Gay rights laws in America have evolved to allow — but in some cases ban — rights for gay, lesbian and transgender people on a range of issues, including marriage, hospital visitation, adoption, housing, employment and school bullying.
The Guardian has done a great job visualizing the various rights, state by state. Timely and well done.
The Week is one of the most underrated magazines out there. I’ve been reading the paper version for years now so I’m very excited to see a well-executed weekly magazine done on the iPad. If you’d like a series of quick read articles on well-balanced issues and stories from the US and the world, check it out. It’s the only news source I need anymore these days…
Do we really trust the security and safety of our skies to an agency that says “interwebs”?
Has anyone started to measure the effectiveness (attention, awareness, change) of the Occupy movement versus blackout SOPA/PIPA?
On one hand, Occupy Wall Street and the movements across the country gained plenty of media attention. With people physically taking over public spaces, standing on street corners, and getting pepper-sprayed, it was hard to miss. But was the point well received by the public at-large? Or congress? Or business? Was there a clear goal reached?
On the other hand, by “turning off” websites in order to protest the ability for organizations to… “turn off” websites, did the public miss the point? Did it turn people against Wikipedia (see @herpderpedia)? Did it confuse visitors to Google? Or did it immediately capture the attention of millions of individuals with a few simple lines of code? Congresspeople have already started distancing themselves.
I wonder this because the two approaches appear to go about the same thing: protesting a government full of corporate mouthpieces with no real appreciation for what “real people” need. Police are trained to quash demonstrations and pepper-spray people, yet nobody but “the internet” can mess with the internet (yet..).
Recorded yesterday and worth a watch today as the internet goes on strike.
(Here’s a direct download link if you don’t have Flash Player installed.)
If you become an EFF member today your donation will get a 4x Power Up (donor matched contribution). If you’ve never heard of the EFF, they’re the leading organization defending civil liberties in the digital world.
There’s no way to overstate how much these guys and gals are “fighting the good fight”, especially this year (like preventing SOPA, enabling ISP freedoms, allowing jail breaking, etc.).
I support that.
In case you haven’t seen what the U.S. Congress is working on lately (hint: not creating jobs, not fixing the economy) in between voting to make sure the nation’s motto is still “In God We Trust”, please watch this video.
PROTECT-IP is a bill that has been introduced in the Senate and the House and is moving quickly through Congress. It gives the government and corporations the ability to censor the net, in the name of protecting “creativity”. The law would let the government or corporations censor entire sites– they just have to convince a judge that the site is “dedicated to copyright infringement.”
I just love that my councilwoman, Judy Montero, has her own blog (on WordPress). Not only that, but she can respond to an article published in the Denver Post which printed only part of her prepared statement that lacks the full context of her response. Not that the news hasn’t been doing this “fit the quote so it fits our story” game forever, but now the public can easily see the other side.
Here’s what the Denver Post printed on in their story describing medical marijuana grow sites in Denver:
Councilwoman Judy Montero, who represents north and central Denver, went a step further, suggesting that the presence of grows in some areas might need to be re-evaluated as those areas look to redevelop.
“I don’t see the uses of medical marijuana grow facilities being consistent with our land- use visions for the future of these communities,” she wrote in a prepared statement. Such a clash has already occurred in Montero’s district…
This statement only suggests she’s against the grow sites (negative) then the article goes on to conclude that the sites are very much friends of the community (contrary to her point).
Stepping back, if you read the full statement it may paint a fuller picture of her thoughts on the future of the community (excluded text is highlighted):
The grow facilities you see on the ground today are a reality of today’s economic climate and obsolete land use policies of the past. Unfortunately, I don’t see the uses of medical marijuana grow facilities being consistent with our land use visions for the future of these communities – visions that include new parks, affordable housing options, retail, and other amenities that are the foundation of a sustainable neighborhood. So if market conditions start to change, I am not confident that grow facilities will still be considered an appropriate use as these areas start to transform themselves with exciting redevelopment opportunities.
I’m happy to see the internet is able to help balance the discussion and remove some of the power that the media has to form public opinion in their own views. Check out the comments on the article to see how individuals specifically ask what Montero’s vision includes…
[geolocation]