I find it hard to get worked up about a lot of things. Privacy for instance. No matter how much data the government collects on you, surely for it to be a threat to liberty a few things have to happen. They have to process it - a task which is increasingly challenging as they collect more esoteric data. Then, your joke about bombing a public space has to be considered so serious that it is actionable - in other words, more serious than the millions of other bomb jokes which they are diligently recording. All this has to happen becfore the cardinal sin occurs - the government gets in the way of my life.

I in this way I oppose anti-privacy measures like the national ID card on non-standard grounds - as expensive, useless, largely symbolic, unnecessary burdens.

And so Google sets up a website in China that says that Tianamen Square is most famous for its happy snaps and tourists. The internet goes crazy - a fair enough reaction, once Google set themselves up as the opposite of evil, it doesn’t take much creativity to flip the tables.

I’m pro-freedom, so obviously censorship is unwelcome.

But to argue that Google did the wrong thing is misguided, and ignorant of the nature of political information. Merely making it tough to do a Google search for “why the chinese government sux” does not a closed society make. Similarly, just because your MSN home page can’t be titled Freedom in China; or Why the Falun Gong is Awesome, doesn’t mean your ideas can’t be delivered in a more subtle fashion.

Information is not that simple. We don’t read books called Freedom!, we read books called Two Treatises of Government, Atlas Shrugged, or, more accurately, Cryptonomicon.

On the internet, when a teenager is forming his political beliefs, he does not do it systemically by reading up on every issue from a dedicated website which lays down the points in a logical and coherant manner. Instead, he goes to The Onion, or SomethingAwful, or CollegeHumor.com. Political beliefs are ingested, not calculated.

When the media first realised that millions of Chinese getting blogs, they waffled about how political communication was the natural result - how blogs would free the Chinese from the shackles of their one party state. Until one day a chinese-reading reporter realised that the vast majority of them weren’t writing about Tianamen Square, but instead about going out, relationships, school and uni. A collective disappointment was discernable - the Chinese were squandering the internet on petty matters, instead of starting up moveon.org

No matter, its better this way. Political freedom isn’t taught by debate, it’s learnt by experience. By using Google to go to apparently non-political websites, Chinese citizens become more and more attached to the marketplace of ideas. The advantages of pro-market economics will become clearer as they dig through the unregulated world of eBay. And not for nothing do popular histories attribute part of the pro-freedom movement in the Soviet Union to non-political communication like Dallas.

Mind you, I find it hard to believe that the average Chinese citizen will be unaware of the evils of events like the cultural revolution, merely because they can’t download directly images of it happening. The value of a book smuggled is greater than the value of a book brought freely. And informal networks are more powerful than books or websites. Oral histories, while they are inaccurate, are more compelling.

Hopefully Google recognise this. Political awareness and freedom seep through a collective mindset, they are not instantly acquired. This is why some freedom in communication is better than no freedom of communication. As the famous saying goes ‘do not let the best be the enemy of the good’. Would Google’s critics prefer it not be available in China at all?*

*yes, I know it was available in China somewhat through the international sites, but it was unreliable and rarely accessible.

Terry Teachout on the possibilities that a functioning, mature ebook market would provide gives this as one of its biggest advantages:

You’ll be able to carry dozens of books with you wherever you go

Without a doubt, this is the most appealing idea of the ebook. Because I have many books on the go at once, and many others I like to randomly dip into on occassion, the idea of being able to carry dozens - although, more realistically hundreds, if not thousands - at once is innately appealing. There is always a book for your mood, but that book isn’t always nearby. A good ebook service would bridge that gap.

Some regulation trivia via Bryan Caplan:

From Prohibition until 1960, New York City required “cabaret card” permits to be held by all workers in its nightclubs. Their administration was fraught with politics, and some performers’ cards were revoked on specious grounds. Those of Thelonious Monk and Billie Holiday were suspended due to drug charges. In 1960 the death of Lord Buckley soon after his card was seized in mysterious circumstances evoked a scandal which led to the abolition of the cabaret card system.

I don’t tend to systematically read the essay sections of art books - they can run the gamut of turgid, unnecessarily subjective analysis to simple biography. But having started reading Pulp Art: Original Cover Paintings for the Great American Pulp Magazines, I heartily recommend it as one of the most enthusiastic defences of the American pop art tradition as can be found. For example:

Cultural Anarchy believes that any picture painted by the hand of man, woman, or child anywhere, anytime on the planet, is art. Not fine art or commerical art, not high art or low art, not populist art or museum art - just Art. It can be characterised as good or bad, genius or worthless, I like or I hate it, worth a million bucks or not a dime, but it’s all art…

The value of [the art] is to be determined by the people making a democratic choice, voting yes with their dollars or no with their feet.

The best is yet to come.

Penn Jillette has a podcast (its more of a ‘best of the day’ in podcast format - but details, details), the repeated listening of which has reminded me of an old personal adage. If you disagree with Penn Jillette, you’re wrong.

“Our new Amsterdam subway must be absolutely Amsterdam-idiot-proof.”

Found at BoingBoing

One of the most interesting parts of Jesse Walker’s history of alternative radio, Rebels on the Air is the section on how the ideals of the progressive era resulted in the almost conspiratorial alliance between big business and big government at the detriment of the consumer.

Jonah Goldberg, in an essay on books to understand American ‘liberalism’, links to a history of the progressive era called A Fierce Discontent: The Rise and Fall of the Progressive Movement in America, 1870-1920. Is there a better history on the relationship between government and business in the era? I’m looking for more of an economic history rather than the social history which A Fierce Discontent seems to be.

I am easily amused by examples of the collective intellegence of the internet. Today’s find comes after John Derbyshire on the Corner theorises that the deckchairs of the Titanic could of been tied together to create effective floatation devices. A reader reponds:

Back in 1912, deck chair frames were made from teak, a very dense wood which floats somewhat like concrete.

This “internet” thing proves its value once again.

EH.net can compare historical US and UK prices using a wide range of indices. Is there a comparable resource for Australian prices?

Its cooling down in Melbourne, but my house isn’t, so energy policy is still relevant. Futurepundit has a piece on wind turbine sales in the US - the comments are fascinating for an exploration of restraints and possibilites of wind generating capacity.

The very existence of this podcast: This Week in Nuclear is a stunning advertisement for the podcast industry - its so wonderfully specific. (But they should certainly drop out the faux-rock in the background.)

The latest episode refers to a decision by Toshiba to purchase Westinghouse Electric Co., a nuclear plant builder for US$5 billion. The last time Westinghouse changed hands was in 1999, for a mere 1.1 billion. The podcast makes the case that the huge price indicates great confidence in the worldwide nuclear power industry - Toshiba must be expecting a surge in new power plant orders over the next few years.

There’s a lot more, the podcast is definitely worth subscribing to.