On anonymity

Head first to Bruce Schneier’s brief article, which links to and reproduces a short Kevin Kelly (from Wired magazine) article about why anonymity is bad.  Mr. Schneier then writes why he disagrees.  These men are both smarter than I am, and writing about something that matters and needs to be discussed.  Take 5 minutes to see what this is about.

Things that matter

I dislike most politicians. In general, I think they are corrupt people, and mostly liars. Sure, there are some good ones, but my guess is that there are more not-so-good ones. With that in mind, let’s look at some of the things some of our great “leaders” have done to further convince me they are criminals and not worthy of the offices where they are.

First, hit Salon for an interesting story on Jack Abramoff. To read the whole article, you have to subscribeto Salon. Alternatively, you can get a one-day subscription by watching a short advertisement. I’ve done this before. It is simple, and for this story, worth doing. Then, further up the political food chain we find this story of investigations into recent leaks of classified information. I believe you need a membership to this site (the New York Times in this case) to read the article, but you can get one for free just by signing up.

The first story above shows a large spread of corruption at a high level in congress. The second shows our executive branch trying to distract Americans from the real issue of illegal happenings in that branch by focusing on the illegal, but less serious, leaks regarding the wrong-doings. We, as Americans who want our government to do right by and for us, should be angered by the current administration’s attempt to remove attention from the real issue of executive abuse and disregard for the law. I’m not saying that finding the source of the leak is unimportant. I’m just pointing out that seeing how far this dictatorial activity by the current administration went and removing an individual who is clearly not fit for office is more important.

Patrick Henry said “Give me liberty or give me death.” Simple, to the point. He did not say “Give me liberty, unless, you know, you think you might save me a little inconvenience if you take some of it away.” As Benjamin Franklin put it, “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Allowing the current administration to take away our rights and legal protections under the veil of protecting us from some nebulous threat is tantamount to saying we’ll give up liberty for temporary safety. I won’t agree to that, and I hope more people who read this feel the same.

By the way, don’t think this article means I only dislike the conservatives – I have no qualms pointing out the bad the liberals do, as well. Any politician, really. We are obligated to keep up with what they are doing wrong, to encourage them to do what is right. I just happen to see more wrongs being committed by the conservatives at this point in time.

On rejection

I randomly discovered this site today, which has a very interesting article on rejection.  I aspire to write, but have a bit of an issue with focusing on the task at hand.  So an article on rejections from publishers is interesting to me, even if it is brief.  Just for a preview bit, check this article ending bit:

•  I feel you may lay it on a bit thick with the dying donkey.
• My response: What dying donkey?