Bryan Lunduke, Jono Bacon, Jeremy Garcia, and Stuart Langridge present Bad Voltage, the greatest podcast in the history of this or any other universe. In this episode:
In the wake of the European Court of Justice's recent ruling about "the right to be forgotten", we discuss how the European law will play out and freedom of expression versus Google's control of viewpoint on the internet
What happens if someone tries to create a page that has everything taken down from google and people keep distributing the database peer to peer how do you effectively take that down if it is decentralized if it becomes a decrentralized gripe list.
Although something like this would be good agaisnt cenorship if something fabricated gets put on there it could be harmful for people.
I think thereās two things you got absolutely right during your discussion: why just Google and not every search engine? And history happened, move on and so will the Google search results!
Ironically, this guyās court challenge is only making his original case more relevant. I mean Google could justifiably refuse his request on the basis that his property auction is now relevant to the current situation!
And if they do take down those search results theyāll probably post a notice as they do for other take downs that some results have been scrubbed. Which means people will just try another Google domain or another search engine. So really it just makes Google.es less relevant and Google.com or another search engine more relevant and the cycle begins again.
What I donāt understand is why the decision went the way it did. Either it was activist judges who had already made up their minds before the trial started. Or Googleās attorney sole argument was āNo habla espagnol.ā
I realise a lot of focus was on the claim that Spanish court has no jurisdiction over Google, but Iām sure that was just the media seizing on the something their audience understood and they could sensationalize (no one but us really cares about the perl script that ranks Googleās results ).
Mmm I agree with Langridge, its pretty easy to go on about the tapestry of history or w/e if you donāt have some really regrettable things in your life, but there are people who who are effectively condemned until their deathbeds based on things they did a very long time ago when they were an utterly different person. Also just saying if you do good things to counteract it the bad will go away, that seems stupid as media organisations love to proliferate bad news over good news so you will have to do some pretty amazing things to bury that dirt.
Iāve used Balsamiq quite a lot. A few particularly awesome points about it:
The āhand-drawnā style of the mockups are great for demoing to non-technical users. It makes them a lot less scared to criticise or suggest something else. Aside from people concentrating on minutiae as discussed in the segment, Iāve found more complete looking stuff can put people off giving their opinion as it looks like youāve already done a lot of work.
The mockups can be linked together to provide a simulated flow through the screens.
Aside from Balsamiq being free for do-gooders, if you want a properly FOSS alternative Pencil is a pretty good tool.
Remember John Profumo? He was a UK Government minister and did something stupid in the early sixties. It was a big scandal and he lost his job.
Now, he spent the rest of his life working for charities and doing lots of good, yet everyone still associated him with the scandal. Hell, they even made a feature film called āScandalā about him.
John Profumo was very high profile, at least in the UK, but I think we need something that allows ordinary people to re-build their lives after the silly mistakes they make without having constant reminders about it readily available via search engines. However, we donāt want laws that lead to excessive censorship and the re-writing of history.
Itās really hard making good law. Should we even try to make such a law or should we be completely anarchic when it comes to information on the Web? Is there a middle way?
One interesting view Iāve heard of this (I canāt rememeber who said is) is that because people (and importantly, companies) āgetā open source these days, itās not so important to compel people to contribute back changes. Because itās become more mainstream, people tend to realise the valuable and importance of contributing changes back, so will do so even if the arenāt legally requried to.
This issue reminds me of the principle āwhatever a man is sowing, this he will also reap.ā And sometimes a person reaps results for the rest of his life. An example would be one who is paralyzed from a crash because he was driving drunk. And maybe a stupid thing done in oneās past will come back to bite. But, as @bryanlunduke so well pointed out, what have they been doing lately? Perhaps some will keep pointing back to past stupidity. If that is the case, just how important are the opinions of those people? You will find that those who really care might be aware of past actions, but it doesnāt really matter to them. I have friends that have done things that they are really ashamed of. I am aware of what those things are. However, if they had kept doing those things, they wouldnāt be my friends. But rather, I take pride in them, knowing what they have overcome.
But even if they get it the license is your guarantee as the original author that everyone will do it. And 10 years from now when youāve moved on to other projects and other people have taken over your original work you can still be certain it wonāt be sold for a billion dollars by some guy who added his name to the comments of a header file.
Iām having trouble seeing when this would be possible with permissively licenced code where it wouldnāt be with GPL code. What do you mean by āsoldā? Sale of copyright, sale of a license, or something else?
Overcoming adversity ā including moving beyond the mistakes of ones past ā is something to be proud of. A badge of honor.
Will there always be other people who criticize, ridicule and dwell on things in the past? To be sure. But those people are lame and should be forced to live together on an isolated commune where the only song is Cherās āLife after loveā.
While I take pride in my friends, itās hard when it comes to my own failings. I can still be brought to tears when remember the hurt I have caused others and that may be decades in the past. I try to learn from it all though. And not to beat myself up too much over it all. But for me, personally, I just canāt bring myself to view it as a badge of honor for me. A double standard? Perhaps. I certainly donāt feel that others should view themselves as I do myself. I guess I should try more what you said, to āmove beyond the mistakes of ones past.ā
This matter with Google, can someoneās opinion be trusted if they were to form a conclusion of another based on search results? Of webpages? Really, can even official documents that can be found online give an accurate picture of a person? Sure, it might raise questions, but would it not, at best, be a start instead of a finish? It would seem to me that a person forming conclusions based on such little information would be quite shallow and such conclusions are suspect at best.
Others, however, just love to dig up dirt. And, we all have dirt. A wise man once said: āif I stop to kick at every dog that barks at me, I wonāt walk very far.ā Are the opinions of dirt diggers important? If a person sticks to his principles and acts in a respectable way in order to maintain a healthy self-esteem, then his reputation will follow. Perhaps instead of an isolated commune, they should just wear badges that says āIām a shallow person. It would be best to ignore me.ā
Iām right there with you on that. I think most of us are. We all have our own crosses to bear. Thatās part of what makes us who we are. Making mistakes is a critical part of how we learn and grow. As painful as some our mistakes may beā¦ we wouldnāt be ourselves without them.
And, really, this isnāt just about mistakes. Itās about history and people who want to erase history.
A personal example: I was born into a Lutheran family. I was baptized Mormon when I was a teenager. Some time after that I left the LDS church behind and converted to Judaism (where I have stayed for the lastā¦ 15 years or so). Just because Iām Jewish doesnāt mean I should sweep my Lutheran and Mormon past under the rug. All of that made me who I am (for better or worse).
Personal-ish example: One of my relatives, from way back, was responsible for the settling of Jamestown, Virginia in the 1600ās. He was in charge (at least partially). Over 80% of the people there died in a very short period of time, likely in part due to decisions he made. Should we erase our knowledge of that event so he can āstart overā fresh (or, at least his memory can)? No. Thatād be silly. His mistake there (as colossal as it was) is part of what makes himā¦ him. And it shaped many lives for generations to come.
Oh, wouldnāt that be nice? Iād love advance warning when ever someone like that is approaching.
That sounds like an interesting story to sit down, person to person, and hear. I am always interested in how people got to where they are now, what shaped their views and opinions. (I am making no suggestions here )
).