Sunday, 04 August 2013 10:43
'According to the Thunderbolts Project this documentary was removed by the Google-owned YouTube following 'a single complaint of copyright infringement by astronomer Travis Rector at the University of Alaska'. It goes on:
'Prompted by astronomer Sean Walker, Rector filed a complaint with YouTube, in disregard for both fair use and fair play. Unwittingly, he provoked an outpouring of criticism that caused him to hide the story he'd published on his own Facebook page as criticism continued to pour in.
On matters such as this, public consciousness has come a long way in recent years. Take away the fair use principle and the same people who manage taxpayer funding within the sciences will also control the flow of information and ideas.
When foundational theory is thrown into question, a publicly supported jobs program will typically resort to science by news release. Its advocates will seek to maintain an illusion, to suggest that "all is well in our science."
But what if facts discovered by their own scientists challenge the cover story from start to finish? That's when the program's Inquisitors will resort to "copyright infringement" claims, seeking to deny public access to data and images gathered at taxpayer expense.'
There is a gathering war against the communication of all views and information that demolish the lie-machine that we call 'The System' in all its forms and we must not stand for this at any price. Great news that we now have them running around in such a panic, though.
The recent YouTube take-down of this fact-based documentary has provoked a remarkable response, suggesting that a large and growing community understands very well the issues at stake.
The take-down was due to a single complaint of copyright infringement by astronomer Travis Rector at the University of Alaska. Prompted by astronomer Sean Walker, Rector filed a complaint with YouTube, in disregard for both fair use and fair play. Unwittingly, he provoked an outpouring of criticism that caused him to hide the story he'd published on his own Facebook page as criticism continued to pour in.
On matters such as this, public consciousness has come a long way in recent years. Take away the fair use principle and the same people who manage taxpayer funding within the sciences will also control the flow of information and ideas. When foundational theory is thrown into question, a publicly supported jobs program will typically resort to science by news release. Its advocates will seek to maintain an illusion, to suggest that "all is well in our science." But what if facts discovered by their own scientists challenge the cover story from start to finish? That's when the program's Inquisitors will resort to "copyright infringement" claims, seeking to deny public access to data and images gathered at taxpayer expense.
YouTube is a huge enterprise, and it's understandable that copyright and fair use issues are left almost entirely to an automated system. To move beyond the automated process may require litigation. Our own intent is to go to court if necessary. The essential contribution of fact-based criticism in the sciences REQUIRES the fair use principle, and the documentary in question is the poster child for fair use—an ideal opportunity to test well-established but often-ignored provisions of the law. (See our forthcoming report.)
In the meantime, we've now placed the documentary here, since Vimeo is the leading alternative to YouTube, particularly for communities exploring challenges to institutionalized theory:
If you have any doubt as to the objective value of this documentary, we invite you to review this factual presentation (still in its original form for critical review prior to the final edit). Please speak up for the essential principles of fair use and fair play—wherever you can reach people who care about truth first and not the preservation of cherished dogma in the sciences.
Sunday, 04 August 2013 10:35
'Earlier this week, the Oakland City Council voted to approve the second phase of a $10.9 million surveillance center that would enable the City to engage in widespread warrantless surveillance of Oakland residents who have engaged in no wrongdoing whatsoever.
This is a terrible blow to privacy.The so-called Domain Awareness Center (DAC) would consolidate a vast network of surveillance data. The project was initially supposed to be about port security. But in a classic illustration of mission creep, the project as proposed would have pulled in over 1,000 cameras and sensors pointed at Oakland residents, including 700 cameras in Oakland schools.
While surveilling schoolchildren is not going to secure the Port of Oakland, it would allow for the comprehensive tracking of innocent Oakland residents.'
Posts
3 Comments
Well done for keeping the meanies at bay and welcome to Vimeo!