DRM

The other day I formatted my C Drive and installed Windows XP again. This was the first time that I did that after having downloaded a couple of LPs from the Future Shop sponsored Bonfire (Puretracks) download site. I had also upgraded to Windows Media Player 11.



Well, I thought I should back up my Licences before formatting. Well WMP 11 doesn't allow you to back up your licences. (unlike 10) I had a backup from a while back so I continued. Anyway, I am now operating WMP 10 again and half of my legitimately acquired songs DO NOT work. I have tried downloading the songs again, but they won't download with the licenses. So because Microsoft Windows needs to be re-installed every so often, and Microsoft's Media Player doesn't allow you to backup DRM licenses I am stuck with unusable music. The situation is garbage. I am NEVER going to frequent a download site again.



I object to the whole DRM system. With the large levies that we pay when we purchase recordable media there is no excuse to have such restrictive software. Moreover, all the portability and network playing restrictions that are built into the DRM scheme infringe on fair use. It is perfectly reasonable for me to store all of my music on one computer and want to listen to the song on a networked computer, or let a friend listen to my music via a wireless network on his/her wifi enabled laptop. These are not unreasonable uses, yet the DRM programme is intent on hamstring my ability to use the songs that I have legitimately acquired. I am all for legitimising the trade in digital music but this kind of crap forces reasonable people underground. We need to decriminalise and resurrect the original spirit of Napster.







Technorati Tags: DRM, Windows Media Player, Bonfire, Puretracks

powered by performancing firefox

Nation! - Me Too

I think that enough has been said about the Quebec nation debate, so I will change the subject.

I would like for everyone to look back at the history of British Columbia. I believe that when they do, they will come to the inevitable conclusion that the province of British Columbia was founded by TWO Colonies: The Colony of Vancouver Island and the Rest of British Columbia (ROB). While Vancouver Island was an organized bastion of colonial civilization, ROB was an unorganized backwater of fur traders and prospectors. And yet, since joining, ROB has has garnered all of the attention, money and political power. Certainly most of the premiers of the Province have represented ROB (There hasn't been a Vancouver Islander since the election of Premier Byron Johnson in 1947).

Most importantly, as a founding colony of British Columbia, Vancouver Island deserves some recognition for its unique historical and sociological contributions to the Province. Vancouver Islanders have a unique culture and way of life that deserves formal recognition - in a sociological sense. Anyone who has ever visited Vancouver Island will notice that older cars are driven and at slower speeds; we complain about Toronto; and we believe that every four lane divided highway should have stop lights and overpasses are for pedestrians. Moreover, as a people we have distinct tastes: Starbucks and Serious Coffee are preferred over Tim Hortons. We have a distinct way of talking: When we complain about snow in February or March we are referring to the petals falling from the flowering cherry trees.

To this end, I urge you to help convince the Provincial Government of British Columbia to "Recognize that Vancouver Islanders form a nation within a united British Columbia."

Sign the petition here!

Technorati Tags: Nation, Canada, British Columbia, Vancouver Island, Politics, Nationalism

powered by performancing firefox

Response to CDNTARHEEL

CDNTARHEEL commented on my post about Ignatieff's statement on China. Here is a response:

Fair enough, here is a bit more explanation. I was quite excited to hear that Ignatieff was running. I saw hope for a liberal party that put deep thought and principle into their policies - in contrast to the liberal party of Mr Martin. I may not agree with all of his pronouncements, but I was hoping he would stick to his guns with a little more steadfastness.

The statement that I quoted in the original post makes human rights sound like something a father would lecture a teenager about - say, coming home after 11pm. That wouldn't be a problem were he Jean Chretien, but Chretien did not write a book like The Needs of Strangers. Of course, he goes on in the interview to argue for a softer approach to China. This isn't the human rights professor strategising about the best way to help the Chinese, but the work of a political hopeful trying to earn the respect of Bay Street while appearing to remain committed to the principle of Human Rights. He seems to be pandering when I hoped he would stand on principle.

Technorati Tags: Michael Ignatieff, Politics, Canada, Liberal Party of Canada, China, Human Rights

Something Feminism has done for Me

Here is an interesting post:

Pieces of a Whole » Blog Archive » Stay at home dads

The post sets forth two arguments:

I am saddened by this post for a couple of reasons. If I can assume that this person is a member of the so called "Christian Evangelical Right" then how does this kind of an attitude "focus on the family". I would have thought that anything that would build good strong families would be welcome, especially ones that seem to reinforce the importance of males in the rearing of children. There are some that say that fathers are no longer essential for modern families. Oh well here are some thoughts on the post:

The first is an ideal of strict gender roles that are based on some conception of scriptural hermeneutics apparently from 3 Genesis. There is a lot to be said against this kind of straight-jacketing. Few fathers regardless of whether they stay at home or not would accept the kind of gender roles for their daughters so why should they accept it for themselves? So, unless you are willing to raise your daughter to believe that they have one purpose in life that is predefined by her gender then so might the fathers. But, I think most fathers are willing to raise their daughters to believe that their daughters can play many roles in life, and what better way to show that to them than as a father who too is willing to have many roles.

The second argument is one that is much easier to agree with: More fathers ought to spend time with the kids even if that means taking a pay cut. My problem is that by railing against stay at home dads the post is removing the one option that might best achieve that aim. Parental leave taken by fathers is one of the ways many men (including yours truly) get the opportunity to stay at home. And here is the rub it often comes with legal protections against job loss and discrimination - unlike taking a 10% pay cut as the post suggests in order to work less and play more.

REVISED 21 Nov to reflect a post made elsewhere.

Technorati Tags: Stay at Home Dad, fatherhood, parenting, feminism, christian

powered by performancing firefox

Ignatieff vs Harper & China

There are a lot of things that I dislike about what Harper is doing with respect to China and the diplomacy of trade and human rights. There is one good thing that can be said about Harper that cannot be said about Ignatieff is that at least Harper knows what he is supposed to say to Canadian electors about Human Rights. The quotation from Ignatieff, who I had a lot of hope for about 2 years ago, demonstrates a total amateurism that reminds me of the kinds of things I saw at the height of the Stockwell Day carnival.

There is a lot to criticise Harper on the China file. He didn't send Mackay to meet with their ambassador and he hasn't visited China himself. (Does anyone have a source for this, I heard it mentioned on a CBC radio interview with Dr Byers of UBC). In a world of symbols these things mean a lot. It is no wonder that China was not too willing to meet at APEC.

Ignatieff blasts Harper's 'megaphone' diplomacy with China

"Mr. Harper, I think, believes you can go to one of the greatest civilizations on earth, a superpower of the 21st century and give them a little lecture on human rights," Ignatieff told CBC News.

Hat Tip to: AC



Technorati Tags: Canada, China, Ignatieff, Liberal Party of Canada, Conservative Party, APEC, Harper

Kyoto - International Law

I want to put aside the very important issue of the state of the environment and how that relates to the Kyoto Protocol. Another issue of profound importance to the Canadian National Interest is being missed entirely.



One of the things that I've blogged about in the past is the importance of international law to the Canadian foreign policy. Quite simply put: as a small power in the presence of an American Super Power and an Asian Uber-Factory if we are ever going to have an international presence that punches beyond our weight class, then we will have to rely on an effective and respected system of international law. The alternative to relying on the civilising effect of law is using dangerous international military missions to get seats at tables and to earn favours. I am not willing to endorse such a foreign policy as the price is too high, the policy is unsustainable and the whole thing is morally reckless.





I think that most can guess where I am going with this post. It is believed that Canada will be the first state to withdraw from the protocol. The fact that there probably are some withdrawal clauses in the treaty is not important. Leaving treaties and/or ignoring the commitments that have been made on the international stage is precisely the kind of thing that will weaken Canada's place in the world. Imagine how we would feel if the United States started to ignore the provisions of NAFTA or simply withdrew from the agreement - imagining itself not bound by its obligations? Where would we stand and what could we do about it? The point here is that a policy of strengthening the norms of international law and the expectations among nations that treaties will be upheld is the kind of foreign policy that Canada ought to be advocating at every turn. We don't want to have to use our economic weight (which is waning against Asia) or to veiled threats of military force (which we cannot back up). We can get what we want on the international stage by being a good global citizen and working to ensure that others will be too. If we don't get what we want, we will at least have the consolation of knowing the system by which we didn't get what we want was fair (or at least agreed to).



The kind of publicity that we have been getting c/o Rona Ambrose and the Canadian delegation to the conference in Nairobi is a disaster. The example that Canada is setting is entirely hypocritical. I won't start on my thoughts on the politics of blaming the previous guys.





Technorati Tags: Kyoto, Canada, Politics, International Law, Rona Ambrose, Conservative Party, Foreign Policy, Environmentalism, Conservative Party, Treaties

powered by performancing firefox

West Coast Life

When I was doing my undergrad, I thought that it would be very cool and studious if I had a bust of some famous person on my desk - it would make me look smart and that is what school is all about. The only one that I was able to find (I didn't look very hard) was a bust of the victor of that glorious battle of Omdurmann - Lord Kitchener. Now, that bust would become the bain of my existence as it got tossed out of windows and photographed in compromising situations.

Now that I am on the West Coast it would seem that the tradition continues. This past week I woke up and found an e-mail urging me to sign a great petition urging a state funeral for the last Great War Veteran. I wrote that article and then went to see how I could get a code to have it voted on at Progressive Bloggers. Their I found A Post by Lord Kitchener at the top of the Voting List! Then the next day I found a post over at My Blahg about a White Poppy. I went for a morning walk to think about this idea and came to some conclusions. When I sat down to write the post I found it almost idea for idea written by Lord Kitchener.

So, I blame the three hour time difference. If I was operating on Ontario Time my greatness would be more fully realised and accepted throughout the world. However, I'd rather not move back to the land of snow and ice, so I'll just sit back and read Lord Kitchener's blog (now on my blogroll) whilst plotting his demise.


Technorati Tags: Blogging, West Coast

powered by performancing firefox

Rumsfeld Resigns:

What did it take?

Rumsfeld resigns as U.S. defence secretary

Technorati Tags: Donald Rumsfeld, Politics, Canada, Election

powered by performancing firefox

Petition - Last Great War Veteran

This is an important historical issue and a great milestone in Canadian life, and marks the passing of a foundational era. Canada was rose out of the ashes of the Europe leftover from this great struggle. Please sign this petition and never forget the great sacrifice of those who purchased freedom for us on the fields of France and during the Great War.

The Dominion Institute - Memory | Democracy | Identity

Canada's Last Great War Veteran
"We the undersigned feel enormous gratitude for the sacrifice made by all the Canadian Armed Forces through the ages in defence of this country and its values; acknowledge the very special nature of the sacrifice made by those who fought in the First World War in appalling conditions and with terrible loss of life; note that only three First World War veterans remain, and urge the Prime Minister that their sacrifice, and all of those they served with under arms from 1914-1918, be celebrated by offering a state funeral to the family of the last veteran of the First World War resident in Canada." The Dominion Institute will send the petition on behalf of its signatories to the Prime Minister of Canada on December 11, 2006.

UPDATE: The movement is afoot in the UK too:
The Observer | UK News | Calls grow to grant last Great War veteran a state funeral

Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers!


UPDATE: I will link to any other blog that encourages people to sign the petition:
Kitchener's Own
Socialist Gulag
Responsible Government League
Small Dead Animals
The Screaming Pages
Halls of Macadamia
Andrew Coyne


Technorati Tags: Remembrance Day, First World War, WW1, State Funeral, Canada, Dominion Institute, Canadian Armed Forces

powered by performancing firefox

Not an Issue of Naturalism/Religion/Cleanliness etc... it is about Rights

And so, my faithful reader, I deliver unto you links to a rather bizarre conversation taking place mainly on the comments page of the Red Tory. The first quotation is from a counterpost to the original thread, the second is a counter-counterpost and the third is the original post.

Defend Canada: A Debate on Homosexuality

Further, it demonstrates that those promoting this so aggresively, outright refuse to recognize that if I have to accept their rampant over-promotion of Homosexuality, then churches across the country should be able to send out flyers promoting Homosexuality as "unnatural", without resistance.

RT: We Get Mail
RT: Sexually Immoral Conduct

As I have explained before (Ramblings: April 2005) the whole issue surrounding the acceptance in society of homosexuality and all of the trappings that come with is not a matter of anything other than equality rights. And, because we are talking about equality rights (everyone has them) a diminution of one person's rights is a weakening of everyone else's.

For instance if, because of an argument about the naturalness of something, one is able to restrict the behaviour of homosexuals - restrict marriage rights or permit ad campaigns against that conception of how to live, then one would have to accept the opposite. Again, for instance, it may be true that the traditional definition of marriage is un-natural. Anthropologists may determine that humans were ever meant to live together for more than seven years - they might cite the "seven year itch" and demonstrate overwhelming scientific evidence. Would we then wish to legislate marriage to restrict it to seven year renewable open term contracts (you know - like mortgages).

You can substitute the the terms of the above argument for most anything: unpopular, socially destructive, not-true-because-my-religion-says-so, unscientific, backwards etc... But, what you cannot do is substitute a rights based argument.

My point is this by couching the terms of the debate in rights and ensuring that recognition of homosexuality is done in terms of rights churches and other organisations are strengthened. A equal rights based argument makes it more difficult to threaten the place of churches in society.


Technorati Tags: Gay Marriage, homosexuality, politics, canada, conservative, rights, equality,

powered by performancing firefox

More on Trusts

It looks like I am not the only one saying that some warning would have been nice.  There are a lot of pissed off people out there - and a lot of them from the demographic that the Conservatives should be courting.  Again, I do think that in the long run this was a good decision, but the whole process by which the Conservatives have done this strikes me as piss poor.

Cherniak on Politics: On Income Trusts

If they had warned people to be cautious, then this would not have happened. How might they have done that? It is simple. The day that BCE made its announcement and after the markets closed, Flaherty could have said "this sort of extremity was not our expectation when we set our policy a year ago". Would that have been misleading? Perhaps as far as the motivations for the policy last year. However, at least it would have informed the markets that something was up.

The Progressive Right: Income Trusts

Garth Turner had a better solution to handling the income trust closure: I think the minister of finance could have declared a moratorium on new conversions, struck a blue ribbon panel to study the industry and eased in regs over the past few months making it crystal what direction the feds were going in. That would have allowed for a more orderly, less panicked correction, and kept from scaring the crap out of a few million seniors. It would have been a kinder blow.

Technorati Tags: Income Trusts, Politics, Canada, Conservative

powered by performancing firefox

The Worth of Freedom

As pointed out here:
My Blahg » A TALE OF TWO COLUMNS

Two columns in which both authors say the conjoined Simms’ twins should have been aborted.

The two columns are very similar in their arguments:

The Gateway | Tuesday, 31 October, 2006 | Volume XCVII Issue 15

Furthermore,
being on government assistance and with two other children to care for
already, she knew she would have to rely on Canada’s health-care system
to pay for an operation that may or may not work on little Tatiana and
Krista.

globeandmail.com: Twin sides of the coin

The
twins' mother, Felicia Simms, is a 21-year-old single woman on social
assistance. She has two other children, ages 4 and 2. She is unable to
work, she has said, because she has severe scoliosis — curvature of the
spine — and a panic disorder.

NO, I will not make a comment on any arguments for or against abortion, be drawn in to said arguments or even touch the arguments about this case.  However, I will use this as an opportunity to point out the emptiness of of libertarian conceptions of freedom against liberal equal freedom. 

Ms Simms' case, to me, is a shining example of how a guarantee of freedom is meaningless without some sort of system to ensure that such freedom is actually worth something to the individuals to whom it is guaranteed.  Without a redistributive system whereby individuals have the means to make choices (like Ms Simms did) a guarantee of freedom is in fact meaningless.  Had there not been a health care system in place she may have been forced by her circumstance to do something she would not otherwise have chosen to do.

The two columns, I presume, would be made quiet if Ms Simms won the lottery and moved to the United States.  To this end, it seems that the columns are saying that certain of our freedoms ought only to apply to those capable financing their decisions; to the rest of us, we are doomed to be slaves to the contingencies of necessity.  But, such a world is not fair as it privelleges some above others and punishes others for things wholly beyond their control.  For this reason, a charter that guarantees rights and freedoms is of no value unless it is coupled with a system that ensures that those freedoms can be exercised to some degree by all people. 

To those not swayed because they feel that they will always be in a position to have the resources to exercise their freedom: imagine that one day, out of the blue, the minister of finance makes a decision and your net worth is suddenly reduced... oh sorry, still a little bitter.




Technorati Tags: Politics, Canada, Abortion, liberalism, libertarian, health care, freedom, rights, choice

powered by performancing firefox

Furious over Income Trusts!

Well I'm pissed! The decision to tax income trusts has me fuming for several reasons. For one it has cost me a lot of money, so I am obviously unhappy about that. However, Flaherty's righteousness over the way he handled the announcement is completely unwarranted. The nature of coporate taxation and the pandering that is going on towards the NDP has got me going and finally so to is the bribing of seniors!

The first two points are one and the same really. Me losing a lot of money all of the sudden is a direct result of how Flaherty decided to handle this issue. He wanted to contrast how the Liberals did it:
Flaherty imposes new tax on income trusts

"Well, the last government did nothing but muse about it and that was the problem," said Flaherty. "There's still an RCMP investigation of the Department of Finance in Ottawa about leaks arising from that."

But the problem with how the Liberals handled the affair was that they leaked the decision before the announcement to folks on Bay Street. It was known generally that an announcement was going to be made, but not what that decision was going to be. Contrast Flaherty and the Conservatives who showed absolutely no intention to deal with trusts until last night. As a result the market has to absorb this shocker the instant the doors open in the morning. If you are planning on screwing with the market you warn people that you are thinking about it so that the market can deal with it rationally when you announce the decision a month (or whatever) later. Today was a mad scramble. In addition if you warn, you can consult.

Then there is the nature of corporate taxes, capital gains and dividend taxation. As Andrew Coyne points out "No corporation ever paid a dime of tax. All taxes are paid by people: the people who own the corporation, or the people who work for it, or the people who buy its products. A corporation is just a piece of paper, a legal document on file at the registrar's office." So why the hell are people getting double taxed left right and centre? And then, depending on the source of the money taxed at different rates. Income is income is income - tax it once and all at the same rate. (keeping it progressive of course). By making the move at the corportate tax level is an attempt to placate the NDP who don't understand Coyne's point and are always going after corporations to pay more taxes.

Lastly, I am not a senior and ther was nothing in Flaherty's announcement that was designed to soften the blow of the announcement. He was abviously sucking up to that demographic, but they are not the only people who have invested in income trusts. Why the hell must I bear the full brunt of the blow while others get deliberate cushioning?

Looks like I'm not the only one who lost, looks like some lost BIG:

globeandmail.com : globeinvestor.com : Surveying the fallout from the trust bombshell

Income trust investors suffered more than $20-billion in paper losses on their portfolios as some of Canada's best-known companies — from telecom giants BCE and Telus to Yellow Pages, CI Financial, Canadian Oil Sands and Aeroplan — were battered by the rush selling following Mr. Flaherty's surprise announcement that trusts will be taxed.

Technorati Tags: Income Trusts, Conservatives, Taxation, Canada, Politics, Conservative Party of Canada,