The short answer is yes. Sadly. Visit Canada and Mexico wisely folks. I can understand and appreciate the need for border security but for a person who lives in my vehicle I keep my entire life on my computer and I don’t want just anyone poking their nose in there.

I’m really curious what would happen if I was asked and refused to give the myriad of passwords used to protect and encrypt various parts of my system? How long would the work at it if I conveniently forgot the passwords and how long would I rot in jail for refusing to have various federal agents reading though my personal journal or other information that’d not elicit even a momentary glance if held in paper format on my front seat.

from Indymedia

“The homeless people that live here are the luckiest homeless in Fresno.” Surprised by the statement, I asked undercover Fresno Police Officer Ray Wallace what he meant. “They have maid service. We come out and clean up for them about every other week.” The cleaning party today was particularly vigorous.

The letter handed out by the Fresno Police Department, giving notice of the “clean up” said they would “start at 8:00am.” I arrived at 7:50 AM and the destruction of property was already well under way. One homeless woman told me that everything she owned had been destroyed because she was a few minutes too late to save it. “I had paper work in there that can’t be replaced,” she said.

Within a couple of minutes, half of the shopping carts were destroyed. One sanitation worker was heard saying that he wished he could get a nickle for every shopping cart he destroyed.

Of course, this isn’t the first time Fresno made some bad karma for itself.

Do we really need to have one-touch shopping for groceries? Who in their right mind is going to surrender their biometric data to a grocery store so that they don’t have to remember a pin number or carry an ID or whatever alleged perk this system offers.

When the US government is going willy nilly in spying on their citizens without warrant, I for one am not going to even point at this data collector let alone touch it. Perhaps I’ll even avert my eyes.

A letter to the Secretary of the Smithsonian has given me renewed hope that our government can’t be bought out by just any old special interest party. The House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations has negatively addressed the secret deal made with Showtime to let them have first right of refusal, essentially an exclusive contract to the holdings of the Smithsonian.

The Subcommittee requests the Board of Regents to immediately review this contract to determine whether it violates the spirit if not the letter of the Smithsonian Trust and to consider changes to the contract which would fully guarantee that its terms are limited to a narrow set of programs and not a bar to other legitimate commercial filmmakers who we believe have the right to reasonable access to the collections and staff. The Subcommittee requests that this matter be brought to the attention of the Board of Regents at its May 2006 meeting and that a response be provided to the Committee regarding these concerns within 90 days.

In addition to our concern about this particular contract, we would be concerned about any future agreements that are negotiated in secret, without Committee consultation, which commercialize Smithsonian resources or which appear to essentially sell access to Smithsonian resources. While the Committee recognizes that budget shortfalls, in particular the need for funds to repair and maintain an aging infrastructure, require the Smithsonian to be aggressive and imaginative in its fund raising, these actions are often controversial and raise the risk of damaging both Congressional and public support for the Institution.

Previously addressed here:

It’d be a good show indeed if the American people actually won out in this case, that the treasure not end up in the hands of the well monied, big business, special interest juggernaut.

While we’re on the subject of foods, seems like all that food science stuff is actually doing little to nothing to benefit us the eaters. Stuff may be easier to produce by the mega farms and easier to ship, but we’re suffering nutritionally because of it.

Donald Davis, a biochemist at the University of Texas, said that of 13 major nutrients in fruits and vegetables tracked by the Agriculture Department from 1950 to 1999, six showed noticeable declines — protein, calcium, phosphorus, iron, riboflavin and vitamin C. The declines ranged from 6 percent for protein, 15 percent for iron, 20 percent for vitamin C, and 38 percent for riboflavin.

Oh, and let’s add into the mix all the genetic modification going on too. And the designer seeds that need designer pesticides because of induced mutations. Oh, and what about all the toxins not allowed for use in the United States but produced here and sprayed on produce grown elsewhere and shipped back to us?

So just what is safe to eat anymore? Eight dollar a pound heirloom tomatoes from an organic co-op? Hunting and killing our own wild game for meat? Will we soon rely on the grocery store to fill our stomachs and the pharmacies to deliver our nutrition in pill form? Or will they just treat us as we’re sick and dying?

Is the government going to force me to be a hippie or something? All I ask is no jam bands please. A big government federal mandate is need be. If I want pointless noodling in my ears I’ll just shove in some pasta made from genetically modified wheat.

I would if I could.

Things aren’t exactly all peaches and cream in the US economy at the moment, just in case you haven’t noticed. And when the economy starts hurting everyone starts hurting. I’m happy that you’re apparently well employed though, congratulation to you. But for many of us we’re facing unemployment or under employment. And when we work we’re not necessarily getting what we used too.

Some of my earlier posts talk about my field of specialty being decimated after 9/11 with the number of jobs in the local area shrinking as fast as the pay rates for them spoiling my life long run of good employment and comfortable finances. So please go back and read if you’re so inclined. But trust me, I’ve tried. Both in my field and outside but I remain grossly under employed with just occasional gigs here and there.

On a Metafilter discussion thread, Mark Kraft posted one of his typically concise summaries of how the US government is cooking the books on the unemployment numbers. Like it or not you well employed people, there’s plenty of folks in my boat and it’s sinking fast. His comment inspired my thinking today.

The current unemployment rate is 4.7% for March 2006 according to the latest US Department of Labor statistics. And let’s just note right now that the figures given are severely being skewed. Like how being employed now means simply having a job no matter how few the hours or how little the pay. My favorite trick used by the Bush Regime is not counting anyone who’s fallen off unemployment. Only in Bush’s doublespeak America can being unemployed mean being employed. While the current number touted is allegedly is 4.7%, the real number is probably twice that.

Let’s put that number in perscpective. We’ll conveniently estimate current US unemployment to be 10%. At the peak of the Great Depression the rate was 24.9%, a time of perhaps the greatest economic disaster in US history. So we’re only 2.5 times away from meeting head on with the Great Depression and people think people in my situation have somehow managed to forget to send resumes and poke around the social network. “Get a job,” is quite the helpful statement indeed. As if I haven’t noticed that my lack of employment is caused by, well, a lack of employment.

And to make it sound even more dire some actual economists, and not total ranting noobs like myself, have put the real unemployment figure at 12%. Whether it’s 10% or 12% the reality is that we’re screwed.

So before anyone starts spamming my comments, comments in places that link to here or emailing me with “helpful” advice, please be a little bit more thoughtful with your assistance than suggest that I get a job. I’ve thought about that one already.

“It’s the economy, stupid.”

New York is set to roll out a huge wave of 500 new surveillance camera. In this age of the War of Terror we’re increasingly faced with having our civil liberties taken away with grossly ineffective and expensive invasions to our rights to live freely. The initial 500 will cost $9 million dollars and an addition $81.5 million is requested for the project which could bring the total up around 4,500 more. To what goal are the trying to achieve. Serious criticism of the effective of this style of policing are rampant and civil libertarians are up in arms.

Cameras already in place have shown not to reduce crime. They were ineffective in stopping the terrorist attacks in London and they did nothing for the killing spree in the Atlanta courthouse.

So what are they there for? Nefarious kicks? Is there some payola scheme of kick backs from the manufacturers? Politicians looking to impress future voters with some tangible though ineffective means of “safety?” Is this the beginning of the end for Innocent Until Proven Guilty? Where all citizens are just future criminals waiting to happen?

One fear I have is with the technology is the currently limited means to effectively monitor the incoming data streams, but it is cheap to store. Hard drive prices alone are an indicator of the massive storage banks that can be built easily. At what point does the recording of our entire lives happen? What will happen when processing power is far greater than today and can interpret automatically all sorts of details from the vast wealth of collected material from the already installed cameras? When will the current face recognition technology take the next step and start assembling dossiers of everyone, tying that information to all the other various government and private databases available to government agencies?

When will we fondly Joseph McCarthy era witch hunts as quaintly trivial and small? When will our government be able to extend it’s current inward seeking eye to include all of the daily comings and goings of our society? Combine this with some national IDs with the proposed biometric data encoded in the RFID and we have the making of being goldfish in a bowl.

To me part of being an American is the freedom to go about my day without undue interference from any government agencies. The photo boxes I’ve seen in the wild have only caused me concern for the freedoms they take away. If a criminal is going to mug me then all I have to do is step out of camera range. I know where the camera is and so does the thief. The solution isn’t more cameras as it’ll just move the criminal activity yet again. Fixed cameras are not the answer, more cops are. Beat cops, randomly walking or riding around provide a set of eyes that cannot be predicted and the visibility of a human with a badge will do more than the camera ever could. The camera doesn’t jump down and arrest, but a cop will, and even the stupidest criminal knows there will be a dispatch time from being caught on camera to a cop showing up in the area. So what is the system for in terms of legitimate enforcement? Catching only the stupidest of criminals?

“I then bequeath the whole of my property…to the United States of America, to found at Washington, under the name of the Smithsonian Institution, an Establishment for the increase & diffusion of knowledge…”
James Smithson (1765-1829)

“The Smithsonian is committed to enlarging our shared understanding of the mosaic that is our national identity by providing authoritative experiences that connect us to our history and our heritage as Americans and to promoting innovation, research and discovery in science. These commitments have been central to the Smithsonian since its founding more than 155 years ago.”
Lawrence M. Small, Secretary of the Smithsonian

In yet another grand theft from the American people, the Smithsonian has awarded Showtime the right of first refusal to the public domain holdings held in what was formerly regarded as America’s Attic. What was one our collective storage for cultural and historical ephemera has now been sold off to one of Viacom’s many entertainment branches. Rather than being America’s Attic it is now, in essence, a corporately owned holding as should anyone want to use the public domain holdings of the Smithsonian they now have to first contend with the whims of Showtime and ask their permission. These holding that were one public domain, free for anyone to use as they see fit, must now be preapproved for use. How can we any longer call this a public domain collection in America’s Attic?

In a New York Times article famed documentary creator Ken Burns had this to say, “I find this deal terrifying,” Mr. Burns said in a telephone interview from San Francisco, where he is filming interviews for a documentary on the history of the national parks. “It feels like the Smithsonian has essentially optioned America’s attic to one company, and to have access to that attic, we would have to be signed off with, and perhaps co-opted by, that entity.”

Imagine being a historian with an idea for creating a new documentary. You query the Smithsonian and find in it’s great storehouse of American history all the footage, documents and physical objects you need to independently produce a documentary. Being that this is public domain, i.e., free of any copyrights on the material, it is free for reuse and may be combined into a new and larger work. A historian may gather separate elements and draw together a new or entertaining conclusion from such material and then have the rights to sell the completed project for distribution. But under the new Smithsonian rules the material from the archives and the project itself would first have to go before Showtime for approval. A corporate entity has bought out America’s Attic for it’s own private gain. Will Showtime allow others to use “their” archives? Does anyone really think Showtime will look at their competitors projects and smile brightly upon them and grant approval knowing full well they can just say no, steal the idea and produce it themselves? Does anyone think that doesn’t happen enough already?

The entertainment industry already has a long established history of riding the coat tails of whatever trend or idea is showing promise. Look at any industry indicator in the entertainment industry. One record company releases a band with a certain sound and marketing niche, it does well, then all the other record companies find simiilar bands and start marketing them. Same with movies. Pixar starts doing well with animation and soon everyone is all excited about animation. Even Disney, the classic American animation producer, just bought out Pixar. Even Disney could not compete with the Pixar powerhouse and smartly realized their survival depended on not only continuing their course in animation, but to overtake them financially.

This media industry inbreeding and nepotism will only be furthered by the introduction of Smithsonian Network’s and their new product Smithsonian on Demand, a joint venture between Showtime Networks and the Smithsonian Institution for producing pay per view content delivered via cable and satellite. How could profit generating entities possibly allow for an unbiased and fair decision on who can use what and how? The Smithsonian Network will be a profit raising initiative for the Smithsonian and therefore in therefore its motives will be profit and self preservation, not exactly what you’d like to go up against as a documentary producer who wishes to remain independent, someone who doesn’t want to sell out to the Smithsonian’s new venture or to Showtime Networks without open negotiations with other distributors just to get access to one of the largest and most important historical archive in the country for documentarians.

Now, if Ken Burns wishes to do a new documentary on a subject, much like he did with jazz or baseball, he’ll first have to run his ideas past Showtime executives. How can this be considered in the American public’s best interest for the use of the holding collected and archived for us by the Smithsonian. Clearly, this deal benefits only Showtime. Not Ken Burns, not the Public Broadcasting Service that showed the series for free to the American people and most certainly not to the American people who have without concent had their history sold off to the highest bidder in a yet to be announced contract with a corporate media mega-entity. As of this writing the exact terms of the contract have only been announced to the upper executives of the Smithsonian.

This is a sell out of the American people and our collective heritage to a corporate entity pure and simple. If Showtime’s interest was simply to fund the Smithsonian in its time of budget crunch surely it could simply have negotiated to give the money to the Smithsonian in exchange for co-branding it’s name and logo into the Smithsonian and it’s publications and productions. Surely they could have underwritten the costs of general operations or funded the costs of producing a new exhibit at the Smithsonian museum.

Furthermore, the World Intellectual Property Organization’s (WIPO) “Treaty on the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations” would allow, if approved, Showtime to take content from America’s Attic, create a show based entirely on its public domain content and then get a 50 year term of exclusivity on that content that is similar to copyright. Though a simple packaging of existent and free intellectual property such as archival footage, a corporate entity can then claim functional ownership over “their” newly acquired content.