
thing. “Theywouldn’thaveherdeliverbadnews. Itcanonlybegood.” Iwasn’t
buying it.
As I walked to the meeting, there was a different disposition. I heard a girl
screaming her lungs out and then slapping her boyfriend, who had apparently
cheatedonher. Theboyfriendwasdesperatelypenitent,insistingitwasjustan
accident, not a pattern, and that he loved her.
You cheated at cards, and lied when you hung out
in bars making time with those girls you called old pals
Noneofthiseasedmydiscomfort,nordidthefactthatIhadamajorassignment
due in a couple hours. 90% of my grade in one class depended on what work
I turned in today by 5pm and I hadn’t really started on it. I tried to do it
9
last night but I couldn’t bring myself to do it until I was too tired to make any
progress. I wasn’t sure I’d have any better luck this morning.
WhenIfinallysaw[unnamedauthorityfigure]shewassohappythatIcouldn’t
stop myself from smiling. Maybe she was right — maybe it was good news.
Then we sat down. “I wanted to talk to you about some of your behavior,” she
began. Oh, this wasn’t going to be good.
I cried when you left me,
now I’m wondering when you’ll make it all up to me?
Shesaidshe’dbeentippedoffbymyIHUMTF,whichwasodd, sincewe’djust
had a long talk a week ago or so and I thought we’d worked everything out.
Not that there really was a whole lot to work out. Actually, that talk probably
just made it worse.
But then she’d done her own research and begun telling me what she’d uncov-
ered:
• She’d pulled my admissions applications and saw that I was really self-
schooled, meaning I was probably “a bit more isolated or sheltered from
your peers than might be typical.”
• She checked with the Residence Dean at my dorm and found I was too
shy to ask someone for help moving a filing cabinet.
• She also heard (amazingly) that I’d written some hurtful things about a
“young woman I was dating”.
• TheTFhadsaidthatIonceblurtedsomethingoutinclass,whichIdon’t
really remember specifically but certainly seems plausible.
• The TF also claimed that once I had jumped out at her and said boo.
• The TF also said that I’d once said she went to a lower-class school and
suggested I was trying to call her authority into question.
“It paints an interesting picture for me,” she said. I laughed to myself. “Heh,
it’s just like one of those television season finales, you know, where the main
characters get called before an authority figure who then proceeds to list every-
thing they’ve done over the season, only it’s all a little off and a little out-of-
context.” Like that Seinfeld finale, where everyone they’d ever met started to
testify against them. (See how I self-consciously point out the clichés I’m in?
Let it never be said that this blog is not post-modern!)
Itcertainlywasaninterestingpicture. Iwasbeginningtosoundsortofautistic
or something. “I feel like I’ve made a couple mistakes,” I said, “but doesn’t
everyone? Thedifferenceisthatminearejustalittlemorepublicandmineare
the ones being scrutinized.” If reality TV has taught us anything, it’s that you
can find something in anything, if you look hard enough.
10