Much Ado About Transparency

I'll say this right off the bat: it's tough to deny complete transparency without looking like you're supporting the kind of people that kill reporters from helicopters, but I'm going to anyway. I believe in Wikileaks, that what it's doing is good, but I can't just say "okay, let's put every single thing the government is doing in plain view." It's just not feasible. Quite simply, the concept of complete transparency borders on irrationality because people don't want to know everything the government is doing. They want to know all the bad things the government is doing. Complete transparency simply can't work because there are bad things that work towards a greater good. But, at the same time, there are more than enough bad things that amount to a greater evil. War crimes must be dealt with harshly and severely, but I really don't think that they should be broadcast for all to see. Back in the Vietnam War era, when John and Jane Q. Public were introduced first-hand to the horrors of war for the first time through the media, North American morale took such an incredible hit that, as a society, we're still feeling the effects of it. This cannot be allowed to happen again. War is already an atrocity, and when that atrocity is willingly pushed beyond all rational limits (i.e. American soldiers killing reporters from an Apache attack chopper), these things must be dealt with so fiercely and remorselessly that everyone knows that they are not safe from repercussion no matter how many guns are on their metaphorical chopper. However, although such crimes are hideous and lamentable, they cannot be treated as just another news story, because stories like this do more harm than good, not to the government, but to the people who read them, their morale, their spirits. For most North Americans, soldiers are a symbol of strength and justice, and if stories like this are reported openly, we will demonize all soldiers based on the actions of the heartless few. Complete transparency is not the answer.

As for the hypothetical scenario of me being a journalist with a USB drive full of leaked information, it all depends on the information I'm carrying. If I'm carrying a USB filled with war crimes, I certainly won't be taking it to the press, for the reasons stated above. If I'm carrying a USB filled with information about companies causing mass contamination of forests and rivers through their dealings, that information is going to every major news outlet from here to Japan, because these are the things that the public must know, and must stop. Let the army deal with the crimes made in war, but let the people condemn the corrupt who dwell among us. Now, information like the Guantanamo Bay Manual is more tricky and less black and white than the two examples above. Housed in this facility are suspected terrorists, that if they are guilty, deserve no sympathy, but if they are innocent are being brutalized beyond belief. The most convenient thing to say is "it would be best if Guantanamo Bay didn't exist," but it does. Facilities like this are at best inhumane, and at worst inhuman. If pressured by the government to censor the information, there could be absolutely no capitulating on my part to their wishes. Leaks like this have to be known, because they represent the absolute worst of what people with too much power are capable of. Information like this must be very carefully handled, and only released to the most trustworthy of news sources, with absolute assurances that no spin will be put on the facts, but that the facts will be reported for the people to decide upon for themselves.

If I had information that the public had to know, I would take it to Openleaks, not Wikileaks, and this is for one reason. Wikileaks has a political agenda, and though I hold very strong opinions about certain things, the public must decide for themselves what is sweet and what is sour, and not have Wikileaks deciding for them. In conclusion, information should be made to the public without slant, without spin, but instead given as pure, raw information unfiltered by expression, and must be allowed to make up their own minds. The dwindling of reason is the death of the mind, and so the people must be given the chance to reason for themselves.

Lastly, I feel it necessary that even though I've said that war crimes should not be published, their existence must be made known. We must have no illusions, but have no prejudices either. With this full 39 minute video of the Baghdad chopper killings, we have to remember to judge each and every individual by their own deeds, and not to judge a whole by a single portion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is9sxRfU-ik&feature=player_embedded

Looking into the future: the crystal ball goes digital

If there's one thing on this guy's list that I agree with, it's his seventh prediction. Apple is dominating the tablet market, and they're going to keep dominating it as long as their competitors have little ambition or ability to overtake them. Apple is already leaps and bounds ahead of other software/hardware companies in terms of tablet technology, and this is because they didn't launch a product that would be considered copyable. They held off with the release, slowly but surely building a machine that was so remarkable that no other company could just rip it off or repackage it as their own in a few months. And, clever little devils that they are, they did it partly by creating other, more minor marvels like the iPhone. While all the other companies were sitting around trying to copy their lesser creations, they created a full-blown nonpareil.

Another good prediction that this particular writer has made is that television is dying out because of the internet. It's already happening, and for one reason: computers are starting to eclipse the usefulness of television. Our family doesn't even own a TV, and one of the biggest reasons why is that anything you want to watch, you can watch on the internet. With the advent of streaming TV and the gargantuan following that file sharing already has, TVs are swiftly becoming obsolete. I've watched every single episode of Frasier, and I've never seen a single one on TV.

If there's one thing that's very obvious throughout this article, it's that Robin Bloor(the writer) has one incredible man-crush on everything Apple. He seems to worship at the altar of Steve Jobs, and frankly, it's skewing his judgement. Even if he doesn't realize it, his predictions are very biased. First of all, his prediction that Microsoft must run with Kinect or slowly die off is ludicrous. Even before Kinect launched, Microsoft has been boasting insanely high figures, with sales of their products through the roof. Go to almost any home, and look around. Sooner or later, you'll see the PC sitting there. While Macs are enjoying huge popularity, they're not going to annihilate Microsoft anytime soon. Kinect is fantastic, but even before it's release, Xbox 360 sales worldwide were already over 50 million. With Kinect, even in it's basic form, those sales are going to see massive growth as even many casual gamers will be purchasing 360s because of Kinect's possibilities. Microsoft stands strong, and will for a very, very long time.

Let's go back to tablets for a second. I'm going to start this point off strong by saying that the notion of tablet computers overtaking laptops is ludicrous. He's comparing the two as competitors, which they aren't. No one wants to type a document or play a video game or edit a sound file on a tablet, because it would be painfully awkward. I'm not entirely knocking tablet PCs. My father owns an eReader (which basically handles like a tablet PC even though it isn't one, let's not split hairs here) and as easy as it is to carry around and lay on a couch and use, etc. it's the devil to type on. Can you imagine typing a 3000 word essay on a tablet? Trying to play a first person shooter? I know I'm reusing the same arguments that I used a few sentences ago, but trust me, these are the things that young people are worried about today. In case this fact isn't painfully obvious, young people are the future of this planet, and what's important to them is going to be important to the future. The laptop is made for function, but the tablet lacks utility in too many areas to make it a laptop killer. Robin Bloor says himself that he made "the most outrageous estimate of iPad sales" last year. Well, he's still doing that in 2011.