Rant of the Day: Google
No, this isn't a rant against Google. It's a rant against all the people who have their panties in a bunch about the kind of information that Google makes accessable.
Recently, Google unveiled a new feature in Google Earth that takes historical maps and overlays them over the areas those maps depicted, so you can look at the historical map, and then you can click and see what's there now. They're using maps that were already in the public record, that often were already posted online. Cool, right? Think again.
As part of this, they posted some old maps of Japan revealing the locations of various neighborhoods that used to be where an undercaste in Japan lived, similar to the famous undercaste in India. There's still a lot of prejudice against this caste, and showing the neighborhoods where they lived would supposedly increase that prejudice (or give pepole better targets for it), and lower property values in those neighborhoods. So shame, shame, Google, for giving people access to information that was ALREADY OUT THERE.
Oh, even better? When Google responded to people's calls to take the information down, they photoshopped the maps to hide the information about where those neighborhoods were, and the SAME DAMN PEOPLE started whining about how Google was pretending that the undercaste never existed. What the fuck?
Here's what set me off:
"If there is an incident because of these maps, and Google is just going to say 'it's not our fault' or 'it's down to the user,' then we have no choice but to conclude that Google's system itself is a form of prejudice," said Toru Matsuoka, a member of Japan's upper houseof parliament.
If Google says that, then they're fucking right. If there's an incident, it's the fault of the society that perpetuates the prejudice and the person who causes the incident. Google's revealing the prejudice does not mean they themselves are prejudiced, and I don't even see where that ridiculous tortured logic comes from. Don't piss and moan because they shined a big fucking spotlight on the fact that the Japanese have shitty prejudices. FACE THOSE PREJUDICES, acknowledge that they're there, and fight them. Don't let this shit live in the shadows.
Look, you either think information should be freely accessable to all people, or you don't. You don't get to waffle in the middle and say 'all information should be freely accesable, except the information that I don't like'. If you do that, then everyone gets to do that, and you might as well be living in fucking China. Unless, that is, you're going to say that you're better than everyone else, and you should get to make the rules about what other people can and can't learn about, and I hope I don't have to explain to anyone what's wrong with THAT logic.
This goes for all the people who whine about how Google Earth reveals them coming out of sex shops or passed out on the street in a pool of their own vomit. Guess what? If you don't want people knowing you go to sex shops, then don't go to sex shops. Concept, right? Because you're probably ashamed of going to sex shops because you condemn people who do to your friends and family, or at least stand by and nod in agreement when they're condemned. Oh no, you're a hypocrite! Stop the fucking presses! Maybe if we stopped lying to everyone all the damn time, the world would be a better place to live in.
It cracks me up that the country that's whining the most about the violation of their privacy rights is England, home of CCTV, whereas the US, who don't have that kind of government surveillance, are like "whatever".
And that village that was all pissed off because OMG PEOPLE CAN SEE THEIR HOUSES NOW!!1111!one? What the hell? People can see your houses by driving through your neighborhood. It's not like y'all have a villiage cloaking device going on there. If someone has access to your houses to rob them, they have access to your houses to drive by them themselves. Invest in decent security and lock your damn doors.
Either you're for a free flow of information and you believe that people having access to information without censure leads to a more enlightened society, or you're not. Those are the choices. It doesn't go halfway, to some information, but not the rest.
Before someone strawmans me and says 'that means you're in favor of child pornography being legal to distribute' -- child pornography is illegal to make, and is thus an illegal product. Information can still be a product.
And to be honest, yes. I am squeamish about the way that people who look at CP are treated. Obviously, if you have a huge stash of it on your computer, it bears looking into what you're doing with yourself, but what if someone is curious about what goes on? Having information about how CP is done and what it looks like might help someone who's not sure if maybe someone they know is making it figure that out for sure, or recognize when they're about to unwittingly turn their kid over to a pornographer to photograph (something that does happen). What if someone knows someone who was in child porn when they were children and wants to understand what they went through? What if someone is just curious? Those people, IMO, should have access to what's already out there without being labeled perverts.
I know there's a line, and it's blurry, but our 'OMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN' hysteria is a little bit ridiculous. If parents are paying attention and being honest with themselves, they're going to be able to detect a change in a child's behavior if that child is being molested. All of the stories of children being molested that I've heard of from people who went through it feature prominantly a parental or adult figure who should have seen their change in behavior (or who they flat out approached and asked for help) who turned their backs because they didn't want to see what was going on. Again, if we want to protect the children, the solution isn't forbidding anyone from looking at child porn. The solution is aggressively prosecuting the people who make it (which we do), and being honest with ourselves about what's going on in our lives (which we all too frequently do not). Don't lay thinking of the children on someone else unless you're doing it yourself.
(And no, I don't think that information that someone owns because it was the result of their creative process should be free. In that case, someone put work into the creation of that information, be it book or song or artwork, and they should be compensated for that. However, the RIAA needs to get their heads out of their asses, because they don't compensate the artists as it is.)
Recently, Google unveiled a new feature in Google Earth that takes historical maps and overlays them over the areas those maps depicted, so you can look at the historical map, and then you can click and see what's there now. They're using maps that were already in the public record, that often were already posted online. Cool, right? Think again.
As part of this, they posted some old maps of Japan revealing the locations of various neighborhoods that used to be where an undercaste in Japan lived, similar to the famous undercaste in India. There's still a lot of prejudice against this caste, and showing the neighborhoods where they lived would supposedly increase that prejudice (or give pepole better targets for it), and lower property values in those neighborhoods. So shame, shame, Google, for giving people access to information that was ALREADY OUT THERE.
Oh, even better? When Google responded to people's calls to take the information down, they photoshopped the maps to hide the information about where those neighborhoods were, and the SAME DAMN PEOPLE started whining about how Google was pretending that the undercaste never existed. What the fuck?
Here's what set me off:
"If there is an incident because of these maps, and Google is just going to say 'it's not our fault' or 'it's down to the user,' then we have no choice but to conclude that Google's system itself is a form of prejudice," said Toru Matsuoka, a member of Japan's upper houseof parliament.
If Google says that, then they're fucking right. If there's an incident, it's the fault of the society that perpetuates the prejudice and the person who causes the incident. Google's revealing the prejudice does not mean they themselves are prejudiced, and I don't even see where that ridiculous tortured logic comes from. Don't piss and moan because they shined a big fucking spotlight on the fact that the Japanese have shitty prejudices. FACE THOSE PREJUDICES, acknowledge that they're there, and fight them. Don't let this shit live in the shadows.
Look, you either think information should be freely accessable to all people, or you don't. You don't get to waffle in the middle and say 'all information should be freely accesable, except the information that I don't like'. If you do that, then everyone gets to do that, and you might as well be living in fucking China. Unless, that is, you're going to say that you're better than everyone else, and you should get to make the rules about what other people can and can't learn about, and I hope I don't have to explain to anyone what's wrong with THAT logic.
This goes for all the people who whine about how Google Earth reveals them coming out of sex shops or passed out on the street in a pool of their own vomit. Guess what? If you don't want people knowing you go to sex shops, then don't go to sex shops. Concept, right? Because you're probably ashamed of going to sex shops because you condemn people who do to your friends and family, or at least stand by and nod in agreement when they're condemned. Oh no, you're a hypocrite! Stop the fucking presses! Maybe if we stopped lying to everyone all the damn time, the world would be a better place to live in.
It cracks me up that the country that's whining the most about the violation of their privacy rights is England, home of CCTV, whereas the US, who don't have that kind of government surveillance, are like "whatever".
And that village that was all pissed off because OMG PEOPLE CAN SEE THEIR HOUSES NOW!!1111!one? What the hell? People can see your houses by driving through your neighborhood. It's not like y'all have a villiage cloaking device going on there. If someone has access to your houses to rob them, they have access to your houses to drive by them themselves. Invest in decent security and lock your damn doors.
Either you're for a free flow of information and you believe that people having access to information without censure leads to a more enlightened society, or you're not. Those are the choices. It doesn't go halfway, to some information, but not the rest.
Before someone strawmans me and says 'that means you're in favor of child pornography being legal to distribute' -- child pornography is illegal to make, and is thus an illegal product. Information can still be a product.
And to be honest, yes. I am squeamish about the way that people who look at CP are treated. Obviously, if you have a huge stash of it on your computer, it bears looking into what you're doing with yourself, but what if someone is curious about what goes on? Having information about how CP is done and what it looks like might help someone who's not sure if maybe someone they know is making it figure that out for sure, or recognize when they're about to unwittingly turn their kid over to a pornographer to photograph (something that does happen). What if someone knows someone who was in child porn when they were children and wants to understand what they went through? What if someone is just curious? Those people, IMO, should have access to what's already out there without being labeled perverts.
I know there's a line, and it's blurry, but our 'OMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN' hysteria is a little bit ridiculous. If parents are paying attention and being honest with themselves, they're going to be able to detect a change in a child's behavior if that child is being molested. All of the stories of children being molested that I've heard of from people who went through it feature prominantly a parental or adult figure who should have seen their change in behavior (or who they flat out approached and asked for help) who turned their backs because they didn't want to see what was going on. Again, if we want to protect the children, the solution isn't forbidding anyone from looking at child porn. The solution is aggressively prosecuting the people who make it (which we do), and being honest with ourselves about what's going on in our lives (which we all too frequently do not). Don't lay thinking of the children on someone else unless you're doing it yourself.
(And no, I don't think that information that someone owns because it was the result of their creative process should be free. In that case, someone put work into the creation of that information, be it book or song or artwork, and they should be compensated for that. However, the RIAA needs to get their heads out of their asses, because they don't compensate the artists as it is.)