Spalpeen

Clay, what really tipped you over the edge? Was it the eight trillionth biased, irrelevant, spammed, or purchased link on the homepage of Digg.com that made you lose faith? Or was it the fact that every politician who has successfully utilised the internet, has cynically used it to raise money for their existing political platforms? Perhaps the continuing utter insignificance of Creative Commons in relation to greater society, and the prevalence (and success) of DRM?

Technology is not innately “good.”

People split the atom, they use it to build bombs that can millions, and to provide power for millions.

People make a site that can allow anyone to vote for stories, they use it to help other people discover “10 Famous People Saved By The Heimlich“, as well as the latest obscure political development.

Crowds are not wise. They are mobs.

Clay now thinks of the internet as “just another implementation layer for special interest groups” - this didn’t have to be the case! But that’s what happens when people just invent a piece of technology and give it to millions with no guidance. There will always be a need for editorial control.

Frankly, the kind of wide eyed optimism that many people have about the internet is really unhelpful. Theories aren’t enough. Just putting it out there isn’t enough. It’ll take a lot of hard work to make the internet even a shade of the amazing place that people like Clay like to imagine. People want money and power, and the internet is just another tool to get it.

I sent this pitch into 4iP the other month, which was rejected for the following reasons: “This idea is great, but it would more likely be a print publication that would be interested in supporting the development of such a tool, rather than 4iP or Channel 4 which is investing only in multimedia platforms and content. There is also a risk that the idea is highly copiable by existing competition, at relatively low cost. Justifying the technical outlay for the basic shortening of URLs is therefore hard to justify. Do check out the aims of the fund and our submissions guidelines (http://www.4ip.org.uk) and please keep submitting your proposals.”

I agree with this rejection, but just thought I’d post my pitch on here to see what other people think of it.

Description

The British National Party’s membership list got leaked. For people not familiar with the Party, it’s an extreme-right wing group that is based around racist policies (they only allow whites as members, and want to kick everyone of any other ethnicity out of the country). You can download the BNP Membership list over at Wikileaks.org.

I’ve been poking around the list, and found some interesting figures about the members. At a brief count, there are the following numbers of people in “important professions” on the list.

-1 currently employed Police Officer.

-1 currently employed NHS Doctor.

-17 former or retired Policemen, including one detective, one inspector, and one who claims to be a “human rights lecturer” which I don’t quite understand.

-15 people currently employed as full or part-time teachers, or with teacher qualifications, including secondary school teachers in subjects like Maths, English, and Physics.

-12 former or retired teachers.

-114 ex-servicemen. Army, Navy, RAF, Intelligence, MoD Police. 

-18 current servicemen. Army, RAF.

Check the Google Maps mash-up of the BNP membership.

http://www.earthquakes.bgs.ac.uk/helicorder/heli_dir/SWN_SHZ_GB_00.2007042800.gif

British Geological Survey readout, pictured above.

EARTHQUAKE on 28/04/2007 at 07:18 (UTC)
ENGLAND, UNITED KINGDOM                7 km SE Ashford

MAGNITUDE: ML 5.0 

Data provided by: GFZ  IMP  LED  MCSM NEIC NEWS RNS  SED            

Latitude    =  51.11 N
Longitude   =   0.94 E
Origin Time =  07:18:07.7 (UTC)
Depth       =   2 Km
RMS         =   1.21 sec
Gap         =  85 degrees

http://georgero.bgdx.net/28/earthquake-in-england/

Romanian data.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Quakes/us2007bsal.php

The US Geological Survey has chipped in too. They say 4.7 on the scale.