Herr Larbig schreibt unter der Überschrift »Von der Umwertung von Werten oder: Kritische Anmerkungen zur „PostPrivacy“« …
»[…] Kurioserweise ist der Begriff „Anonymität“ in den vergangenen Jahren mehr und mehr mit negativen Assoziationen verbunden worden, die „Anonymität“ nicht mehr als ein grundlegendes Freiheitsrecht verstehen, sondern diese grundsätzlich mit der Frage rechtswidriger Handlungen verbinden. Früher lautete die Grundannahme, dass der Staat erst genauer hinschauen darf, wenn ein Bürger berechtigten Anlass zur Annahme gibt, er sei in schwere kriminelle Handlungen verwickelt. […]«
weiterlesen bei → Herr Larbig; es lohnt sich.
It’s not Photoshop. It’s real. German tv station ZDF aired a 40-minute piece about banks in their program WISO, someone put it on YouTube – an now it’s gone. Well, not exactly: it’s still on the «mediathek» (media library) of ZDF – edited.
Youtube is youtube, so if something is gone it’s not.
Take the time to watch the embedded 30 minutes video clip — it’s worth the time spend, promised.
«[…] one would think that this is what’s going on — this is not what’s going on. This is what’s going on on Twitter — maybe. […] We have a great conversation happening on Twitter about Twitter. There is something going on, but it’s not this. […]
[…] If they don’t understand what the technologies they’re using are for, it’s really hard to use them effectively. […]
[…] What is Facebook for? […] We all know Facebook is not here to help kids make friends, Facebook is here to try to figure out how to monetize relationships, […] how to put brands between social relationships and all that. […] Kids who are using Facebook to make friends are not really using a tool that’s devised to help them make friends and thus they’ll get a different result, than actual making friends, they’ll get the making of «likes» or shared «likes» or something else. […]»
— Douglas Rushkoff
«[…] It’s so very very simple that it breaks their minds. Or they think it’s communist to ask „what value is created?“ Or that I’m being facetious since we’re all supposed to know that no value is actually created. […]»
— Douglas Rushkoff, comment on «Meme Hacking, Douglas Rushkoff Drops a Memetic Bomb on PivotCon 2010»
[«Memetic» → Wikipedia]
one source says:
«Protesters stopped an army officer from shooting himself. Cairo, Egypt.»
twitpic picture caption says:
«احد افراد القوات المسلحة يبكي امام احد المتظاهرين بعد ان هاجمهم بلطجية مبارك لما جاء الشاب وقبل قدميه ليحميهم من البلطجية ولكنه بكى لعدم تمكنه من حمايتهم ونزل على اقدام المتظاهر وقبلها»
via Google translate≈
«A member of the armed forces cry in front of one of the demonstrators after they were attacked by thugs Mubarak came to the young and before his feet to protect them from thugs, but he cried because he was unable to protect them and got onand before the feet of the demonstrator»
«false pic cos there was tear gas bombs from unknown source the soldier affected and thats a doctor»
[pointed to the picture by Sebastian Waters & fuck yeah middle east!]
«It is a bit of a joke in our family that I use FB to ‘stalk’ my young adult children (19 -22). And my youngest and I had a great exchange the other month. He posted something (as a joke) that I found a bit offensive … so I left a little short comment along the lines of … “I do not think this appropriate …” (yes that is the ‘mother tone’ you hear). It is what happened next that really impressed me and gave me a real AHA moment.
He ‘inboxed’ me (so it was private) .. and said this was his space and I should really respect that. He said he found my comment on his comment ‘inappropriate’ not only for the tone but also for the fact that I had posted it on his site (ie all his friends could see it). He then went on to say (along the lines of ..) that while he likes me being his friend on FB and enjoys our on-line interactions .. if I can not respect / accept his space, opinions and jokes (and if I DO have a problem – then deal with it privately) .. – then he suggested either A) I ‘unfriend him’ (so you don’t have t see it Mum!) .. or B) if I do it again he will block me (LOL).
What impressed me the most .. was his choice of reply (ie private .. not ‘ridiculing me in public) and the incredibly respectful but honest and assertive way he (1) put his case forward … (2) said what he wanted from me … (3) and then gave me an alterative option .. and (4) finished off with a final possible consequence.
I sat back, had a laugh, went to his FB page and removed my comment. I then sent him a reply email thanking him for the way he handled this & acknowledged all of his points .. and thought.. I am so proud of my son.
I am sharing this story here because it is an example of the way on line interactions with our (adult) children can actually enhance our relationship .. (I think) .. But I also do acknowledge it is different with younger children and I guess parents do have more of stronger role in that situation.»
— Kathleenz, Comment on: «Facebook & helicopter parenting»
Auf F!XMBR etwas zu Flattr:
»[…] Wer will schon mit Sicherheit sagen können, dass der kleine Westentaschen-Nazi nicht am Morgen der NPD, Politically Incorrect und am Abend netzpolitik.org, Spreeblick und Co. Geld hat zukommen lassen? […]«
—F!XMBR , »Flattr — Geld verdirbt den Charakter«
»[…] Flattr hätte also alle Möglichkeiten und jedes Recht (der Welt), die NPD auszuschließen. Es scheint offensichtlich, dass dies nicht gewollt ist. Schließlich muss Geld verdient werden. Der Dunstkreis rund um die Pirate Bay fällt diesbezüglich nicht das erste Mal auf. […]«
— F!XMBR, »Flattr, Peter Sunde und die NPD«