Got a pothole? There’s an app for that. Need a medical marijuana dispensary? There’s an app for that, too. Reason.tv’s Ted Balaker sat down with Matt Harrison and Justin Hartfield of the Prometheus Institute to discuss how new technology can expand liberty. Harrison and Hartfield are the creators of the Do-it-Yourself Democracy iPhone application, which allows users to expose government waste, organize protests, or simply hector officials into finally fixing a long-neglected pothole. Hartfield is also the creator of WeedMaps.com, a site and iPhone app that locates medical marijuana dispensaries and allows users to interact with other medical marijuana patients. Other topics include: Revamping classic libertarian books with iPad technology and how Steve Jobs manages to be both an uber-capitalist and a progressive hero. Interview by Ted Balaker. Shot by Alex Manning, Hawk Jensen, and Paul Detrick. Edited by Paul Detrick. Music: “Get What You Want?” by Beight (Magnatune Records). Just under 10 minutes. Go to reason.tv for downloadable iPod, HD, and audio versions of this and all our videos. Subscribe to Reason.tv’s YouTube Channel and receive automatic notifications when new material goes live.
Video Rating: 4 / 5
@kev3d
continued. free/open source, like libertarianism in general, is the future. as i have said many times, you cannot enforce copyright laws these days without have an orwellian system where network traffic is filtered.
things change. everyone who supports free markets should know that. record and software companies must adapt or go extinct. your arguments for copyright in favor of profit are just as statist and corporatist as are arguments for keeping hemp illegal in favor of oil.
@kev3d
basic intellectual property is when you attach your name to something, like linus torvalds did to linux, but aside from that people can distribute as they wish. you seem to have a problem with grasping the cold reality that to enforce copyright laws these days you must have eyes on the internet and track various activities which is what acta and the cyber security bill are all about.
unfortunately consumers lose choice when corporations receive special treatment, or just can’t find it.
@CaliforniaArchitect Yeah, instead of removing “20 million cars off the road,” we should be removing millions of government bureaucrats from our personal lives.
@furyofbongos yes. that’s why we have a republic. but assuming that we have our constitutional liberties protected, then democracy SHOULD be the law of the land.
I’m glad these guys weren’t shy to take on Steve Jobs in an honest way, b/c admitting a corporation whose product you enjoy does something you don’t like industry wise is at the very least a step in the right direction.
I love how Human Action was the first book he said when thinking of libertarian classics. That is an outstanding read.
A Laptop replacement that is more expensive, hundreds of times less powerful, and locked down with only purchasable apps? I-pad is the most retarded piece of kit I’ve ever seen, it’s nothing more than an giant I-phone. Apple is buy for freedom, because there is no freedom of choice with their hardware. Windows supports any form of hardware you wish to buy and piece together.
cont. I would also add that albums, movies and properly downloaded songs and shows all have user-end agreements. I also find it that you find spy-ware so offensive, since they are spying on electronic data which should not be “owned” by anyone, taking your argument to it’s logical end. Why respect a firewall when you do not respect rightfully owned, closed source code or music? What’s the difference?
@SushiHead20 When they voluntarily check the “I agree” upon installation then it is completely fair. That IS giving consent. Where do you draw the distinction between intellectual property and copyright? How are zeroes and ones different than ink on paper or impressions on vinyl? There is always room for fair use, and debate about what fair use constitutes. But calling proprietary software a means to “control” people is just plain paranoid. Consumers have a choice, let them decide.
@kev3d
lol, software reporting the user, talk about totalitarian and unethical. you know what you call software that reports the user without his/her consent? spyware, no matter how you spin it.
proprietary software is a means to control people into submission, and as i said previously there is a different between copyright and intellectual property. i’m not entirely opposed to intellectual property, but regulating the distribution of ideas is bad for science and it;s bad for freedom.
cont. Lets also be realistic. Technically, it is illegal a NFL game without permission. But who would know and who would care? Does the NFL or whomever airs the game have the resources to pursue that sort of thing? Of course not, they should only have a problem with someone reproducing and (probably) selling the games. THAT is a different matter since it is reproduction of someone else’s property. Hence the need for limited government to impartially enforce contracts and protect rights.
cont. It is not Orwellian nor Totalitarian for parties to look after their own property. Scanning networks is a separate issue. When someone voluntarily installs, say, pirated software, there is very often a user end licensing agreement, which, if you read the fine print, tells you who owns the said software. If that software happens to include a means of reporting to the home office, then so be it. The developer has that right and the user has the right to refuse the product.