i-sako.com

Thanks to John McCreery, the chairman of the Democrats Abroad Japan, for bringing Senator Byrd’s recent Senate speech to my attention.

I think Senator Byrd accurately sums up nearly everything that is wrong with the Bush administration’s posturing on Iraq.

I couldn’t agree more strongly with what Senator Byrd said if I wanted to, with the sole exception of his conclusion:

To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always be a last resort, not a first choice. I truly must question the judgment of any President who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack on a nation which is over 50% children is “in the highest moral traditions of our country”. This war is not necessary at this time. Pressure appears to be having a good result in Iraq. Our mistake was to put ourselves in a corner so quickly. Our challenge is to now find a graceful way out of a box of our own making. Perhaps there is still a way if we allow more time.

I agree that true leadership would not seize upon any opportunity to wage war, but instead would approach it only with great reluctance—and only as a last resort. Wisdom, likewise, does not lie in alienating France, Germany, Russia, and China simply because they do not think that war is justified. But this administration is impervious to wisdom. It shrugs off responsibility, substituting only rhetoric.

I, for one, am sick of Bush’s whining about how he “can’t understand” how other nations might oppose this war, his use of terrorism as a carte blanche to engage in full-spectrum domination of the political agenda at home and abroad, and his autistic hostility to any position that differs from his own. I’m thoroughly disgusted by the ebullient glee on Donald Rumsfeld’s face every time he has a chance to talk on camera about the upcoming war. (Incidentally, I’m also left seething with anger just about any time John Ashcroft opens his mouth. That man is a traitor to his country in ways Benedict Arnold could have never even dreamed!)

This is not an administration of the wisest, most capable leaders the United States has to offer—it’s a government that has been hijacked by lunatics who question the right of the rest of the world to disagree with their foolish, short-sighted policies.

Bush has had his chance to make his case, let him now lead his “coalition of the willing” to disarm Iraq. Go on, George, wage your little war. I can only hope that the American people will come to realize what history will surely record: George Bush is ruining America.

You’ve drawn the sword, George, now use it. You’ve failed to get the broad coalition of international support you had hoped for, but you’ve already made it clear that nothing short of a phone call from God will stop you.

[Aside: Kevin Cleary shared this delightful-yet-sobering game about the possible outcome of Mr. Bush’s war. If you enjoy that one, be sure to check out “Ashcroft Online” and this CNN article about the games’ creator. Good fun all around. Thanks, Kevin!]

I finished Douglas Coupland’s All Families are Psychotic last night. I can’t say that I’ve been less impressed with a book by an author roughly of my generation (Coupland is more than a decade my senior, does that count as the same generation?) since I read David Eggers’ A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius.

Perhaps I’m just out of touch, but I didn’t get much out of Generation X, either. I haven’t read any of Coupland’s other books, although I have read that most of the others are far better. (He recently published God Hates Japan, which I gather is published only in Japanese, but I doubt I’ll look for it in my neighborhood bookstore.)

In many respects, All Families are Psychotic reminds me of a book someone in a high school creative writing course might have written, given time and a bit of artistic freedom. The book contains several interesting ideas, but doesn’t go into much detail exploring any of them. The characters are a bit shallow--especially when you consider their remarkable circumstances!--and, ultimately, are mere spectators in a story that is supposed to be about them.

Perhaps the most interesting thing about this book is the fact that the author doesn’t like the U.K./Australia cover, which is the only one that I thought was not ugly. (Incidentally, yes, I did get the U.K. copy--not because I liked it better, but simply because I picked this book up at a local book fair.)

In thinking about this book, though, I came to realize that I haven’t read any good books by young authors in recent memory; Zadie Smith’s White Teeth being the only memorable exception. 

Is it simply the case that young people don’t have much to say? I would be glad to receive some suggestions about young authors who are writing books worth reading.

Just a few years ago, when I was in my last year of college, I attended a large conference of Asian business and political leaders. Being the diligent journalism student that I was, I took along my trusty SLR camera, a tape recorder, and a notebook. My aim, of course, was to write an article or two after the conference.

The professional journalists at the conference were way ahead of me, though. I watched in sheer amazement as the reporter next to me banged out a report on his laptop, added some picutures that he had taken with his digital camera, and then sent the finished article to his editor as an e-mail attachment via a USB hookup to his cellular phone (this was before phones had e-mail functions built in). His article was done, and would probably be online before the conference had even finished. Standing next to him—clutching a few pages of notes, some yet untranscribed tapes, and a roll or two of undeveloped film—I caught my first real glimpse of how Internet-related technologies would change the way journalists reported news. Needless to say, I was considerably impressed.

More recently, however, I have seen what I believe is an even more interesting trend in the world of news: the yet untapped potential of weblogs as a news source. Granted, there are a lot of mediocre blogs out there, but there are also many good ones. For those who have the inclination to sift the wheat from the chaff, there is a lot of good information out there to be found.

You really think blogs will replace journalism?

No, I don’t. Not even close. As a former journalism student, I know that journalist are far better equipped to deal with news than your average Joe or Jane Blogger. (In a recent discussion about this topic on the SWET-L mailing list, Michael Turner offered this article from The Register as an example of the folly of thinking otherwise.) On the other hand, you don’t have to be a journalist to write about your work, the trends you see emerging in the fields you follow, your political views, or any number of other subjects. Although journalists have very specialized training that allows them to gather and report news in ways a blogger could never dream of, they do not hold a monopoly on information.

I also know that most blogs have nowhere near the resources of a conventional media outlet, which means that the average blogger has almost none of the ability to gather and report news that traditional media enjoy. (There is also a significant credibility gap between, say, a reporter at CNN and a lone blogger with no credentials.)

I should probably point out, however, that what I am interested in here is not the teeming multitude of personal diaries (although Paul Andrews makes a very good point when he asks, “What if Anne Frank had had a Weblog instead of a diary..."), but instead the personal or collective weblogs of professionals or groups that share a common interest. Good examples of this might be Steve Outing’s E-Media Tidbits or Librarian.net. I’ll touch on this a bit more later in this entry.

What I do think blogs have the potential to do, though, is extend the news cycle. Stories that might have otherwise faded from public view can be revived and discussed further in blogs. Similarly, news that is not given due attention for lack of space, time constraints, or other reasons can be picked up and highlighted by blogs. I think both of these things show that, rather than replacing traditional media, blogs have the potential to amplify its effectiveness. The latter, in particular, also suggests that blogs might have the effect of reshaping the traditional role of media gatekeepers.

This article from the Online Journalism Review seems to agree. In it, Paul Andrews writes:

\t

\t"It’s the role of institutional media to act as gatekeepers,” he says, “but what you have in print publishing today is a consolidation that’s inimical to the diversity that exists in everyday life. With the rise of the Internet, people don’t need to be bounded by those traditional filters anymore.”
\t

In part two of the same article, Doc Searls says:

\t

\t"It’s a matter of ‘and’ logic, not ‘or’ logic. Weblogs will inform old media. They will increasingly be a source of information that traditional media will rely on.”
\t

A little bit later in that same piece, Dan Gillmor adds:

\t

\t"Technology has been leading us toward new ways of looking at things, and the idea of talented amateurs becoming part of the conversation is just the next logical step.”
\t

Yes, this is exactly what I am talking about.

Technology and the inclusion of talented amateurs

Here in Japan, we are seeing advances in technology that lead the world. What I saw at that conference as a college student was an impressive combination of then-current technologies, but the technology has since evolved considerably. What that reporter did using three separate, expensive tools (the digital camera, the computer, and the cell phone) can increasingly be done with only one (just the phone) for far less.

If you couple the technological advances that make it easier to capture images and to produce and transmit messages with blogging tools that make it easy to dissmeninate such information, it seems natural to assume that amateurs will be able to prepare and share news in ways that were never possible before.

In some areas, like cutting-edge technology, the hard-core geeks of the world will be able to offer insightful counterpoint to the carefully vetted news presented by the media gatekeepers (which, rather alarmingly, are increasingly large conglomerates with vested interests to protect—see this Center for Digital Democracy report on Media Consolidation), simply because they thrive on such information and will surely be abreast of the latest information. If such groups would band together to share such information, it seems only natural that media outlets would begin to see them as potential sources.

Where are you going with all of this?

Well, I would be interested in helping groups of interested individuals put together collective weblogs about topics of mutual interest. In particular, I’m interested in professional angles on a wide variety of topics: emerging technologies, economic trends, political maneuverings, news coverage, and other topics of interest, both within Japan and abroad.

I think some local organizations might be interested in this sort of thing, but it’s still too early to say for sure. Last night, for example, I gave a presentation on PHP for the Tokyo PC Users Group that sparked a lively discussion afterward. Similarly, last week’s discussion with people from SWET indicated some interest as well. Other organizations, ranging from DigitalEve Japan to JAT have been considering starting SIGs with somewhat tangentially related aims.

Might blogging help these groups reach a larger audience? I think so.

Might the overall effect complement my regular news diet? I am sure it would.

Will I be blogging their progress? You bet!

Here’s an interesting idea in the battle to free ourselves from the digital tyranny of the RIAA and its ilk: Get recording artists to release their music under a special license, one that stipulates that the music can only be distributed over P2P file-sharing networks like Napster, Kazaa, and the like. (Better still, as a special bonus to users, might not this license also prohibit the music it covers from being included in a DRM system?)

Then, if the music industry sues the file-sharing networks (with the aim of forcing them to shut down operations), the artists involved can counter-sue, claiming that the industry is restricting access to their market--and violating their right to free speech. It would very likely be a costly battle, but I bet the courts would have to come down in favor of the rights of the artists. 

I wonder if anyone has shared this idea with the folks at The Creative Commons?

(Source: The inspiration for this post came from a comment by “Nandeyanen” in response to RIAA vs. MP3 vs. Adam Smith, an article posted at Kuro5hin.org.)

...and the world will beat a path to your door.

Last night I finally^[1] finished Just for Fun: The Story of an Accidental Revolutionary, Linus Torvalds’ autobiographical account of the birth of Linux, the open source operating system that is gradually changing the long-held corporate dogma that secretive, proprietary code is the only way to develop software.

The book traces the development of Linus himself and the growth of Linux in parallel. All throughout, there is a much greater emphasis on the philosophy of openness than the technical aspects involved in building an operating system (although there is some of that as well). From beginning to end, the book conveys Torvalds’ confidence that Linux developers worldwide are developing the world’s best technology simply through doing what they love: Having fun.

The way Torvalds sees it, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs can be greatly simplified. Whereas Maslow identifies five basic needs, Torvalds sees only three:

1. Survival
2. Finding one’s place in the Social Order
3. Having fun

Hence the title of the book. Torvalds suggests that, in a society where one’s basic survival is all but assured, earning lots of money is less of a motivational factor than enjoying yourself. It is for this reason, he says, that millions of people around the world contribute to open source projects for little or no money: They’re having fun doing what they love most. Just as any artist is happiest when creating art, geeks feel good about creating code. More than that, they feel good about working with the best minds in their fields (not just people who happen to work for the same company) on projects they feel will make a difference.

Where it comes to technology, this book and others like it have changed my religion. Although I am by no means capable of making meaningful contributions to Linux, I have been using it as my main operating system for nearly a year now. Although there is a bit of a learning curve to take into account when moving to Linux from a Windows background, I have found the process very enlightening.

If I ever do decide to build a better mouse trap, you can be sure that I’ll make it open source. Linus and Linux have convinced me that it is not only the best way to make sure that the resulting product is as good as it can be, but also that it’s the best way to have fun while doing it.

^[1] The reason I wrote “finally” here is not because the subject matter was dense or that the book wasn’t a lively read, but simply because I started reading the book while waiting at my daughter’s swimming lessons. When she stopped taking swimming lessons, the book simply waited for me to get back to it—and I’m glad I finally did!