And it's "its".. "It's" is a conjunction. "Its" is possessive.
>> And it's "its".. "It's" is a conjunction. "Its" is possessive.
K
"It's" is a contraction, Brainius.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/closeread/2013/06/edwa...
If anything, Minority Report is what we should send. The entire purpose of this program is to find terrorists before they commit their crimes. The surveillance is widespread (as it is in Minority Report). People live comfortable lives until they become targets, and becoming a target occurs without warning and can happen to anyone.
But much of the picture in Brave New World is that there is no real need for hard repression as people simply don't rebel and are happy with their comfy lives.
The reality here would seems kind of in between (people mostly don't care _and_ the state is more scary).
You'd think this would help bring back individual websites and running your own smtp/pop3 setup.
- The OP
There is no irony here. People make the best use of the tools that they have to prevent a future where they wouldn't be able to use such tools because the government would ban/stop the protest.
By your logic, they should stop using their cellphones also and use carrier pigeons.
Several reasons:
- Elected officials have a direct vote. "These programs are subject to congressional oversight and congressional re-authorization and congressional debate." — President Obama on June 7. - If the campaign is successful, journalists will hear about it in a way that makes it more interesting to report on. If I'm a journalist, I want to write about a grass-roots campaign to change Washington--not a campaign to--what, change journalism? - I'm upset with elected officials such as my own Dianne Feinstein who are publicly defending the program. I have no beef with journalists. - It didn't even occur to me to send the book to journalists.
P.S. You are correct about the goal, but there is a further goal you did not mention: to change the law. The best way to do this: change the minds of lawmakers.
Of course, you can create your own publicity to some degree, and I do agree that elected officials are the ones who need to fix this, which makes them a good target in many ways.
Are the representatives on the receiving end of this campaign going to slap their heads and go "Oh golly, I never thought of that"?
There's no easy way to get through to people who think the benefits of ubiquitous surveillance outweigh the costs. They know 1984, and they don't see themselves in the role of big brother. Throwing this book at them isn't going to change that.
Edit: "There's no easy way" suggests that this is meant as a solution, which obviously isn't the campaigner's intention. What I mean is that I don't think this will have an impact other than to make the recipients think their constituents are oversimplifying the issue, a la Godwin's law.
