tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.comments2022-03-25T18:46:32.159-07:00Nihilo ZeroN. Zerohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11280089601231142195noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-39107135210955748182015-04-09T22:11:58.186-07:002015-04-09T22:11:58.186-07:00Edit: Immediately after posting this article to R...<br />Edit: Immediately after posting this article to Reddit & FB I went out on my porch to smoke a cigarette (nasty habit, I know) and, most coincidentally, a marked police car slowly drove past my house and stopped a couple houses down for a few moments. Again, while this was likely a coincidence, even that doesn't make it comforting. Assuming pure coincidence, the all but literal omni-presence of the police is not a comforting thing. I do not take their presence or their sirens wailing in the background as any sign of a free and peaceful society. And if it wasn't a coincidence... then the appearance of this police car after posting my article says quite a bit about freedom of speech in this country. <br />N. Zerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11280089601231142195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-1701302758015589852013-01-12T11:05:26.091-08:002013-01-12T11:05:26.091-08:00This post was very helpful to me- thank you for wr...This post was very helpful to me- thank you for writing itAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-27631567455624334572013-01-12T10:18:46.403-08:002013-01-12T10:18:46.403-08:00Thank you.Thank you.Scoobynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-76713695591622781962013-01-12T09:32:50.805-08:002013-01-12T09:32:50.805-08:00Thank you for sharing this post. Definitely was a ...Thank you for sharing this post. Definitely was a required read considering that these dark hours seem to dawn on me more than ever during my most discreet hours.<br />On that note, I'll be sure to invest and dedicate some time to absorbing some further knowledge from William Gibson!<br />KR,Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-36362369448213435332013-01-12T05:23:16.703-08:002013-01-12T05:23:16.703-08:00You're the best that's all I have to say
B...You're the best that's all I have to say<br />Before reading your post I was a little confused and questioning myself how would my future be in like 4 - 5 years and I kind of felt like shit.<br />But now after reading this amazing post I'm willing to go on with my life to aim for the best for me my family and whoever who is around me and I'll not let anything get me down anything at all.<br />Thank youAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-43847727997550568112013-01-12T05:19:25.377-08:002013-01-12T05:19:25.377-08:00You're really kind hearted and I'm sure ev...You're really kind hearted and I'm sure everyone can recognize that just by reading this post and you showing that you care over us young radicals and stuff<br />After reading this post I gotta admit I'm feeling way better, I'm motivated to get to somewhere in the future and not willing to let anything get me down<br />Thank you :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-64626574630670036042013-01-12T01:43:55.251-08:002013-01-12T01:43:55.251-08:00Thank you very much for such intelligent sensitive...Thank you very much for such intelligent sensitive well-written article. May Peace and Love be with You. <3Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09474438978948430552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-15382127908128360062012-04-17T15:36:42.307-07:002012-04-17T15:36:42.307-07:00It behooves me to reiterate that, as with Jensen, ...It behooves me to reiterate that, as with Jensen, I consider myself an above-ground radical (insomuch as editorial journalism and analysis is a qualifier in that regard). I assume surveillance, due to my writing and my past, and anymore I am very much disinclined to engage at all in any illegal direct actions. I've clarified these points in my security culture primer and other articles.<br /><br />Also... I'd like to point that I don't have any personal ill-will towards DJ (or anyone else for that matter). This open letter to him was written because of what I (and others) perceive as intellectual inconsistencies on his part and his subsequent failure to acknowledge honest criticism. A truly radical discourse should not, and cannot, be dictated from an essentially unresponsive central authority or expert (no matter how respected they are by the bourgeois establishment -- and no matter if you are given 60 seconds to question them while they are on the stage). Further, as a radical writer becomes more prominently known, there is an increased risk that their message may become corrupted. This can occur even without the trappings of wealth and prestige. All of us need to question, from time to time, what we actually believe and where we actually stand. <br /><br />It is my personal hope that Jensen will repudiate any statements he made which were potentially misused by Christopher Hedges in the latter's intellectually dishonest article about the black bloc tactic and the #occupy movement. Either way... Jensen's previous contributions will still stand as an inspiration to many of us -- but those writings and his forthcoming work may have to be examined in a different context.N. Zerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11280089601231142195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-90765872011455824122011-10-05T19:07:19.413-07:002011-10-05T19:07:19.413-07:00Yeah, I don't understand why nonviolence in th...Yeah, I don't understand why nonviolence in the U.S. seems to mean non-provocative or legal. It can't all be kumbaya and drum circles. Or it can, and nothing will be accomplished. Anyone who read anything about various civil rights groups like CORE and SNCC know that in order to engage successful, meaningful nonviolent direct action, you have to be willing to do 2 things, which obviously not everyone can do: 1.) Get their asses kicked (at the least) 2.) Go to jail, get a rap sheet.<br /><br />Any strong tactic is going to be illegal. If you allow yourself to be kettled, even when you have popular support, you're not helping your cause, you're hurting it. You're recuperating public anger at the oligarchy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-60445842642492832312011-10-04T09:49:55.052-07:002011-10-04T09:49:55.052-07:00(3/3) You are right to bring up these issues and b...(3/3) You are right to bring up these issues and be wary of emerging leaders, but I simply don't think this article is a fair representation of the way things are happening there. Concrete steps can be taken to improve the process, and it is in fact the process which is most important here. It is essentially anarchist in practice and is the most effective defense against all the tactics the powers that be and the liberal establishment will bring to bear against this movement. Fortunately, a number of committed anarchists have been involved since the beginning, and they seem to have helped instill a strong sense among almost all early participants of how important process actually is. I've always thought anarchism was about spreading models and methods to circumvent normal power relations, as opposed to spreading the gospel of Anarchy, so I think this is great. I think it is important now, however, as the movement spreads to other cities, to protect the process by laying the methods out in plain English. The guide to group dynamics from Puerta del Sol (http://takethesquare.net/2011/07/31/quick-guide-on-group-dynamics-in-peoples-assemblies/) is a good place to start. I've also heard talk about potentially sending people from the Wall Street occupation to tour other camps and explain how they've made the process work so far. Of course, another important element is the immediate and consistent involvement by local anarchists.<br /><br />I implore anyone who seeks to be involved in this movement to propose concrete steps to solve tactical and strategic concerns rather than allowing a blame game to occur in the same way it has handicapped radical politics for decades. The reason this movement is catching on is because so far it has been the exact opposite of the sectarianism and strife that has burned out generations of people who want to be involved.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-6929304753357864362011-10-04T09:49:27.280-07:002011-10-04T09:49:27.280-07:00(2/3) I can think of two things that could help al...(2/3) I can think of two things that could help alleviate this problem. First, something similar to the the St. Paul Principles (http://rnc08report.org/archive/224.shtml) should be adopted by the occupations on Wall Street and everywhere else. These were an extremely effective method of maintaining unity among the protesters at the 2008 Republican National Convention while encouraging a broad range of participants and actions. It allowed people to participate only to the extent to which they were comfortable, but still allowed those who chose to carry out road blockades or property destruction to have their space. It kept dissent and division over these tactics to a minimum and almost entirely internal. Beyond the immediate needs, I believe a statement like this can go a long way toward preparing the movement for its first windowbreakers. As of now, I see the first act of property destruction completely debilitating and splitting the movement, so these things need to be planned for.<br /><br />While something along those lines can lay the basis for more successful planning of future actions, I think obviously some lattitude has to be allowed for spontaneous on-the-ground decision making in this kind of movement. The problem here is a lack of tactics and methods that allow for quick decision making in a democratic way. The protesters in Spain, who have had much bigger marches and much more difficult situations with police, solved this problem by simply bringing the general assembly process to the field. If there's a point of confusion during a march, fuck it, sit down and have a mini-GA right there. Without the use of megaphones, this won't reach everyone. But at the very least, the sight of lots of people sitting down will indicate that something's going on, and people will realize they need to figure out what's happening. Hopefully with some modified form of mic check and maybe the livestream this can inform almost everyone of a quickly changing situation.<br /><br />Those two points aside, I think all talk of provocateurs should be rejected outright. This is also in line with the St. Paul Principles, and luckily, I haven't heard this language from anyone at the park aside from the Guardian article you quoted. I have run into this language much more frequently in the internet discussions surrounding the occupation, but we all know the limitations and negative aspects of anonymous internet forums. As to the other terms brought up by the Guardian article, "pacekeepers" and "head" of whatever, this article is the first time I have heard those terms anywhere. Indeed, the idea that any of these working groups have heads or spokesmen is contrary to what I know about the functioning of these committees from multiple other sources. I would suggest that this is a combination of the Guardian pushing to find narratives it is comfortable with (since corporate media organizations clearly can't fathom direct democracy) along with people being interviewed at a time when the whole situation was unclear and confusing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-38308951380222695122011-10-04T09:48:53.120-07:002011-10-04T09:48:53.120-07:00(1/3) I think, unsurprisingly, that this whole deb...(1/3) I think, unsurprisingly, that this whole debate has been marred by confusion. While I am nowhere near any of the ongoing occupations, I have been following them since the initial call-out was made by Adbusters (and I'm an anarchist if that matters). Apologies in advance for the long-winded response.<br /><br />Watching videos from the Brooklyn Bridge, you can clearly see those at the front of the roadway disobeying police orders and taking the bridge. They know what they are doing and are proud of it. That, in and of itself, is not a problem, and I've heard very little criticism of that act as such. On the contrary, what I've read is that when the march started going that route, members from the direct action committee began yelling to marchers that they had both options (footpath or roadway) but that they were risking arrest if they chose the road. Unfortunately, since only the first fifty people or so heard the police warnings and the direct action people were only heard by a few, a lot of people followed the march onto the road with the belief that the police were allowing it. It's easy to see why they believed this since NYPD made no attempt to block the protesters and were in fact blocking traffic for them. I'm sure this was an intentional tactic by the NYPD to kettle protesters, but the situation resulted in a lot of people being arrested who weren't necessarily informed about that risk nor would have agreed to it had they known. Among the arrested were single mothers with young children and I believe at least six people with outstanding warrants. It seems pretty obvious that these people did not intend to take part in civil disobedience on that scale. I think this explains the narrative of "the cops tricked us" that came out immediately after the arrests.<br /><br />I think the actual issue here is a separation of time and space. From what I've gathered, the direct action committee is organized as a small working group like all the others and is open to all. They decide on a general plan of action for each march that is then brought to the general assembly where it is debated and amended until a consensus is reached. All of these actions involve civil disobedience to some degree as no permits have been requested for marches or the camp. However, no large scale plan of civil disobedience was agreed upon for the bridge march. That's not to say that people can't do those things on their own initiative, but to lead unconsenting people into it is wrong.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-820257221748056452011-07-14T07:54:05.820-07:002011-07-14T07:54:05.820-07:00I agree that it would be a bad decision, but huge ...I agree that it would be a bad decision, but huge corporations (and individuals operating within them) often make horrible decisions -- both unwise and unethical. Sometimes they become arrogant and think they can do, and get away with, anything they want. And if nobody is questioning or challenging them... they might. <br /><br />And I'd still like to know who the watchdog group is that's supposed to judge the accuracy of search results.N. Zerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11280089601231142195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-56937778148203788332011-07-14T05:05:45.042-07:002011-07-14T05:05:45.042-07:00I still think it's very unlikely that they'...I still think it's very unlikely that they're tampering with search results for a couple of criticism which <i>some people</i> may read, whereas tampering might lead to strong criticism, lot of attention and bad publicity. <br /><br />Think about it, you're a multi million dollar titan and you decide between having a bunch of nerds read a couple of anti-google pages (considering the average user won't care that much, people will put up with a lot of bad stuff once they're accustomed to a service(see facebook)), and the risk of people finding out about about google-search inaccuracy and corruption, not trusting it for their searches anymore, thus going elsewere (bing, yahoo etc.)Danielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04996529500244425035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-64669112557467743172011-07-13T11:20:10.915-07:002011-07-13T11:20:10.915-07:00Admittedly, Thom, the design criticism was mostly ...Admittedly, Thom, the design criticism was mostly just a surly tactic to set up for the stronger criticism. The design works well enough and Google+ may end up having some redeemable features... we will see. <br /><br />Mike, the search terms I used may seem arbitrary, and I suppose search quality is arguable either way, but I do think that seemingly arbitrary searches are actually somewhat reflective of natural searches. And, if we don't compare several different methods of searching, I don't know how else we could judge and compare any particular search results. I feel that Google's lack of transparency works against it in this regard because we can't look at its technical schematics to ensure that it's optimally fair or accurate. We can only judge by what we see and make logical determinations based on that information. I mean... who is the watchdog monitoring search results supposed to be?N. Zerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11280089601231142195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-65952186201752513182011-07-13T10:12:24.815-07:002011-07-13T10:12:24.815-07:00The search query you use -- "criticism survei...The search query you use -- "criticism surveillance google" to illustrate your claim of google censoring criticism is a bit contrived. <br /><br />Why not try the simpler, more natural "criticism of google," and see what you get on Yahoo, Google and Bing. I'm seeing fairly comprehensive -- and mostly anti-google -- results in Google's search results, whereas Yahoo and Bing just give a bunch of wikipedia clones.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-83100615955664399312011-07-13T10:10:06.975-07:002011-07-13T10:10:06.975-07:00One man's sterile is another man's clean, ...One man's sterile is another man's clean, I guess. Personally, I prefer the G+ layout to either twitter or Facebook's layout.<br /><br />As for what G+ offers that Facebook doesn't...well, the easiest answer to that it offers a hybrid of Twitter and Facebook. You have a one-stop place for 'public' content ala twitter and 'circle' content that only (various subsets) of your friends can read. And it's EASY to create either of these content types.Thom Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13177757464209574440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-550962094287972022011-07-13T08:32:27.280-07:002011-07-13T08:32:27.280-07:00Here's the snarky anonymous comment from above...Here's the snarky anonymous comment from above which I mistakenly deleted: <br /><br />"Interesting that you critique their design and layout when this blog is so poorly designed." <br /><br />And here's my snarky response...<br /><br />I'm sorry you don't like the design of my blog. But you should recognize that Blogspot is a Google product and I'm mostly using the template and tools provided. Since I'm not a multi-national corporation with thousands of employees to work on my blog... I think I have more of an excuse for it not being satisfactory to your sensibilities.N. Zerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11280089601231142195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-89601666172869759352011-07-13T07:54:48.281-07:002011-07-13T07:54:48.281-07:00Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-60586795287157129342011-07-13T07:47:20.981-07:002011-07-13T07:47:20.981-07:00This begs the larger question of whether the web, ...This begs the larger question of whether the web, and digital technology in general, is an effective tool for organizing and/or ridding ourselves of the agenda of global corporate and political overlords. Computers, datacenters, network cable, and the capacity to string it all together are obvious prerequisites for a functioning internet, but the labor (and other energy) that goes into producing these goods is monstrous and exists on an enormous industrial platform. Not that I'm arguing for extinguishing the digital age, but the contingencies and precision necessary for such existence are certainly complex.joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02529074648972690139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-70197746904842654752011-07-13T05:47:10.444-07:002011-07-13T05:47:10.444-07:00I wasn't aware of the TOS shortcomings regardi...I wasn't aware of the TOS shortcomings regarding control of your created content. Yes, that is something of an issue. And not nearly as tolerable as I thought it was. <br /><br />As for the search results... If finding negative information about the company is more difficult when using its own search engine (relative to other search engines), at best that means the Google search engine isn't up to par. And, since the search algorithms are so closely guarded... it's nigh impossible to know if they are tampering with the results beyond merely analyzing the quality they are displaying. This, to me, is evidence that they may very well be tampering with the results regarding certain subjects. I'll let the results and common sense speak for themselves.N. Zerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11280089601231142195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-67031540836359474622011-07-13T05:31:02.751-07:002011-07-13T05:31:02.751-07:00I'm sure discovering they are keeping out unwa...I'm sure discovering they are keeping out unwanted information from google-search would be quite disturbing, if that were true that is. <br />But saying "it was hard for me to find results about such and such" and "it was much simpler to find them on yahoo" is far from being proof of such a thing.<br /><br />Of course it <b><i>"makes some obvious sense (as the corporation is protecting itself)"</i></b> but tampering with pageranks is not something users would find acceptable at all, and it would certainly drive away even diehard-google-fans if proved to be true.<br /><br /><b><i>"One thing I do like about Google Plus is that the content created on the service will continue to belong to the user(s) who created it."</i></b><br /><br />Actually google TOS is currently the main target of users criticisms and wariness towards google services. In fact you may retain any rights to the content you submit, but you forgot to mention you also give google a <i>"perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services."</i> <br />Not so much friendly for artistic works, is it? <br /><br />cheersDanielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04996529500244425035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-43605155430046164282011-07-08T15:29:35.176-07:002011-07-08T15:29:35.176-07:00The comments in r/Anarchism are so tough to read s...The comments in r/Anarchism are so tough to read sometimes. It seems like so many of them are people arguing with other people because they feel marginalized somehow. I rarely read the comments anymore and even more rarely post.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-53556772131337343592010-06-25T14:46:35.689-07:002010-06-25T14:46:35.689-07:00Hi there, I left my first comment about this piece...Hi there, I left my first comment about this piece on Anarchistnews, just wanted to follow up on your response.<br /><br />As to "Hurling a rock is not practically the same as hurling a nuclear missile. And the type of society required to do the latter, I would consider technological," well I cannot disagree that these things are quite different, they certainly are. And if you define your terms accordingly then I take no issue, rather I agree heartily. <br /><br />"And I wasn't just arguing for the abolition of specific technologies" I didn't mean to imply that you were, rather I suppose I was just generally recapping my own argument.<br /><br />Now, as how best to go about actually replacing modernity, that can get tricky, as modernity has successfully co-opted or snuck its way into the the deepest aspects of many of those very philosophic movements that have arisen as a direct challenge to it... thoughts on how to proceed?<br /><br />-AAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32552056.post-40887348066418583852009-10-22T04:18:20.541-07:002009-10-22T04:18:20.541-07:00Mr. Zero,
You sound like an interesting fellow. ...Mr. Zero,<br /><br />You sound like an interesting fellow. I read the better half of your last two posts. I agree with much of what you say. I'm in New Delhi. I think that what the West has done to our climate amounts to a crime against humanity. The Indian government is not beyond reproach, of course. <br /><br />I'll visit again.Love to have you stop by the Green Light Dhaba. You will agree with much of what you read there; not everything.<br /><br />yours,<br />HariHari Battihttp://www.greenlightdhaba.orgnoreply@blogger.com