Click on the link below to see the cartoon. It’s a good one. The battle over net neutrality illustrated. This is delicious. And it is accurate.
Fighting the net neutrality battle for a small blog seems almost hopeless but there a lot of us. We’re disorganized and highly independent. It doesn’t make for good group cohesion. But we have our anger and each of us has our own niche on the web. Maybe we can make some difference in this battle.
James Pilant
From the article by Stan Finger –
A half-dozen Wichita police officers are testing a new body camera system that records everything the officers see and do outside their vehicles.
The field tests began two weeks ago and will continue for another two weeks, Capt. Jeff Easter said Wednesday.
“Anything that they get out of the vehicle on, they’ll record,” Easter said of the officers. “Anything is evidence. You never know what’s going to happen in front of you when you get out on the scene.”
Early results are promising.
“It’s a very good system,” Easter said. “The video quality is amazing. It’s much better than any other camera system we’ve looked at in the past.”
The system is manufactured by Taser, which is letting Wichita police try it out. The head-mounted system resembles a Bluetooth and can also be attached to an officer’s hat or eyewear.
I’m a little surprised that the police are adopting these without any fuss. I have read and directly heard about the police disabling cameras. But apparently it has become a useful tool for the officer.
I’m a little more interested in what this means for the rest of us. I recognize that the technology is available to be purchased now but it is not the same. These things kick on every time an officer exits the car. They keep all of what is seen for a year. This is no short time surveillance camera in a tie. While we are not police officers whose department is willing to spend the $5,000 a year necessary, we will eventually be the beneficiaries of the technology. Soon at a reasonable price you will be able to make a record of everything you see 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It might be useful taking college classes or at a family reunion or in large scale use changing the social fabric of the nation.
Will all Americans adapt their behavior to an utterly continuous recording of themselves by countless others? What will be the long term social effects?
In terms of business ethics, what we have here is the private becoming public. Discussions, comments and negotiations will all be easily recorded in the most informal of circumstances with the ability to keep records for years. Is there a disclosure requirement? Is there going to be an unspoken agreement not to use these in negotiation? Can they be used in court? This kind of evidence could come back to bite you as long as it exists and eventually those records will exist for the course of our lives or longer.
Will states or the federal government regulate their use? That is an important question. There is some regulation of recording phone calls. The grounds for this is that there is no consent from one of the parties. That would be a similar justification for laws on continuous viewing by personal cameras.
These things worry me. We seem as a society to do things without discussion and debate. When we do it turns every single time into a debate over personal freedom versus government regulation whether or not these are significant factors in the issue. Every subject can be classified that way but that doesn’t mean it fits into that box. Surveillance is more of an issue of what can new technology do and “what the effects are.” What are the advantages of this technology? Does it conflict with our customs and morality? What effects will it have in different areas of endeavor; medical operations, trial, sports, sex, and countless others. Once we think about the effects then we can start putting it into legal or regulatory boxes. But in current discussion the boxes come first and we never do the often subtle thinking that allows humanity to make reasonable and intelligent decisions.
James Pilant
P.S.
I went to a “gadget site” on the web. I couldn’t get a price but the system ad read this way. I think you’re supposed to feel like Tom Cruise in a Mission Impossible move.
This High Quality Body Camera set is ready for Covert Operations. This complete set is all you need. At a much better and higher resolution then our lower priced Body Cam, you get what you pay for. This is the best there is. Camera is powered by the DVR unit itself so there is no stupid 9 volt batery to weight you down.
I’ve changed themes on my blog. I sometimes posted more than three times a day (one day I did nine). My previous theme was a three column and it was difficult to look at more than three articles I began to get concerned that my kind readers would only see the three posted when they visited. So, I went to a single vertical column with a list of recent posts off to the right. The theme also places my blogroll right at the top. I like that.
If you like the change or don’t the change, please let me know.
I changed it to make your blogging experience more user friendly.
James Pilant
This article is concerned with net neutrality. A good part of the article focuses on this issue. But the article takes on some other critical issues. One is Congress’ bizarre lengthening of the copyright privilege to seventy years plus the life of the author. It’s tragic in literature but in the tech world it ties up technology is a disastrous fashion. He also discusses new laws under consideration that would make suppliers of net access vulnerable to legal action over the content of their various customers. This would provoke massive censorship of the web not because there is illegality but to avoid the slightest possibility of illegality.
It’s a good article and his conclusions are very close to my own. I wish the author well.
James Pilant
via The Prelator
This article focuses on the key issue in the FCC ruling. The issue is whether or not the decision actually favors consumers.
I hold the FCC decision in contempt. I do not believe it protects the interests of consumers because it will allow charges for using larger amounts of bandwidth when there is no shortage. Further, the FCC under these rules can only respond to complaints. The FCC does not enforce the rules without customers asking it do so in individual cases. Responding to complaints sounds good until you look at what happens with a complaint. If my web site is discriminated against and my loading time dramatically increased, I will only get redress after a lengthy complaint process. By the time that is completed, I would no longer have a successful blog. It’s the same with anybody else. The Internet is a fast moment by moment product. A complaint system is a post destruction remedy that does in no way mitigate the damage.
This is a good blog entry that asks who does the decision really benefit. If you are interested in a deeper understanding of this issue, I would read the article.
James Pilant
Is a major factor in the battle over net neutrality the consolidation of the industry by companies like Google? History suggests that after a period of development the market tends to consolidate and it consolidates with companies that make things simpler. From the author –
The question today is whether this is happening again, and if the Internet is slowly becoming monopolized. Here, think Google, with 70 or 80% of global search volume. Likewise, in social networking, Facebook has become predominant. Apple’s iTunes rules content download in the music sector. We’re consolidating.
See what you think. Read the article and ask yourself if consolidation makes the end of net neutrality inevitable.
James Pilant
via The PSSI Blog
Surprising statistic. My impression gathered from the media is that manufacturing is long gone. But America is still number one.
Yet America remains by far the No. 1 manufacturing country. It out-produces No. 2 China by more than 40 percent. U.S. manufacturers cranked out nearly $1.7 trillion in goods in 2009, according to the United Nations.
The story of American factories essentially boils down to this: They’ve managed to make more goods with fewer workers.
The United States has lost nearly 8 million factory jobs since manufacturing employment peaked at 19.6 million in mid-1979. U.S. manufacturers have placed near the top of world rankings in productivity gains over the past three decades.
That higher productivity has meant a leaner manufacturing force that’s capitalized on efficiency.
China is using its political power to enhance its manufacturing, offering tax free zones, only allowing companies to enter their markets if they build in China, and bending or breaking the rules whenever possible. And yet, the United States still wins the contest.
The United States will be the number one economy in the world for the next fifty years. That is my belief.
I find America’s largest competitors to be a pretty sorry lot.
China is a totalitarian state. In terms of quick economic growth, they have great advantages over more democratic societies. They can do what the Chinese are doing. Let me make a brief list for you – subsidize any critical industry to make sure foreigners cannot make inroads in that area; require foreigners to “partnership” with locals for admittance to the economy; use the resources of the state, particularly the intelligence sources and the military to enhance competitive advantage; act ruthlessly against parts of the nation or its population or its minority groups while favoring others; and manipulate economic statistics to paint a rosy, optimistic picture of progress. They might even say something like, “We will bury you.” Perhaps not.
China is a Communist state. It seems at times, that this part of the equation simply doesn’t figure in economic and political discussions. What about the words, Communist State, do American and multinational corporations not get? There were 12 Communist nations in 1989. Now there are five. Does history favor the Communist system?
Will China be the world’s greatest economic power? No. Their economic statistics may one day say so, but reality will still be reality.
If we believe in the idea that capitalism is the most efficient and productive form of economy, how does China even figure in that? Look at the rules and regulations for business in China. Is that the free market?
In Communist China, the law is a creature of the state. In the United States business law is extremely stable and predictable. Is this a predictable safe business environment?
Let me predict what is going to happen to these foreign investments in China.
They will end badly. They will end whenever the Chinese see a profit in doing so. They will end whenever China has an international dispute with a country whose citizens are involved in that investment. And they will end whenever corrupt Chinese officials decide it is profitable and they have a good chance of safety.
China will not be the next great power on earth. What they will become is in many ways is not clear but the one thing we can be sure of is that a Communist dictatorships will not end well.
James Pilant
Does this level of mistrust damage our society? It should be obvious, that people don’t invest with people they don’t trust. And I find it hard to believe these numbers aren’t reflected overseas.
What about a nation where the major institutions are held in widespread contempt? Congress, the courts, state governments, the health care system – would you feel comfortable running any of them in popularity contest?
What about corporations? From the article –
Big corporations fared the worst in the survey, with just 13 percent of Americans saying they trust these major businesses. That’s the same level as the first quarter of last year and down from the middle of 2010.
The stock market also isn’t high on Americans’ list of trusted organizations, with just 16 percent of Americans saying they trust that institution. Again, that’s the same percentage as last March.
Banks and mutual funds fared better, at 43 percent and 31 percent, respectively. Among all the components of the index, the banking system has seen the biggest percentage gain in trust this year.
This is a very serious matter. These levels of distrust, probably even hatred, are reflected in actions. Could the idea that vaccinations caused autism have gained traction without widespread distrust of the pharmaceutical industry? Children have died because of the lower rate of vaccinations.
These are not signs of a healthy society. They are the signs of a distressed society, a society where things no longer work. Trust abandonment can manifest in many ways. Most likely, we will see more and more political volatility.
Elections will be won by groups who claim to have all the answers. When they fail to deliver, they will be thrown out in mass. Election victories will go more and more to extremists. And when those winners fail to deliver, there will be another cycle where they are thrown out. It will make stability impossible and each cycle will further radicalize the nation.
We are already seeing the embrace of abandoned ideas and discredited ideologies. Of course, the system may return to stability for any of wide number of factors. But I don’t think so. The mistrust, the hatred, is too deep.
James Pilant
This is a fun article. Of course, as an ethics teacher I should probably worry, but I will continue to have faith that I will do okay.
I am still working my way through moral philosophy so this article had relevance for me. I hope you enjoy it as well. Read the comments, some of them are pretty fire breathing.
James Pilant
via Ockham’s Beard
Here is the situation from the Yahoo News article, Feds probe Calif. ‘sham university’ for visa fraud.
The government of India is urging the United States to show leniency toward Indian students who were enrolled at a “sham university” in California that U.S. authorities say was a front for illegal immigration.
The U.S. attorney’s office alleges the owner of Tri-Valley University in Pleasanton used the unaccredited school to charge foreigners millions of dollars in tuition fees and help them obtain student visas to stay in the U.S.
Officials at Tri-Valley did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday.
There were 1,555 students enrolled at Tri-Valley last fall and about 95 percent of them were from India, according to a complaint filed Jan. 19 in U.S. District Court in San Francisco.
Many of those students, who took Tri-Valley courses online, could be deported if they are found to be in violation of their immigration status.
Okay, these guys were probably duped into enrolling into a money making scheme posing as a college. It’s pretty sad. Now, assume just for a moment that these students were aware in some way that this was a sham. I don’t believe that but let’s assume it for the sake of my next question.
Is this fair? Read on –
Indian officials say the students are being “treated like criminals” by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents even though they were issued valid U.S. visas by American consular officials in India.
“I don’t think any of them had any idea this was a sham university,” said Susmita Gongulee Thomas, consul general of India in San Francisco. “I don’t think any of them had the motivation to defraud any rules of the U.S. government … These students came here genuinely to improve their prospects and they should not be criminalized or victimized.”
Students told Indian consulate officials that they were searched, treated rudely and handcuffed before being taken into immigration offices for questioning, Thomas said.
Many have been forced to wear ankle bracelets to track their movements with radio frequency signals, and they must report to immigration officials regularly while they go through deportation proceedings, Gongulee Thomas said.
I’ve had people put in ankle bracelets. Those things are pretty demeaning and easy to spot. I recommended those individuals be put in ankle bracelets because they were flight risks.
These citizens of India came here looking for an education or to work at a job. Doing either one requires having a verifiable identity.
This is from Change.org –
Currently, the students from Tri-Valley have their SEVIS information blocked by DHS without which they cannot seek transfers or admissions to other universities and the students are under electronic surveillance. India has already demanded that the students be treated fairly and expressed concern. The Ministry of External Affairs stated that “we have conveyed to the US authorities that the students, most of who are victims themselves, must be treated fairly and reasonably, and that the use of monitors on a group of students, who were detained and later released with monitors in accordance with US laws, is unwarranted and should be removed.”
Help these students stay in the United States to complete their education. In my experience there are a great number of schools in this country designed to extract the maximum amount of money for the least educational value. Considering the number of these schools, I think it would be wise to give these students the benefit of the doubt.
There is an online petition here. I doubt that the petition will get them released, the fear of foreigners in the United States being at all time high. But maybe they will reconsider things like the ankle bracelets and other objectionable treatment.
If you’ve liked the things I’ve written I would appreciate the assistance. Okay?
James Pilant
Pilant's Business Ethics Blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.