Matthew Rutherford's Missing Piece

Here's looking at you, citizen

2006-06-06T10:59:00.000-06:00

It is eerie just how much the United States is becoming just like the "utopic" world of the book, 1984. I know I am not original in this thought, but I cannot stand to see this country lose its freedom and not seem to care.

We are in a post-9/11 world, and our sensibility has changed. We have to watch out for the invisible bad guys who are out to get us. We also live in an internet-driven world, where watching the actions of individual "surfers" is both trivial and profitable. This current world also has a global economy and United States citizens are encouraged to accept open boarders, jobs going to other countries, immigrant workers (legal and illegal) taking jobs here. This current world is filled with media messages about how families are destructive and full of hurt, that fathers are abusive monsters or bumbling idiots, and teenagers should have all the freedom in the world. Racial tensions have not improved much, despite legislating against hateful speech and thoughts. Drug usage (both legal and illegal) is way up, and our general health is not improving.

We are a nation feeding on ourselves, eating our innards in a desperate attempt to satiate hunger. And what is that hunger? Most couldn't even identify it if asked. We are insecure. We desire security, but everything we do creates greater insecurity.

There are those who are willing to capitalize on our insecurity. I would say that the American citizen is so beaten down, so knocked about, Americans barely know which way is up. Of course, there are many in the world who would happily say, "Poor Americans, with their cars and houses and computers and TV's and food!" And it is true that we have a lot, in material goods. But Americans are becoming prisoners to the corporate greed and governmental control. Not only are our jobs barely paying enough to allow the average American to survive, but our very thoughts are being shaped by the onslaught of advertisements, entertainment and advertisements disguised as entertainment.

We are becoming slaves in most every aspect. Monumental debt alone is a large enough millstone to crush the spirit of the average American. And we just sit and watch, helpless, as our freedoms and liberties die, one by one. Privacy, never protected by the constitution, was an afterthought, assumed to be a part of that life, liberty and happiness clause. Well, we are no longer innocent until proven guilty, because the entire nation will be watched. The current law being considered to monitor all citizens on the internet, via their ISPs, is the latest in a long line of abuses we have had to put up with. They say it is to catch child pornographers, but who cares what the justification is? This is another step down that path. The path to which I refer will only end if someone in government gains some sense, or someone among the average citizenry sparks a revolution. Feel free to read more about this at http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ratcliffe/?p=125&tag=nl.e539 or do a Google search.

Are we truly so far gone, that we are willing to put up with this? Is there no one out there willing to speak out. Someone must say, "Stop the madness!"

In reading an article on Stratfor by George Friedman (http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/read_article.php?id=266237&selected=Analyses), I have gained some balance in my views. We cannot forget or ignore that there is a real danger out there to our lives. However, we also cannot forget that absolute power corrupts, absolutely. Let us remain a nation of rules and law, including those in governmental capacities.

A possible solution to RFID privacy concerns

2006-05-11T00:31:00.000-06:00

I'm not taking my eye off of RFID users. Their goal is not my privacy. Their best interest is not mine. But it is heartening to see at least someone actually listen to the consumer. IBM has come up with a great way to discard the little buggers after a consumer purchase. The RFID units are sewn with their antenna inside a small tag that can be torn off of the merchandise. Tear off the antenna and the unit becomes useless. Sounds nice. A lot cleaner than nuking your clothes in the microwave to make sure you aren't bugged by this privacy nightmares.
This article (on Information Week) discusses this new solution, and is one of the first I've read that actually admits that RFID tags pose a security/privacy risk to the consumer. I say "Bravo" to IBM and anyone who adopts this method or similar methods to empower the end-user.

Drug companies creating illnesses

2006-04-23T21:05:00.000-06:00

As someone who currently works for a natural health book publisher and who hopes to help people with their mental health needs in a nonpharmaceutical way, I am definitely not a promoter of drug use, illegal or legal. I am also very cynical about people who earn billions off of drugs that don't cure anyone (despite what the FDA says). All drugs cause side effects, and side effects make people worry that they are getting sicker, so they take more drugs. Disgusting. And we have all these wonderful "programs" to make sure people, young and old, will be addicted to medical advice and drugs for their entire life.

So it comes as no surprise to me that the BBC had a recent article stating drug companies have been known to come up with diseases. Coming up with more creative uses for their legal poisons? How surpising!

Naturally, the drug companies deny the allegation of disease-mongoring. But you tell me. Does it make sense for billion-dollar companies to not try and grow their businesses? Do they really expect us to believe that they aren't manufacturing reasons to take their drugs? Why should they change their business model when it is so lucrative and has very little consequence?
Anyway, read more about it on the BBC website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4898488.stm

Wikipedia abuses

2006-02-14T00:15:00.000-07:00

Obviously, I underattend this blog. Although there are dozens of governmental and business abuses every day, I cannot report on all of them, and there are so many other places to find such shenanigans. But when I read about this, I knew I had to say something. Our elected officials (I'll refrain from calling them representatives of the people) have been known to abuse their power. They have also been known to indulge in the sin of pride. With the power of Wikipedia, an open source encyclopedia, anyone can make changes to entries. There has been a lot of talk lately about how such an open system can get abused. Duh. Email is an open system, and it is being abused daily, hourly by spammers. Open is insecure is open. Can't escape it. However, most people didn't realize just how this could be until recently. I won't rehash the news, except to say that the most recent abuse to come to light is the uncomplimentary changing of entries by congressional staffers. You can read more about it here and elsewhere.

I think Wikipedia is great. It has the potential to be a truly useful tool. But it only takes a few bad apples to ruin the pie. Perhaps they should tighten up security, add accountability to the editing procedure. However, the abuse by people in government, even if they are merely staffers, is inexcusable and childish.

I remain unchanged in my view of politicians.

Bad legislation

2005-11-14T21:45:00.000-07:00

The world of "fair use" and "the customer is always right" are numbered. I know, this isn't anything new. In fact, I have bemoaned this very fact several times. But I can't escape the fact that we, a supposed democratic republic, are not in fact represented by those whom we put in office (through our vote or our neglect). Those who claim to be our representatives answer to a higher law, big business. Don't believe me? Let's look at the current problem by first looking at the past.

The late 1990's. So-called "piracy" actually stimulated sales of albums, as people were able to hear the music before they plunked down their hard-earned dollars. Consumers were getting wary because popular music was crap and albums were (and still are) populated with maybe one good song and completely padded with poor songs. A little later, the dot-com bust happened. The economy took a dive. People were still buying, but not as much, because there wasn't as much money. The one good thing going for the music industry, something that actually got people excited about music again, was killed off (Napster).

But the "piracy" continued. People hopped over to other services. Music sales continued down. But the discretionary spending of the average American was down, not just in music, but in all areas of luxury spending. But no, it had to be the "piracy." Sharing services came and went, and the industry decided that suing their customers was a good idea. Hey, no consumer has the money to fight the lawyers hired by the deep pockets of the music industry, so nothing came to court and no one could get the courts to declare their (the music industry's) actions as illegal. But the "piracy" continued, because there are so many people and only so many lawsuits that could be filed at a time. Hey, you might get unlucky, but more likely, you will be ignored, or so the logic went.

Now we come to today. We have politicians easily in the pockets of the music industry who are happy to trade our rights as citizens and consumers to accommodate those who create the shoddy content, the music. There is a law being considered that would virtually take away fair use, in the name of "protecting" the profits of the music industry. The law is called the Analog Content Security Preservation Act of 2005, and you can read about it on Extreme DRM or on the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Of course, I have faith that some plucky hacker out there will circumvent any technological protection scheme, but when the laws of the country are not protecting the citizens, we are one step closer to a fascist state. Some day, we will look back on the old days when the RIAA just sued its customers, and wish things were still so simple. "Back then (we will say), we knew who our enemies were."

Finding what you love

2005-10-16T16:26:00.000-06:00

I am not a Mac user, nor do I have an iPod of any kind. It might be fun to have one, but the cost prohibits me. Nonetheless, I have to have some admiration for Steve Jobs. He is a unique person who has had some real impact on the world of movies and computers. Rather than sing praises to his name, I want to point you to a transcript of his commencement address at Standford this past June. It is powerful and meaningful to me.

Here is the link to his address.

He tells us to find what we love and do it. Doing something just for money does not bring lasting happiness, and there is the possibility we may find financial success while doing what we love. He talks of finding the good in even the worst of circumstances. Lastly, he tells us to live life to its fullest, as if each day is your last. This is great advice that I try to follow, but it is not easy. I suspect it will be worth it in the end, though.

Church and state and war

2005-10-07T12:17:00.000-06:00

George W. Bush has not hidden the fact that he is a religious man. Regardless of his past (drinking and carousing about), he seems pretty sincere about his religious affiliations. And while I definitely want a moral and ethical person in office, and further want someone who is not anti-religion, I am more than a little concerned how much "W" puts his religion into his policy-making.

There is a recent report (which you can read here at the Independent) that George W. has claimed God told him to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Naturally, the White House denies such statements as false, which comes as no surprise. Most people do not want a war president taking his orders from God. No, they would feel more comfortable with a president taking orders from our enemies, like China (thank you, Mr. Clinton!). But I understand the concern. A war has been declared, between a Middle-Eastern religion and a Western religion, much like the wasteful crusades of the past. And what was gained by those crusades? A lot of bloodshed and resentment that we can still see today.

Bush can believe what he wants, of course. However, whether he claims to have heard the voice of God directly (not as likely, but possible), or just feels he is a messenger who kills in God's name (more likely), it is the same. The decisions being made are not going to be in the best interest of the nation.

As a Latter-Day Saint, I have read enough history of how things work in a theocracy. I don't think I would have enjoyed living under the shadow of Brigham Young's controlling fist. This nation was founded for freedom of religion (among other reasons), and that means freedom from having a national religion forced on everyone. I think it should also mean freedom from having national policy made for quasi-religious (and barely justifiable reasons).

I did not support the war in Iraq, but I support the young men and women who are willing to fight for our country, even in wasteful wars that they don't believe in. There are times when war is justified. To right a grave wrong, such as Hitler. To protect freedom, such as the cold war. To retaliate when others attack us, as in World War II again, or after 9/11. I support a nation's right to defend her borders, (although our government is not doing enough of that (have you seen southern California, Arizona, Texas and New Mexico lately?). But our "reasons" for going to Iraq changed constantly. I was truly surprised we didn't fine weapons of mass destruction, but only because I expected there to be evidence planted (yes, that's the cynic in me talking).

On this subject, I would say one thing more. Separation of church and state does not mean we divorce ourselves from the very principals upon which our nation's laws were founded. Whether we like it or not, our laws are based on the ten commandments and Judeo-Christian tradition. It was out of that tradition that the concept of a free nation for all was born. Sure, we have made mistakes as a nation, but we have so much capacity for good. Let us embrace all that is good, from whatever source it may come, but not forget the lessons we have learned in the past. The ten commandments do not cover everything, by any means, but they are a good place to start and they are where our nation's morals did start.

New Orleans and other tragedies

2005-09-14T00:51:00.000-06:00

The recent destruction of many parts of the South, including New Orleans, has left many people stunned, feeling vulnerable. It is hard enough to those poor people who were directly affected, but the rest of the nation is also in fear that it could happen to me. I don't know that I could at to the voluminous commentary about these tragic events, but I want to try.

I don't believe playing the blaming game right now is the right thing to do. There is still much to do to help those who are suffering. This is an event that should transcend politics. Focus on those who need help!

And after the help is rendered, after the kind people of the world have finished picking up the pieces, the bickering and arguing can resume, I suppose.

The anniversary for 9/11 just happened. I remember where I was when I first heard it was happening. I was at work, and everyone just stopped working and turned on the news. We watched as the second tower was hit, and stared in horror as bodies fell, and teared up when the towers fell. The anniversary was somewhat forgotten under the weight of the current events, and that is understandable.

Horrible things happen in this world, some man-made and some natural. I don't know about other people, but when things like this happen, I am reminded how weak our grip on civilization is and how much is outside our direct control. Mortality faces all of us and we never know when it will strike. It is time to stop worrying about petty concerns and pay more attention to the more important things in life. Pay more attention to friends and family. Do something nice for a stranger. Help remove some of the misery found in abundance around you. Make this world a better place.

Yes, this is the idealist in me speaking. Sometimes, I have to let that part have its say. I know the human race can be better than it is. We all have to make an effort, though.

Movie industry needs help

2005-08-29T14:25:00.000-06:00

As the entertainment industries work (music, movie, software, etc.) on blaming other's for their money problems, the whole story isn't ever given. This is going to pick on the movie industry. While movie watching in theaters has declined, DVD and satellite sales have brought in a nice and tidy sum, and is growing.

Nonetheless, profits are not as high as the suits want. Why is that? Pirates distributing movies for free? The theater-going experience isn't as good as it used to be, with cell phones and the such?

There is a theory (and it is a theory) that a certain level of piracy is good for business, and can be considered free promotion. True or no, piracy levels have not been reduced, despite all the legal efforts. Perhaps the answer doesn't even lie in that direction. The truth seems to be that moviegoers are finally realizing that movies aren't that good.

We, the public, are starting to figure out that sequel after sequel, remakes of bad TV shows and just bad stories and acting with lots of explosions do not make good movies (I mean, who really thought we needed a Dukes of Hazards or Charlie's Angels made into movies?). Oh, there are still the occasional good movies coming out, but very little that gets us excited. The New York Times seems to agree with me.

I love movies and always have. In fact, I buy more movies that CD's. Sadly, I can get good movies for cheaper than a CD, and have a better return investment for my money. But I can't stand to see all the garbage coming out now. The entertainment industries all seem to think they can forever foist garbage on the public and get away with it. I can't wait till they realize that the world has changed, for the better. Maybe movies will finally get better.

The good and bad of technology

2005-08-23T23:34:00.000-06:00

Anyone who has talked to me or read my old blog knows that I am not fond of RFID tags. However, I can admit that there may be good things about them. There may be ways that time and money can be saved by using these and other technological gadgets. And isn't saving time and money a good thing? Well, yes, society teaches us that these things are good. I would argue that there are higher considerations.

Technology can be wonderful and I am a happy benificiary of progress, from my computer hobby, cell phone and DVD player to the car I drive and the job I have. But technology and science have no morals on their own. It is up to individuals to impose a morality and ethics on science. For example, it is not a question of if we can clone humans (not tested but a good likelihood, at this point), but whether we should clone humans that occupies lawmakers around the world. This is not an idle topic, but something we are currently wrestling with in public dialogue (for more on the topic, read the following Rednova.com article).

So, what is the answer? Should we clone humans? Right now, I'm not going to touch that question. Perhaps at a later date. I bring this up to illustrate that point that science doesn't much care for ethics. Humans as individuals and as societies struggle to direct science, and sometimes cannot come up with a satisfactory answer. Look at abortion technology and the debate that has raged for years and years about that topic.

Where does this leave us with RFID tags? What morality do they have? On their own, none. However, we should not just adopt this technology without examining its impact on privacy and human dignity. I recently read a CNET article whose author feels this technology will be adopted because we are lazy people and anything to make our lives easier will be worth it. Is this true? I shudder to think it may very well be true. Would we sell ourselves to corporations and governments for the promise of an easier life? Is ease our ultimate goal in life? Frightening thought, that.

Music industry gets a clue. A small one, but a clue

2005-08-23T11:31:00.000-06:00

Yes, it is true. At least seven years after I got turned on to digital music, available on the web, the music industry decides that they will distribute new groups songs on the web in "clusters," instead of albums. Huh.

You mean people hate buying albums for just one or two good songs? People don't like being forced to buy a product they only listen to twice so they can get the one song they want? Oh, you also mean people don't want a bulky disk to carry around when they have their Ipods and other MP3 players? Boy, am I shocked!

Seriously, I wonder who came up with this. He or she should be given a huge bonus for talking some sense into the minds of the other Warner suits. Too bad they couldn't have done this years ago.

No, this isn't about "control[ing] the means by which artists' voices are heard, but to amplify those voices." They care about artists and their needs. Money is not the issue. And I am positive that they weren't exaggerating when they said Warner is"excited by the power of digital distribution now available to every potential artist," because we have seen how excited the music labels have been before by this digital media. Not just the illegal digital distribution, but their love of even legal digital distribution.

Ok, enough sarcasm. Despite the glowing, self-congratulatory statements about how wonderful they all are, I do see this as a step in the right direction. Who knows? Maybe people will take the music industry seriously again. Maybe they will invest more in artists. Perhaps artists will see more of the profits they deserve, instead of giving it all to the "middle-man." Anyway, if you want to read more about this, go to the following BBC article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/4176486.stm

Pictures of the Fuhrer

2005-08-22T00:08:00.000-06:00

I grew up in parts of Bavaria, Germany, before moving to Arizona at age 10. The whole World War I and II thing has always been fascinating to me. I also grew up watching movies about those wars, which only enhanced this interest of mine. I grew to love the German people, but couldn't (and still can't) understand the atrocities they committed. How does something like that happen?

Though there is no excuse for the things that were done to Jews and other minorities, I think that most of the German people did not really understand what was happening. The average German was probably quite decent, if massively misled. Meanwhile, the worst that Germany could produce ended up in the SS. Bad combination. The average Hans over there did not take a stand when he could have. There are some examples of heroism and bravery among the common German, but too many people were willing to accept empty promises and let others do the thinking for them.

It is easy to criticize others, though. How would the United States act in a similar position? We may already be in a similar position. Misled or not, I think that any people should be willing to stand up when they see something going wrong with their government. We in the U.S. should stand up and complain until something changes, rather than sit complacently and watch TV, surf the web and go to football games because that's easier than thinking or taking action.

So, what makes a man like Hitler become a man like Hitler? We have had other tyrants in history, some quite recently, but he alone stands as a man apart in the imagination of most people. How does someone like him grab the attention of an entire nation, and ultimately, the worlds attention? I don't have an answer, but I found an article on an early interview with the man, including some early pictures. The particular article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,1076455,00.html) is about the backlash of a man reproducing the original article from and issue of Homes and Gardens in 1938, but has the actual pictures available. It is very interesting to read. I hope you enjoy.

The Patriot Act renewed

2005-08-16T21:33:00.000-06:00

Anyone who has read my old blog will note that I am not a fan of the Patriot Act. I think it was a knee-jerk reaction to a bad situation that some power-hungry politicians used to take away many of our freedoms. Thankfully, there are people today who are willing to take a stand and complain about the more offensive portions of the bill (as opposed to just after 9/11, when no one said anything, for fear of being called unpatriotic). Unfortunately, the powers that were supposed to end have been renewed and made permanent. How convenient that there was a terrorist act somewhere in the world that we cared about (England) right before the bill was put up for a vote. In the following article from CNN, it's reported that there are no reported instances of abuse of the Patriot Act powers.
My biggest beef is this: just because they haven't been abused doesn't meant they won't be abused. True, the corallary could also be said: Just because excessive powers have been abused in the past, doesn't mean the U.S. government will abuse this power in this instance. There might be some validity to that point, but I still wonder how far we can go in trusting our politicians.
Their goals include gaining more power and getting enough votes for reelection. Are our interests really being watched for, or is it just the big business interests? I know I don't have enough money to garner attention from Washington, so I kno where I place my bet. And I know enough history to know that given a little extra power, a lot more will be taken. You could almost call it human nature, but there are some nice humans out there. Just not enough in Washington.

Psychiatry, psychology and the definition of sick

2005-08-13T00:26:00.000-06:00

As I attend graduate school, working my way toward becoming a counseling psychologist, I feel I have learned a few things. I have also gained a little cynicism for how people are diagnosed with mental illnesses. The definition of what is mentally ill is not absolute, nor is it always reasonable. We claim to be a reasonable society, and those that are deemed "ill" are considered a "threat" to society in some way. Well, the history of psychology (and even worse, psychiatry) is such that many decisions were made for political reasons. As the winds blow, there goes the choices of the mental health professional.

It is especially interesting being a non-liberal in a currently very liberal field. I break a few expectations and get into some interesting discussions. The wind is blowing in a liberal way, right now. In the 80's, it was conservative. I am neither. So it was interesting to read this article on how the definition of mental illness has changed and is currently changing. Just remember, nothing is as cut and dried as it seems. Enjoy the article, originally appearing in the New York Times.

Utah's Mormon Population

2005-08-08T01:35:00.000-06:00

Interesting article I saw recently, found at Utah Valley's Daily Herald. I have been out of town, so I'm only now getting to comment on it. As a Mormon, it is always interesting to see what others think about Mormons. Although I never expected to live in Utah, three years ago, I moved this sea of Latter Day Saints. The culture here is different from anywhere else I have been. For the curious, the places in which I have spent significant time include (in roughly descending order): Arizona, Germany, New York State, California, Alaska, Mexico, Washington state. Well, I have been other places, but this is a good enough list for now.

Unlike some Mormons, I welcome the day when the state of Utah does not have a religious majority of Latter Day Saints. Those who live here tend (and I'm speaking in very general terms and recognize there are exceptions to this rule) to be comfortable with their religion, because everyone else is the same. While comfortable is nice, it means that people don't try as hard, don't extend themselves, don't work at standing for what they believe. Losing that majority edge will be a great test for many Saints, but I suspect this is what this church needs to rouse its faculties in this state. Maybe, the realization that many people are moving in to Utah who need some happiness in their lives will be good for the missionary effort. Hopefully, this population shift mentioned in the article will help to reduce the levels of pride I have seen around here. Of course, I am imperfect and shouldn't judge, but I know what I see and I know hypocracy.

Anyway, I promise not to get too preachy here. I just had to comment on this article. Mormons, thy days as the majority are numbered!

New blog

2005-07-22T16:27:00.000-06:00

Here I am, creating a new blog, when I have a perfectly good old blog, located at http://www.lacuna.us/blog. The problem is, I got tired of the software running that blog and decided maintaining my own takes too much work. So, here is my new blog, for all the world to see. However, I am still doing the stuff I was before. Only I may do more lighthearted posts, too. The old one was getting too heavy. Anyway, we'll see what I can do on blogger.com.