eon

i want to thank everybody for coming here today and especially the people who were here from the beginning

eric wiseman
tom smuts
dave marglin
jon zittrain
john perry barlow
larry lessig
alex and wendy
myles berkman
fern and eric saltzman

we are here to talk about the future of the net.

my vision of the future of the net is the same as the vision i enunciated ten years ago.

cyberspace is an integrated media realm of stories told and shared by digitally connected and enabled hearts and minds.
WE are the Future of the Internet. We have good stories to live and to tell.
let us make our stories represent our values of
open code
open access
open talk
open education
let’s bridge the digital divide
let’s build the commons of the net

i am listenting to rubin in the morining live from tower street general penitentiary, kingston jamaica, FREE FM signal coming from the SET lab at tower street through FLOW to a UNESCO Caribbean portal to my machine and to my earphones. rubin is an inmate, the pastor of SET. SET is an inmate-driven rehabilitation program which is being embraced and supported by staff and administration.

give thanks with a grateful heart

respect and thanks to Jamaica Correctional Comissioner Richard Reese and his team

Forwarded conversation

————————

From: John Palfrey
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 5:53 PM
To: Staff List , faculty , Berkman Fellows
Cc: Tim Wu

Hi all:

Best,
John

–
John Palfrey
e: jpalfrey @law.harvard.edu
p: 617-384-9132
w: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/palfrey/

———-
From: William Fisher
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:00 PM
To: John Palfrey
Cc: Staff List , faculty, Berkman Fellows, Tim Wu

I want to add my thanks to John’s. It was an extraordinary event –
probably the best governmental hearing I’ve ever attended. The
combination of excellent panels and the freewheeling questioning by
the commissioners was very informative. Thanks to all for putting it
together — so well and so fast.

Terry

———-
From: Yochai Benkler
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:59 PM
To: faculty @eon
Cc: John Palfrey, Staff List, faculty, Berkman Fellows, Tim Wu

Just to add my thanks. It was extraordinary to see how seamlessley this all
went, and with what enormous turnout (including what seemed to be the Comcast Cheerleaders Brigade…) and crisp conversation.

———-

From: John Palfrey
Date: Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 7:36 AM
To: Staff , faculty , Fellows

From our friend Tim Wu:
w: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/palfrey/

—–Original Message—–
From: Tim Wu

Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:32:39
To:John Palfrey
Cc:Staff List ,faculty ,Berkman Fellows
Subject: Re: FCC event today

John,

TW

Tim Wu
wu @pobox.com

–
when appropriate (in my judgment) to an open project and not sensitive (in my judgment) in terms of privacy, i may post email to my blog. all privacy requests respected.

Forwarded conversation
————————

From: Larry Tribe
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 5:59 AM
To: lessig@lessig08.org
Cc: jpalfrey, Elizabeth Warren , nesson, William Fisher , zittrain

Hey, Larry — What exciting news! I very much hope it works out. I’ll do what I can to support you, including coming to (and maybe co-hosting) the March 13 breakfast event for you in Cambridge. – Larry Tribe
———-
From: Charles Nesson
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:22 AM
To: Larry Tribe
Cc: lessig@lessig08.org, jpalfrey, Elizabeth Warren , William Fisher , zittrain

–
when appropriate (in my judgment) to an open project and not sensitive (in my judgment) in terms of privacy, i may post email to my blog. all privacy requests respected.

———-
From: Larry Tribe
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:08 AM
To: Charles Nesson

Charlie, this email contained no message. Did you mean to send me something?

———-
From: Charles Nesson
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:58 AM
To: Larry Tribe

sorry. actually, i was thinking we should issue a press release announcing your support. i was about to ask your permission to do this and hit send instead of save by mistake. i’ve been blogging about it this morning and looking for other support. thanks for yours. the Change Congress strategy larry has adopted seems both practical and effective.

nice to see you in the square. you look fit. i hope you are well, considering all.
———-
From: Larry Tribe
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 8:13 AM
To: Charles Nesson
Cc: Kathy McGillicuddy

Larry

———-
From: Lawrence Lessig
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:10 AM
To: Charles Nesson
Cc: Larry Tribe , lessig@lessig08.org, jpalfrey, Elizabeth Warren , nesson, William Fisher , zittrain

Thank you Larry and Charlie,

I’m grateful to everyone for their support. As you know, I don’t shy away from losing. But choosing to lose in a way that is certain to harm the movement is not yet a disease I have.

—–
Lessig
Stanford Law School
———-

From: Larry Tribe
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:53 AM
To: Lawrence Lessig , Charles Nesson
Cc: jpalfrey, Elizabeth Warren , nesson, William Fisher , zittrain

I understand and, based on your data, certainly concur. A noble impulse, though, for which I’d commend you. — Larry
———-
From: John Palfrey
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:10 AM
To: Larry Tribe , Lawrence Lessig , Charles Nesson
Cc: lessig@lessig08.org, Elizabeth Warren , “Charles Nesson @ Law” , “Terry Fisher @ Law” , Jonathan Zittrain

Seconded!

John

–
John Palfrey
e: jpalfrey @law.harvard.edu
p: 617-384-9132
w: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/palfrey/
———-

From: Charles Nesson
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:21 AM
To: Lawrence Lessig
Cc: Larry Tribe , jpalfrey, Elizabeth Warren , William Fisher , zittrain

i see your logic and respect your judgment
might you ask your would-be opponent to run on the CC Campaign
———-

From: Lawrence Lessig
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:28 AM
To: Charles Nesson
Cc: Larry Tribe , Elizabeth Warren , William Fisher , zittrain

Another Member of Congress, supportive of our work, is asking that directly. It would be a logical thing for her to do, and costless, since she does not need lobbyist/PAC money to survive in the safe district in which I live.
———-

From: Charles Nesson
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:25 AM
To: Jonathan Cohen

am i crazy for thinking there is a great human interest/political story in this
– lessig’s almost run for congress and formation of a Change Congress Campaign–

———-
From: Jonathan Cohen
Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:20 AM
To: Charles Nesson

Better story (IMO) is how Lessig’s dalliance inspired someone else, and how the open culture movement is getting behind that person or preparing to find an open seat and and a candidate elsewhere.

Jonathan R. Cohen
President
The Weiser Group
232 Madison Avenue
Suite 204
New York, NY 10016
jcohen@ weisergroup.com
Office: (646) 254-6000 ext. 12

“…there is one striking feature of Grant’s orders: no matter how hurriedly
he may write them on the field, no one ever has the slightest doubt as to
their meaning, or even has to read them over a second time to understand them.”

–
when appropriate (in my judgment) to an open project and not sensitive (in my judgment) in terms of privacy, i may post email to my blog. all privacy requests respected.

feb092008.mp3

the_mission.mp3

hear it now

im-the-real-charlie-nesson.mp3

my-name-is-charlie-nesson.mp3

slideshow of open university opening up

GPSTSBusiness - 16 Feb 2008
subject Fwd: bracken on obama on the

i want license to use the wire in my online school. is this within the realm of fair use. i want colvin and pryzbylewski in my classrooms. i want to take it with me in a box to kingston prison and run my class for real in our prison lab. omar, as obama says, is a man of character playing by his code. the lessons of the wire are profound

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: wayne marshall
Date: 2008/1/15
Subject: bracken on obama on the wire!
To: Charles Nesson

http://bracken.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/what-obama-may-learn-from-omar/

where does it go from how crazy is that
should it go crazy
off into the eon dance
should it go sane

what is hunter thompson’s message
what was his freedom

sponsored by Do Not Click dot Org

Don’t click here!

DoNotClick.org’s power lies in its simplicity. The project’s main argument is that actions taken on the web have real consequences. When I initially saw this argument, my first thought was, “well, duh.” Obviously what I do on the internet affects the real word – when I buy books on Amazon.com, they show up on my door (with Amazon.com SuperSaver™ savings!) 5-9 business days later, as promised; when I register for classes on the Harvard MyPlan website, I get stuck in the queue for forty minutes and them am booted from the interface, just as expected. But as I read deeper into DoNotClick.org I found that my opinions about the nature of the internet weren’t as objective and informed as I had imagined.

It is the implicit position of most internet users that actions taken on the internet have no consequences. The nature of the internet fosters a set of assumptions and attitudes that can make a user feel that he or she inhabits a space of complete anonymity and, as DoNotClick.org shows, this sense of (false!) anonymity can have expensive, even disastrous consequences.

What makes this argument so effective is that it presents an overt message that seems so intuitive as to be obvious, and then shows just how counterintuitive that message actually is.

Visitors to DoNotClick.org inhabit both sides of the argument by first presenting a position that almost anyone can agree with (clicking has consequences) and then showing how the person being argued to is, in fact, you, the internet user with all your assumptions about anonymity – a really nice, satisfying, and powerful maneuver.

the-mission.mp3 ten years out

A presumption of liberty
Give me liberty or give me death
Live free or die
Liberty
This is what America is supposed to be about
This is the original understanding

Common sense in common wealth
An equilibrium reached by men who had achieved personal liberty and saw the benefits of sharing in community
Framing a constitution to capture in words the very best of their intelligence expressing all that’s good in life in common without sacrificing their essential personal liberty
Freedom
Freedom with responsibility makes common sense

What do we human have in common
I say common sense

Imagine ourselves as free men and women who sit together to decide what is best for us in common

Common sense says we agree first and foremost that we will not give up what is most precious to us. liberty. At the least we can agree to maintain a presumption of liberty as we thrust ourselves forward into the developing thicket of statutory Law. Understand, we are gathering to create a government which will make statutes. Statutes are made by men for citizens to follow, not to lead. Can we agree then that as we go forward into the thicket of the statutes our government will generate in our future that we proceed with a presumption of liberty against arbitrary override by whim special interest reflected in exercise of legislative and executive power.

Let us articulate as best WE can this presumption in broad strokes of freedom of religion and speech and trial by jury drawn from among us, expressing our underlying commitment to liberty in our own fundamental rules here to be made. Let us leave a presumption of liberty to the future to stand as a beacon above all other presumptions our government may make after this one. This is our foundation and our goal, our original understanding and our polestar to wisdom in the future.

The essential constitutional role of the american jury is to preserve our liberty. To perform this function the jury must be informed of its function, its power, and its responsibility.

the judiciary quite rightly presumes reason and requires only rationality in legislative statutes which do not tread on explicitly articulated constitutional rights. to do otherwise would assert judicial prerogative into legislative sphere.

this means that the judiciary provides no check on legislative statutes which though rational lack wisdom yet are backed by special interest. such statutes intrude upon the liberty of citizens in a manner which the authority of judges does not check. the check for that abuse of citizen liberty in our constitutional system is trial by jury.

A JURY OF OUR PEERS
a jury of our peers was to have been our protection, the gateway through which legislative edict would have to march before taking a citizen’s liberty away.

from the vantage of the people, and the subset of us which is the jury in a criminal case, our trial system frames a question to us which we answer with our verdict. the indictment frames a question in terms of the violation of a statute.

what is the question to which we want an answer before we see a man’s liberty taken away

is it:
(a) did he violate a legislative statute
(b) did he do something covered by a legislative statute that is wrong
(c) did he do something wrong

balance is the essence of our constitutional ideal

a massachusetts referendum asserts the legality of possession of small amounts of marijuana
this is an assertion of legality
we the people are the keepers of our liberty
we the people decide whether the legalisms of the law intrude too deeply upon us

we need neither judges and nor legal training to tell us that our liberty is infringed by arbitrary law

this is not a judgment that requires legal education
all the logic of education is on the other side
on this side is the justice in our hearts

it requires our willingness to speak truth from the justice in our hearts

verdict - speak truth - guilty or not guilty

“To avoid destruction, the United States need only measure up to its own best traditions and prove itself worthy of preservation as a great nation.” george kennan

lovely thought
but a huge problem

the ideal of our nation is a government under law, not under men
yet now ingrained deep in our government is an attitude that deploys law as a weapon rather than follows law as an ideal

this ingrained ends justifies means attitude to the weilding of prosecutorial power corrupts the ideal of law.

imagine the universe of people divided among three groups in relation to law.
one group consists of those who obey rules because that’s what they have been taught to do. think of this group as a flock that asks and perhaps needs to be taken care of. another group consists of individuals who see rules for what they are and rises above them or sneaks below them when there is need. this second group subdivides between those who constrain them selves by belief in and expression of law as an ideal expressed in ethical behavior, make this group two, and those who abuse the credibility of law by abuse of power, group three.

my goal is to lead group two in its tension with group three to become self aware and combine its rhetorical force to express enlightening truth.

i teach law at harvard law school. i teach about truth and evidence of truth sufficient to persuade. i’ve been teaching Evidence at hls for enough years to have an army of students who might welcome from their old teacher and help propagate a new approach to truth and persuasion

truth, not just logical but emotional and physical. i believe there is truth in our hearts which we can seek to know in our minds and express in our actions. i am a student of truth. each of us has our own. i am we are students expressing truth. i am teacher. we are teachers. i want my students to find truth in themselves and express it.

truth for our future lies in a balance of power which has seen for profit legal corporations influence law in their self interest to the point of crushing public information space with law. but now a new form of organization is capable of thriving, made possible by the internet’s enabling people to connect. as legal architects we are able to conceive and propagate new forms of legal organization

my path to teaching my conception of truth leads to and through teaching poker as skill in seeing and understanding from another’s point of view. i teach this as a fundamental skill not just for lawyers but for anyone who is eager to learn how the rhetorical world works and connect it to the physical. i teach the teaching of it as exemplar and research.

there is corruption of law in relation to poker. our government seeks to kill online poker as collateral damage to its gambling hypocrisy, passing a midnight bill that never saw committee as part of a terrorism act, prosecuting the founding companies and individuals who made online poker possible, and thumbing its nose at little Antigua and no doubt soon to give the finger to the WTO which has ruled in Antigua’s favor against our govt.

this is exemplary of the corruption of law i would like to see our government foreswear.

i want to array the intelligent forces of the poker playing poker thinking world against it.

the united states government v. the intelligent forces of the poker playing poker thinking world

–announcing a trial on the issue of the legitimacy of teaching games of skill and of learning how to create environments in which to learn and play–

–announcing a poker strategic thinking workshop in singapore–

Online Poker - Internet Freedom - Open Education

Organized by the newly forming Global Poker Strategic Thinking
Society, this workshop combines open philosophy, internet strategy,
instructional entertainment, and vision of a line of development for
integrated real and virtual education fueled by human interest in
mastering games of skill, poker in the lead. We will begin by
distributing in advance of our workshop a paper on education in
virtual worlds. We will aim our trajectory going forward as projection
of a new way of thinking embodied in the learning and understanding of
a game. We will demonstrate the teaching of the game to beginners. We
will talk about why it is a good idea to teach poker to kids. We will
demonstrate transition to an integrated real and virtual internet
environment. We will introduce team play. We will examine
critical issues relating to poker and other games of skill in
education and beyond. What are the key strategic thinking points of
departure? How far should we go in promoting poker in the field of
education? Should poker be taught to children on the $100 laptop?
Can poker and poker strategic thinking serve as a departure point for
openness on the Internet, global education, and beyond. We do not
expect any previous knowledge of poker. We invite participation by those with
curiosity to learn.