Wednesday, April 30, 2008

The Inspector will see you now

A necessary fence:
Murka is a country founded on the rights of property, and about the only thing that's changed since its bloody birth is that some things that were once property — ie: people — achieved legal personhood (after much more bloodletting, of course). It's also interesting to consider that shortly after this wrenching transformation of property into people — so vigorously and violently opposed, remember — that a new class of person was created, almost as if to compensate for the loss; and, in a fitting irony, these newly defined legal fictitious entities, these "corporate persons", quickly became everyone's new master, making slaves of us all. Read the whole thing.



Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, July 09, 2007

Businessmodello Furioso


business Look up business at Dictionary.com
O.E. bisignisse (Northumbrian) "care, anxiety," from bisig "careful, anxious, busy, occupied" (see busy) + -ness. Sense of "work, occupation" is first recorded 1387. Sense of "trade, commercial engagements" is first attested 1727. Modern two-syllable pronunciation is 17c. Business card first attested 1840.
model Look up model at Dictionary.com
1575, "architect's set of designs," from M.Fr. modelle (Fr. modèle), from It. modello "a model, mold," from V.L. *modellus, dim. of L. modulus "measure, standard," dim. of modus "manner, measure" (see mode (1)). Sense of "thing or person to be imitated" is 1639. Meaning "motor vehicle of a particular design" is from 1900 (e.g. Model T, 1909). Sense of "artist's model" is first recorded 1691; that of "fashion model" is from 1904. The verb is 1665 in the sense of "fashion in clay or wax;" 1915 in the sense "to act as a model, to display (clothes)." The adj. is 1844, from the noun.


David Weinberger, in Delaminate the Bastards:
The problem is, this business model requires the carriers to work against the public interest.
David is talking about the way the providers of access to the net are working against the public interest. Read the whole thing - it's lucid, sensible, clear, and openly builds on David Isenberg's Making Network Neutrality Sustainable.

Both Davids say we the users, the people, must act to turn policy around, in the direction of network neutrality.

They are surely right. But what is the recommended method to take a labyrinthine industry's business model apart and create something quite new? How often does this happen?

What they're seeing with corporate network perversion is pretty much homologous with what Michael Moore sees happening with USian health insurance, and again,
The problem is, this business model requires the carriers to work against the public interest.
If a business model is working against the public interest, is it a business model?


Labels: , , ,