Andrew Keen and the end of new media (repost from other blog)

Internet curmudgeon Andrew Keen is at it again, moaning about people creating stuff for free, and telling them that they've got it coming:

Andrew Keen predicts the end of "free labor" online - Boing Boing
...which links to this article at Internet Evolution:
Economy to Give Open-Source a Good Thumping

Keen continues to judge Web 2.0 by mid-twentieth-century standards, but new media technology is fundamentally different from what we had back then, and many of the old criteria have ceased to apply. In the UK we'll be getting more of his doomsaying next week. Here's an extract from RadioTimes.com:

Iconoclasts

Wednesday 05 November
8:00pm - 8:45pm
BBC Radio 4

Edward Stourton chairs a live discussion series in which guests set out their strong views on a subject, before being challenged by a panel of experts. 2: Andrew Keen, one of the pioneering entrepreneurs of the internet boom, argues that Web 2.0 is an anarchic movement that destroys culture of real value.

It will be interesting to learn who's on the panel of experts. It's a live show, and the producers are asking for listener input during the broadcast: iconoclasts@bbc.co.uk. Until then I offer this quote from Oscar Wilde's Lady Windermere's Fan: "What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing."

My Confession - Elyse - Skepchick.org

Some people's path to scepticism is a gentle amble along a relatively unchallenging track. You learn some science and begin to question the beliefs of your childhood. The final break from the world of irrationality may be emotional, but short lived, and once you emerge into the clearing of rational, evidence-based reasoning, the relief can be its own reward.

It's not like that for everyone. Check out this awesome post at the Skepchick blog, where Elyse relates her own heart-rending story of sceptical awakening.

Burnee links for Sunday

So where are the links to the Atheist Bus, you ask? See my previous post: An Atheist Bus roundup

Burnee links follow:

Pharyngula: Where will you be after you're dead?

This is the article that PZ is talking about:
Never Say Die: Why We Can't Imagine Death: Scientific American

The soul? It may all be in your mind - The Boston Globe

Raise Your Voice | Edger

CFI Issues Statement on Religious Discrimination Exemption | Center for Inquiry

The Freethinker › Law Lords condemn sharia as unfair to women

An Atheist Bus roundup

"Organising atheists is like herding cats," someone once said. Well, the cats have been cool and have organised themselves.

Ariane Sherine: All aboard the atheist bus campaign | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

When I made my modest donation to the fund in the evening of the day it launched, there was a notice to say that the target (£5,500) had been reached shortly after 10 am. During the time it took me to enter my credit card details the fund increased by about £2,000. The last time I checked (while writing this post) the fund stood at £108,506.83.

There's been a good deal of adverse comment from both believers and non-believers in the press and online - but the important thing is that people are talking about the campaign. To facilitate further discussions I offer this roundup of comment:

The Freethinker › It’s a miracle! - Resurrected atheist bus campaign takes off like a rocket

No-God squad climb aboard the atheist bus | Joan Bakewell - Times Online

The Guardian has aggregated relevant articles from Comment is Free into a single page:
Comment is free + Atheism | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Atheism on a bus :: Nick Spencer :: Telegraph

D J Taylor: Beyond belief - Commentators, Opinion - The Independent

Howard Jacobson: So God 'probably' doesn't exist. Don't these atheists have any conviction? - The Independent

Has blogging had its day? (repost from other blog)

In general agreement with what these people were saying on the Today Programme recently, I think the answer is no.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7685000/7685883.stm

It is not worth starting a blog, and if you already have one you should think about closing it down, an article on the technology website Wired says. Robin Hamman, of computing consultancy Headshift, and Guardian writer and blogger Kate Bevan discuss whether shorter forms of communication, such as Twitter, are taking over.

They go on about Twitter - a service I've never seen the point of, even if whole swathes of savvy internet users seem to swear by it (though perhaps not literally).

I blog because I'm a writer, and because I frequently don't know what I really think until I've written it down. Whether anyone else reads the thing isn't necessarily an issue (though discourse is, as always, welcome).

(And just in case anyone scoffs at the idea of a monthly post here at WitteringOn being classed as actual blogging, I would refer them to my other blog, Notes from an Evil Burnee.)

If the audio stream isn't working, download the mp3 from RapidShare here:

http://rapidshare.com/files/341863325/Today_BloggingHadItsDay_BBCR4i-20081023.mp3

(5'50"; 1.4 Mb)

Ban Religion! Gilbert & George at the Serpentine Gallery

A very odd report on the Today Programme (BBC Radio 4) last Monday morning (20 October):

What does the art world have to say on the great events of our time? Dozens of artists have taken part in a "manifesto marathon" at the Serpentine Gallery in London, delivering their own statements for the 21st century. Today presenter Evan Davis reports on how the art world is coping with the current economic turmoil.

Streaming audio clip (5'03") available here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7679000/7679375.stm

Gilbert and George performed their two-word manifesto, and during the interview accused religion of criminal activity and of being based on lies.

If the audio stream isn't working, download the mp3 from RapidShare:
http://rapidshare.com/files/341842653/Today_ManifestoMarathon_BBCR4i-20081020.mp3

You have a right to be offended

You might take offence at all kinds of things. If someone suggests that your dress-sense isn't all it should be, or derides your taste in music, you may believe they have offended you. Indeed, someone might have intended to offend you.

But offence is a consensual state of mind. If someone intends to offend you by taking certain actions, then they will only succeed in their intention if you agree to it. You must consent to the offence, by agreeing with the offender that their actions are offensive to you. Whether or not you are, in fact, offended, is entirely up to you. You can choose between being offended and not being offended.

You can take offence or not, as you please. That is your right, and your choice.

Anyone who maintains that they are being offended against their will is admitting defeat. I think religious people who claim offence know this, and that's why their response is so often to seek to reprimand or silence the offender, or in more 'serious' cases, to seek recourse to law. Or in the 'worst' cases, to kill the offender.

When there's no sound, reasoned argument that can be put forward in defence of the offended, the offended resort to playground tactics: whining to teacher about 'what someone said', or in the case of the offended who tend towards the bully-boy approach, plain and simple violence against the offender.

These tactics are similar to those employed by the purveyors of quack medicines. If someone points out that a quack medicine doesn't do what it's claimed to, or that the evidence presented by its purveyors is flawed, you can be sure that they won't respond by presenting sound evidence. They will seek to silence the dissenter, by law if necessary. It's a reliable test of genuineness - if the medicine was genuinely efficacious, but the evidence was unsound, surely the way forward would be to get better evidence. If, instead, the lawsuits start flying, you can be pretty sure the product is bogus.

And so it is with religion. The most bogus religions are the ones that bleat loudest about being offended. What about those religions that don't protest about 'offence'?

Can you think of any?

UPDATE, 2008-10-22: See this important post on the Center For Inquiry website:
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/news/cfi_pushes_back_against_religious_restrictions_on_free_expression_joins_deb/