Check this out:
http://www.house.gov/reform/min/features/iraq_on_the_record/
Who lied. What they said exactly. When. Where. Why it's misleading.
I love the internet.
Making good use of my spring break, I visited New York City last Saturday and went to the Whitney Biennial. There were a number of interesting pieces, but the geek in me was most intrigued by two hacks/game mods on display.
The first was a Mario Bros. cartridge hacked to remove everything but the clouds. The artist's web site is very interesting as he explains carefully how he did this, giving the source code, which is in hex. At the Whitney the clouds were projected onto two walls in all their 8-bit glory and a stereo in the corner played a familiar Mario Bros. tune.
Also of interest was the demo of Velvet-Strike which is "counter-military graffiti for Counter-Strike." As you may know, Counter-Strike is a popular first-person shooter game that people play online in a massively multi-player environment. Velvet-Strike explains how you can put anti-war graffiti on the walls, ceilings, or floors in the game. Other online players will then be able to see these sprays. It's less of a "hack" because it is accomplished by replacing a default graphic file with one of the alternative sprays provided on the Velvet-Strike site. One spray of interest depicts two Counter-Strike soldiers embracing. Also on the site are "Intervention Recipes" that describe various ways people can collaborate to thwart the purposes of the game.
There may have been other hack art at the Whitney that I missed, as my friends and I were short on time and went through each floor in about a half-hour.
This type of art raises interesting legal issues. Hacking a Mario cartridge that is your personal property is probably legal, although it just might violate the terms of service. I can imagine similar hacks that might circumvent copy controls in violation of the DMCA. Velvet-Strike might also violate the terms of service for using the Counter-Strike servers. If anyone has a pointer to these TOS or if people are aware of more such art, please provide a link in the comments section. I'd greatly enjoy finding out about more of this kind of thing.
I'm not a big Korn fan, but their new video, which you're only gonna see online, is very interesting. [That's a streaming WMV format movie, which if anyone can view under Linux or download, I'd like to hear how.] In the video the band trashes a record store while text flashes on the screen criticizing the record industry. They talk about the fact that one company owns all of the five major channels that play videos, and ask if you think you'll see their video on TV. (There would be a lot of bleeping.) They talk about the fact that the music industry promotes about four songs per week and gets their current top 40 hits played 100s of times a week. So, since Korn knows no one will play their video and since apparently their record company asked them to change this video and they refused, one of the many things that flashes on the screen during the video is Korn encouraging you to "steal" their video. Check it out. (Although, again, if you really want people to steal a video, you wouldn't make it available only as a Windows-formatted stream that few can figure out how to save or even view on non-Windows platforms!)
Also, someone (Korn?) has done a nice remix of the song that includes Howard Stern talking about his recent censorship by Clear Channel Communications. Stern starts criticizing Bush, and a few days later, he's off all Clear Channel radio stations. Does anyone need a reminder why concentration of media ownership is a bad idea? We've got to take back the airwaves, people.
Salon has a good article about Howard Stern's recent political turn and the influence it could have on this fall's election. The idea is that his traditional listeners include a lot of unregistered and non-voters who will be motivated by Stern's outrage to get involved and vote against Bush. Let's hope so. (Korn links via BoingBoing).
This editorial in the Washington Times entitled, Database Piracy Plague advocates for H.R. 3261, the Database and Collections of Information Misappropriation Act.
Luckily for those who are less optimistic about the brilliance of copyrighting facts, on Feb. 25, the House Subcommittee on Commerce sent out an alternative bill that authorizes the FTC to take action against someone who misappropriates a database in an "unfair or deceptive" manner, a far narrower approach than the one found in H.R. 3261. The House Rules Committee would have to deal with the two approaches and has said that, in an election year, competing bills on the same issue may well be the death knell for both. Let's hope so. (Those with access to Warren's Washington Internet Daily can read a good article on this from Feb 26.)
Keep an eye on this issue. Over-reaching and unnecessary copyright laws are unfortunately the norm in Congress. In this case we seem to have a few members that realize that current laws already adequately protect information collectors whose work is co-opted. But if we don't watch this issue, then pretty soon I might not be able to report that fact. Under 3261, it'll be copyrighted.