The Freedom Bit

We’ve all been presented with long legal agreements when we install software. Most of us don’t read these things: they are very long, hard to understand and the software won’t install without agreeing anyway. What’s a freedom-loving citizen to do?
Well, if you happen to have children running around your house, just have them install the software. Legal agreements aren’t binding on them. Agreements they enter into aren’t binding on you. Problem solved.
Of course, the real solution is for judges/the legislature to recognize that these are adhesion contracts and that they should not be legally enforceable. –>

In North Korea, you need an internal passport in order to travel between cities. If you are stopped away from home without an internal passport, even on foot, you will be arrested.

This is a typical element of a modern fascist state. The U.S.S.R. had the same system, and remnants of another system remain in modern China. Travel restrictions are a natural outgrowth of the expansive state control of the citizens of these former communist states. South Africa also had an internal passport system to help enforce apartheid.

The right to travel is a basic freedom. In a democracy with respect for freedom, the state should only be able to require identification papers in very specific cases. One situation typically considered valid is during a legal traffic stop, where the police can request to see proof of your permit to drive. Another case is during the crossing of international borders.

Yesterday, the supreme court of the United States made a decision that has serious implications for our right to travel freely.

In the case Gilmore v. Gonzales, (more info about the case at this site) the Supreme Court was asked to reveal the secret law that requires airlines to obtain ID from everyone who flies in the US commercial air system, so the law could be challenged in court. From news.com:

‘The Bush administration … claims that the ID requirement is necessary for security but has refused to identify any actual regulation requiring it. … The Justice Department has said it could identify the secret law under seal, which would be available to the 9th Circuit but not necessarily Gilmore’s lawyers. But any public description would not be permitted, the department said.

Yesterday, the Supreme Court, by refusing to hear the case, decided that not only is it ok to require ID from every air traveler in the US, but it’s ok to have a secret law. We’ll leave the “secret law” part to another post: the case is too complicated to cover in full here.

Don’t ID requirements keep us safer? No, not at all. You may ask: “But what if terrorists want to fly?” Well, that’s a good point. Maybe we should do something about that. You know…like metal detectors and searches. And armor on the cabin doors. If someone was going to go through the trouble of plotting a bombing, they would also go through the trouble of obtaining ID. All of the 9/11 hijackers had valid ID.

An ID check does not make us safer at all. It does, however, make our lives more difficult. It’s more lines at the airport, and heaven forbid if you happen to share a name with a suspected terrorist, or happen to have the name of “Mohammad.” And yet, when we mention this, they ridicule our interests as insignificant. The threaten us. “Papers, Please,” they demand — and we lower our eyes and obey.

ID checks contribute to the culture of fear. It makes it easier to control us. They do not make us any safer. So why do we submit? Why do we tolerate those who force us to submit?

Is your freedom bit set? –>

Computers speak in a string of 1s and 0s. We call each one of these 1s and 0s a “bit.”

The digital world is incredibly simple: everything is either true (1) or false (0). Ever try to fast-forward in a DVD and had a message that says “operation not permitted” come up? That’s because that section of the disk has a bit that tells the player to not allow you to skip that section. Deny track skip = 1.

The people in power — big media companies, many governments, maybe even your boss — are trying to trade our freedom away so they can make more money. They use many tactics for this: they keep us afraid, they threaten us, they ridicule our interests as insignificant.

They lie to us, as if giving up our freedom and wasting our time could possibly make our lives better.

Those who want more control are busy setting bits that tell us what not to do. Broadcasters are trying to set a bit to make it impossible to fast-forward through commercials with your TIVO. They’ve even said that they should be able to set a bit to tell your TIVO not to record a show…and make a law telling your TIVO it has to respect that bit.

We suggest setting your own bit. We call it the “freedom bit”.

When your freedom bit is set, that means that you refuse to indulge those who would restrict your freedom for their profit and gain.

New versions of Photoshop require “product activation”, so if you upgrade your computer, you have to waste your time to call Adobe and beg them to let you run the software that you paid them $650 (US) of your own money. When you’re asked to do that, just tell them “Sorry, operation not permitted.”

When you’re told that you have to sign a two-year contract in order to use your cell phone, make sure that it’s a good deal for you. If it doesn’t seem like it’s worth it to be stuck with one company for that long, just say “operation not permitted.”

Show my ID or give out my address for a cash transaction? Sorry, operation not permitted. My freedom bit is set.

Come into work on Christmas? Is it really worth the money? Is public health on the line? No? Sorry, operation not permitted.

When you buy something, should you have the right to use it? If you bring a DVD home and find out you can’t fast forward or copy it to your iPod, what do you do? Do you have the same problem when you download the movie? Which choice is better for you?

Sony decided to put a computer virus on some music CDs that would stop you from copying your songs, that you paid for, to your iPod. Are you going to keep giving them your money?

Is your freedom bit set?

-Daniel –>

This is the offical blog of OwnYourPhone. Run by Daniel Hornal and Adam Eivy out of Seattle, this blog attempts to log and discuss modern issues of freedom, security, copyright law and other interesting evolutions within the digital age. –>