Bruce Sterling's Blog, page 200
March 1, 2014
“Can We Secure the Internet of Things?”
*No.
http://www.govtech.com/security/Can-We-Secure-the-Internet-of-Things.html
*Things aren’t secure, the Internet’s not secure, and worst of all there is no “we.”
February 28, 2014
A Secure Online Network For Europe by Neelie Kroes
*It’s the press release of a speech.
************************************************************************************
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_...
Speech: A secure online network for Europe
European Commission – SPEECH/14/167 28/02/2014
Other available languages: none
[Check Against Delivery]
Neelie KROES
Vice-President of the European Commission responsible for the Digital Agenda
A secure online network for Europe
Cyber security conference
Brussels, 28 February 2014
To add your comment to this speech, see the social version of the speech here
Digital technologies are changing our world.
Today we are already seeing the difference it makes. From cars to classrooms; from payments to power stations.
And this offers huge opportunities for citizens, the society and the economy.
I often focus on the economic opportunities: and they are significant. The Internet economy generates over one fifth of our growth; 200 million Europeans buy online each year.
But it’s more than economic. It is also for true believers. As Pope Francis put it recently: good communication helps us to grow closer, to know one another better, and to grow in unity; in his own words, the Internet is a “gift from God”.
I don’t know if it’s really a gift from God. But his words are definitely a gift to the Digital Agenda for Europe.
And what we have seen is just the beginning. On the horizon stand new opportunities: big data, cloud computing, the Internet of things, high performance and quantum computing: you name it.
Of course: like any new advance, these opportunities can be misused. We have the technological ability to do immense, unprecedented things. Many of those things are positive; some are damaging. And increasing reliance means increasing vulnerability.
The massive scale of online spying shows how technology can be used for ill. Invading privacy, invading fundamental rights, eroding trust in the online world: and in our governments. This is totally unacceptable.
As Estonian President Toomas Ilves put it recently, it is as though we have two cultures: those who care about technology and those who care about liberal democracy. And not only do they not talk to each other, but act as if the other didn’t exist.
It’s time those two worlds learned how to understand and inter-relate with each other. Then we would not have a situation where, for example, mass observation of citizens is seen by some as “acceptable” merely because it is technically possible. Or, on the other side, where policy makers look at big data and can see only dangers and threats instead of opportunities.
People – including me – sometimes about talk about our “digital rights”. But I don’t think that’s quite right. These are not digital rights, nor online rights: they are fundamental rights, and they apply just as much online as off. Whether it is privacy, or freedom of speech, or consumer protection. New technology can enhance our humanity: it should not override our human rights.
In the “real world”, those freedoms enjoy protections, checks and balances. In the very different online world, those safeguards may need to be different. But they must be present, at every level: political, organisational, technical. And based on common principles: like transparency, responsibility, and accountability. We need to put our foot down to provide those protections. On that note, I welcome President Obama’s speech last month on reforming the NSA: that went in the right direction.
But we also need to ask ourselves the right questions. Not why the US wanted to bug the phones of so many. But: “how did they manage to succeed”? Why are we so unprepared and unsecured against such threats?
You could ask, “why does so much of our data leave Europe”; or you could ask, “why do our citizens prefer American platforms”? And why are our European equivalents unable to compete? Let’s not be naïve. Spying is the second oldest profession in the world, and sometimes even combined with the first.
The revelations of Snowden came as a shock to many. But in a sense they were a blessing in disguise and a wake-up call. And that is just what we need right now. At the very moment where we are making the transition to a data-driven economy and society, these revelations could not have been more timely. We can use these insights to ensure a more secure online world, and a competitive advantage for European industry.
We shouldn’t lose ourselves in the Snowden debate when it comes to online privacy and security. That’s not all there is to building trust online – it’s also about the simple things.
It’s about people trusting that their personal data on social networks is protected.
About small businesses understanding what their cloud provider is offering.
About citizens having the option to use secure eIdentification – if they don’t want to be impersonated.
About children protected and empowered to avoid online risks.
Without security, there is no privacy; nor true freedom. You have no private life if your house has no walls; you are not free to walk the streets if it is not safe to do so.
Those cyber breaches happen for multiple reasons: they are all too common and all too costly. According to one study, over three quarters of small businesses, and 93% of large ones suffered one. Each one can cost up to €50 million: not to mention the reputational damage.
Some – most recently Chancellor Merkel – have called for Europe to have a secure, European network. How would we do that?
For me, the answer starts with how we see security. By seeing it as pivotal to our business models, central to competitiveness. By providing a digital single market, fertile ground for European innovation. By speeding up how we share knowledge, to strengthen the security of products and services.
And by saying ‘No’ to data protectionism; ‘Yes’ to data protection. Because we want to keep the huge boost of big data, and the benefits of this open, innovative, unified global network.
This is why, last year, my colleagues Cathy Ashton, Cecilia Malmström and I came up with an ambitious cybersecurity strategy. A series of integrated building blocks to safeguard a secure, open internet for Europe.
One year on, we are making progress. Europe is delivering on these areas.
The EU has a new programme for research and development, Horizon 2020. It strengthens our investment in cyber security, privacy and trustworthy ICT. We already have strong capacity in areas like business software, smart cards, and cryptography: now we can build on that.
We have also just established what is called the “NIS platform”: a public-private platform for network and information security. This platform aims, as a priority, to find technology-neutral best practice to enhance cyber security; to stimulate secure ICT solutions; and to improve risk management. The platform will feed into Commission recommendations on cyber security, across the whole IT value chain. Because, as you all know, the chain is only as strong as its weakest link. I hope many of you will take part actively in that platform: if you are not already.
Plus, we are implementing our Cloud Computing strategy — to make this technology and its services more trustworthy and transparent. For example, just this week, ENISA published a verified list of which cloud computing security certification schemes are out there, helping you know which you can trust. And the European Cloud Partnership is finalising its recommendations for next steps, too.
Remember this is our comparative advantage – or could be. One estimate put the cost of the Snowden revelations to US cloud providers at around ten billion dollars a year. And security remains an area of European strength.
Plus, remember there is a global angle. And we have incorporated that view too into our work. As the internet is an open, global network, available for all to participate — so it needs to be governed: transparent, multi-stakeholder, and with global balance. That is the philosophy of our Internet Governance strategy just published.
Just this week the EU achieved its latest milestone: agreement with the Council and Parliament on new laws about electronic identification, authentication and signatures. This will boost user convenience, trust and confidence. And that is exactly what we need!
But: all these building blocks, however excellent, will have no future without resilient and secure networks and systems. That is why we have proposed a Directive on Network and Information Security. It is ambitious and important. It will mean better coordination and risk management – just what we need.
But this is the point where I raise my concern – and ask you for your help.
I know that there are still many and important issues to be resolved around this Directive. And I am very open to good ideas and a detailed dialogue to make it work. Let me make myself clear: we aim for smart and effective cooperation between all Member States and all relevant stakeholders. Today that kind of cooperation is already standard for, say, bio-terrorism: now we need to apply it to tomorrow’s digital threats.
We will not reinvent the wheel: but will build on existing and proven structures, and on sound principles.
We will also make explicit what this cooperation means and take into account the experiences and expertise in Member States. When it comes to security – you should rather be an excellent copycat, than a possible underdog.
For risk management, we want our critical infrastructure to have the right security measures in place. Both public and private. Both traditional infrastructure, like energy and transport. And modern, like the internet platforms which all of us, and the digital economy, rely on every day.
Plus, of course, each country needs its own capability: including a Computer Emergency Response Team. I’m proud we’ve already got our own one in place for the EU Institutions. And we stand ready to play our part, cooperating with all others.
Let me make myself even clearer. If that Directive in the end does not make the necessary improvements, if it would have only a marginal impact on our trusted and secure networks: that will weaken your business, weaken our economy and maybe weaken our society too.
Reliability and trust are key European principles. Not only for society, but for economic competitiveness. A weak link will let down the whole network. A weak Directive will let down Europe.
The next few months will be crucial for this Directive: and I will be working closely with the Parliament and Member States to adopt it by the end of this year.
The Cyber Security Strategy is providing us with the right building blocks, but there is important work still to be done. A strong Directive is a European competitive advantage. A weak one, or none at all, would be a proof that democracy can’t manage technology.
I hope you and I all share that same ambition: let’s make Europe the world’s safest online space!
Thank you.
Tech-art patronage from Big Tech companies
*Well, there’s gonna be plenty for artists to complain about there, so might as well get with the complaining.
“Computer, or digital, art has been around for over 50 years: in the early 1960s Desmond Paul Henry and A. Michael Noll explored what artistic practices could be engendered through computer programs…”
(((I’m always pleased to see Desmond Paul Henry get a look-in — but let’s not forget that ol’ Des made his tech art with military-industrial ANALOG BOMB SIGHTS. Henry used military hardware that was designed, built, and used for the deliberate, hate-filled purpose of raining flaming death all over Europe, blasting and incinerating men, women, children, dogs, trees, churches, statuary… So, I don’t wanna give the Chocolate Factory a free ride just because they’re pouring line-item funds into code art. However, tech art doesn’t arise from an unearthly condition of unstained moral innocence. It’s grounded in the historical condition of technology and art generally. If we get art funding from fossil-fuel companies and colossal search-engine outfits, that’s because we gave them huge amounts of money. We made them into our Medici because that is the state of our culture now.)))
February 27, 2014
Augmented Reality: AllSee, bringing gesture recognition to all devices
*Okay, it’s a university lab prototype, but I love this gizmo simply for the cheery fact that it works by cannibalizing power from TV broadcasts.
*Press release follows:
***********************************************************************************************
FROM: Michelle Ma
University of Washington
mcma@uw.edu
(NOTE: researcher contact information at end)
For Immediate Release
Feb. 27, 2014
Battery-free technology brings gesture recognition to all devices
Mute the song playing on your smartphone in your pocket by flicking your index finger in the air, or pause your “This American Life” podcast with a small wave of the hand. This kind of gesture control for electronics could soon become an alternative to touchscreens and sensing technologies that consume a lot of power and only work when users can see their smartphones and tablets.
University of Washington computer scientists have built a low-cost gesture recognition system that runs without batteries and lets users control their electronic devices hidden from sight with simple hand movements. The prototype, called “AllSee,” uses existing TV signals as both a power source and the means for detecting a user’s gesture command.
“This is the first gesture recognition system that can be implemented for less than a dollar and doesn’t require a battery,” said Shyam Gollakota, a UW assistant professor of computer science and engineering. “You can leverage TV signals both as a source of power and as a source of gesture recognition.” (((I knew there was some good reason that I’ve been stewing in TV radiation for my entire lifetime.)))
The technology is set to appear April 2-4 at the Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation conference in Seattle.
The researchers built a small sensor that can be placed on an electronic device such as a smartphone. The sensor uses an ultra-low-power receiver to extract and classify gesture information from wireless transmissions around us. When a person gestures with the hand, it changes the amplitude of the wireless signals in the air. The AllSee sensors then recognize unique amplitude changes created by specific gestures.
Sensors use three to four times less power than existing gesture recognition systems by harvesting power from wireless transmissions. This allows for mobile devices to always have the gesture technology on and enabled.
Gesture recognition already is possible on some mobile devices, including the Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone. But users have to first manually enable the feature and be able to see the device for the gesture technology to work, and if left on, the gesture system quickly drains the phone’s battery. In contrast, AllSee consumes only tens of microwatts of power and can always be left on. The user could gesture at the phone in a pocket or handbag to change the volume or mute the phone without having to touch or see the phone.
This technology could allow sensors to be attached to household electronics, making it possible to interact with everyday objects using gestures and also connect them to the Internet and to each other in an “Internet of Things” world. (((Who can’t like it? Until they patent the gestures and sue you for scratching your nose, that is.)))
“Beyond mobile devices, AllSee can enable interaction with Internet of Things devices. These sensing devices are increasingly smaller electronics that can’t operate with usual keypads, so gesture-based systems are ideal,” said Bryce Kellogg, a UW doctoral student in electrical engineering.
The UW team tested AllSee’s capabilities on smartphones and battery-free sensors using eight different hand gestures such as pushing or pulling to zoom in and out. The prototype could correctly identify the gestures more than 90 percent of the time while performed more than 2 feet away from the device.
Researchers have tested the technology for response time and whether it can distinguish between other motions and those directed at it. They found that the technology’s response time is less than 80 microseconds, which is 1,000 times faster than blinking an eye.
“This enables a seamless and interactive experience for the user,” said Vamsi Talla, a UW doctoral student in electrical engineering. The researchers also designed a wake-up gesture that allows the system not to confuse unintentional motions for actual gestures.
This technology builds on previous work by Gollakota on leveraging Wi-Fi signals around us for gesture recognition around the home. Prior wireless gesture recognition techniques, however, consume tens of watts of power and aren’t suitable for mobile or Internet of Things devices.
The research is funded by a Google Faculty Research Award and the Washington Research Foundation.
###
For more information, contact Gollakota, Kellogg and Talla at allsee@cs.washington.edu.
AllSee website: http://allsee.cs.washington.edu/
Video: http://youtu.be/tJCQZxi_0AI
Related paper: http://allsee.cs.washington.edu/files...
Materials libraries
*That’s a peculiar article; it’s like a materials library for ideas about materials libraries.
http://www.digicult.it/news/material-addicts-when-open-access-becomes-a-cult/
(…)
” ”Material Libraries” dedicated to design and architecture have thus delivered significant results. Some of them are: Material Connexion (materialconnexion.com), Materia (materia.nl), Materialbiblioteket (materialbiblioteket.se), Design inSite (designinsite.dk), IdeMat (www.idemat.nl), Materials Library (materialslibrary.org.uk). Their success owes much to the content offer, specifically designed with a view to design, combining technical performance with formal, perceptive and environmental qualities, whose application is useful in design-oriented domains. The language of these platforms, the type of communication and graphics are cleverly designed to be able to be perceived as relating to the project’s sphere, as opposed to traditional technical-scientific contributions.
“Other than collections of materials on the web, many of these “material libraries” are also places of consultation, display and interface between designers and materials. Contexts in which you can enjoy a direct and multi-sensory fruition of materials. Other than being places where various materials can be selected and all possible information can be acquired without having to refer to individual companies, “material libraries” often present themselves as opportunities for contemplation, almost places of worship, with a strong emotional and inspiring potential for a new generation of “material addicts” designers.
“For a designer, a visit to the New York office of Material Connexion, which offers access to over 7000 innovative materials, is an unforgettable experience, through which to appreciate the magnificence of “making”, the infinite variety of shades and opportunities of translating design theories to subject. Some of the mentioned “materials libraries” are important hubs promoting meetings, exhibitions, competitions aimed at stimulating, engaging and “encouraging” innovation processes shared among designers, scientists and manufacturers of materials. Intersection hubs foreshadowing future scenarios of new forms in the real world….”
February 26, 2014
RoboBeast, the ruggedized, off-road 3DPrinter
*One of the best lessons about hacker labs and Maker spaces is that bits are just bits but atoms can break your bones.
http://www.zdnet.com/meet-the-robobeast-the-worlds-toughest-3d-printer-7000026767/
(…)
“Enter RoboBeast, a RepRap-derivative 3D printer designed by van As that’s made to be thrown into the back of a 4×4, driven deep into the African bush, and will work flawlessly first time when it’s set up.
“van As, a carpenter by trade, shot to fame a year ago following an article in Popular Mechanics. The feature described how, after losing four fingers on his right hand in a work-related accident, he collaborated with an American inventor to create RoboHand, a functioning prosthetic hand made from orthoplast and 3D printed parts.
“Since then, van As has been inundated with requests for help and interest from international press, physicians and NGOs. Helping those who were either born without fingers as a result of amniotic band syndrome or who have lost the use of their hands through work or war has become his life’s work.
“The last time RoboHand hit the headlines was in January, following a trip to South Sudan in which 3D printers and RoboHand parts were delivered to people injured during the civil war who couldn’t afford medical prosthetics through Project Daniel. Although van As himself wasn’t part of the trip, he was involved with Project Danial and through it became aware of the biggest problem with 3D printing in rural areas….”
Chairman Carper’s Statement on Insolvency of Major Bitcoin Exchange
*It can’t be good news for smash-the-state Bitcoin libertarians that I’m getting email of this kind. It’s unsolicited, I never heard from these US Senate staffers before, and as a blogger, I’m not even all that interested in Bitcoin. Obviously, the feds here wanna get heard. Given the situation, one can understand why.
*It’s a press release.
***********************************************************************************************
FOR RELEASE: February 25, 2014
CONTACT:
Emily Spain (Carper) emily_spain@carper.senate.gov
Jennie Westbrook (Carper) jennie_westbrook@hsgac.senate.gov
Chairman Carper’s Statement on Insolvency of Major Bitcoin Exchange
Carper: “U.S. policymakers and regulators can and should learn from this incident to protect consumers while also fostering law abiding commerce.”
WASHINGTON: Today, Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Carper (D-Del.) release the following statement on the news of the collapse of Mt. Gox, a major Bitcoin exchange based in Japan:
“The disturbing news today from Japan is a reminder of the damage potentially ill equipped and unregulated financial actors can wreak on unsuspecting consumers. U.S. policymakers and regulators can and should learn from this incident to protect consumers. For months, our Committee has been calling on law enforcement, industry, and relevant regulators to come to the table and engage in meaningful dialogue to provide clear rules of the roads for entrepreneurs, investors, and consumers. Without these rules, businesses can’t be successful and consumers can’t be protected. If today’s news is true, it is a sad violation of consumer trust, whether through malicious action or simple incompetence. Regardless, it’s unacceptable.
“My staff is working closely working with relevant federal agencies to determine what lessons can be learned from this failure to help ensure this does not happen here in the United States.
“As any industry matures it will face growing pains and there will be individuals who believe they can use the fog of uncertainty to cover up their follies. When it comes to policy, it is the responsibility of the federal government to steer the boat, not row the boat. Our Committee will continue to work closely with relevant U.S. government entities to steer the boat away from nefarious actors – and it’s up to legitimate, law abiding industry partners to row the boat into law abiding waters.”
###
(((I don’t know the name or story of the victim in the Google Glass here, but he deserves to be a bigger meme than Sad Keanu.)))
(((In further US Senate news about Bitcoin, a public reaction from Senator Manchin of West Virginia:)))
http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/fin...
http://www.businessinsider.com/senator-calls-for-bitcoin-ban-2014-2
MANCHIN DEMANDS FEDERAL REGULATORS BAN BITCOIN
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) sent a letter to federal regulators seeking a ban on Bitcoin, the virtual currency that is unregulated and unstable, and has been used in illicit activity, including drug trafficking and money laundering. Senator Manchin expressed concerns about the negative effect Bitcoin could have on America’s economy if this crypto-currency remains unregulated. The letter was sent to Secretary Lew, Chairwoman Yellen, Commissioner Curry, Acting Chairman Wetjen, Chairman Gruenberg, and Chairwoman White.
Please read the full text of Senator Manchin’s letter below.
Dear Secretary Lew, Chairwoman Yellen, Commissioner Curry, Acting Chairman Wetjen, Chairman Gruenberg, Chairwoman White:
I write today to express my concerns about Bitcoin. This virtual currency is currently unregulated and has allowed users to participate in illicit activity, while also being highly unstable and disruptive to our economy. For the reasons outlined below, I urge regulators to take appropriate action to limit the abilities of this highly unstable currency.
By way of background, Bitcoin is a crypto-currency that has gained notoriety in recent months due to its rising exchange value and relation to illegal transactions. Each Bitcoin is defined by a public address and a private key, thus Bitcoin is not only a token of value but also a method for transferring that value. It also means that Bitcoin provides a unique digital fingerprint, which allows for anonymous and irreversible transactions.
The very features that make Bitcoin attractive to some also attract criminals who are able to disguise their actions from law enforcement. Due to Bitcoin’s anonymity, the virtual market has been extremely susceptible to hackers and scam artists stealing millions from Bitcoins users. Anonymity combined with Bitcoin’s ability to finalize transactions quickly, makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to reverse fraudulent transactions.
Bitcoin has also become a haven for individuals to buy black market items. Individuals are able to anonymously purchase items such as drugs and weapons illegally. I have already written to regulators once on the now-closed Silkroad, which operated for years in supplying drugs and other black market items to criminals, thanks in large part to the creation of Bitcoin.
That is why more than a handful of countries, and their banking systems, have cautioned against the use of Bitcoin. Indeed, it has been banned in two different countries—Thailand and China—and South Korea stated that it will not recognize Bitcoin as a legitimate currency. Several other countries, including the European Union, have issued warnings to Bitcoin users as their respective governments consider options for regulating or banning its use entirely. While it is disappointing that the world leader and epicenter of the banking industry will only follow suit instead of making policy, it is high time that the United States heed our allies’ warnings. I am most concerned that as Bitcoin is inevitably banned in other countries, Americans will be left holding the bag on a valueless currency.
Our foreign counterparts have already understood the wide range of problems even with Bitcoin’s legitimate uses – from its significant price fluctuations to its deflationary nature. Just last week, Bitcoin prices plunged after the currency’s major exchange, Mt. Gox, experienced technical issues. Two days ago, this exchange took its website down and is no longer even accessible. This was not a unique event; news of plummeting or skyrocketing Bitcoin prices is almost a weekly occurrence. In addition, its deflationary trends ensure that only speculators, such as so-called “Bitcoin miners,” will benefit from possessing the virtual currency. There is no doubt average American consumers stand to lose by transacting in Bitcoin. As of December 2013, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) shows 1.3% inflation, while a recent media report indicated Bitcoin CPI has 98% deflation. In other words, spending Bitcoin now will cost you many orders of wealth in the future. This flaw makes Bitcoin’s value to the U.S. economy suspect, if not outright detrimental.
The clear ends of Bitcoin for either transacting in illegal goods and services or speculative gambling make me weary of its use. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee issued a report just this month stating, “There is widespread concern about the Bitcoin system’s possible impact on national currencies, its potential for criminal misuse, and the implications of its use for taxation.” Before the U.S. gets too far behind the curve on this important topic, I urge the regulators to work together, act quickly, and prohibit this dangerous currency from harming hard-working Americans.
Sincerely,
U.S. Joe Manchin III
United States Senator
“Cloudwash,” the BERG cloud-connected washing machine
*How could this possibly not be good? It’s like a speculative design seminar that cleans your dirty socks! It’s especially good that the hacked washing-machine is Italian. So elegant!
“Cloudwash – our prototype connected washing machine
“25th February 2014
“Cloudwash is a prototype connected washing machine. We prototype products at Berg to help us understand how our platform should work, and to encourage better design in connected things…”
http://bergcloud.com/case-studies/cloudwash/
February 25, 2014
Augmented Reality: The Verge getting hands-on with Google Project Tango
*It’s interesting to contemplate a device which just registers stuff in three dimensions, without bothering to do anything virtual or augmentational about “reality.” What’s that technical ability good for, once you drop the metaphysical computer-science implications? Nobody knows, really.
http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/25/5445258/this-is-googles-project-tango
(…)
“But what can you do with all of that data? That’s really up to app developers and is the reason Google is giving out 200 of these prototype devices to developers in the coming weeks. The devices that we saw were equipped with a few demonstration apps to show off some of the hardware’s capabilities. One of the apps was able to display a distance heatmap on top of what the camera sees, layering blue colors on far away objects and red colors on things that are close up. Another took the data from the image sensors and paired with the devices standard motion sensors and gyroscopes to map out paths of movement down to one percent accuracy and then plot that onto an interactive 3D map.
“Perhaps the most impressive demo was an app that was able to capture a 3D model of a scene in real time and draw it on the display as you moved the device around the room. It’s pretty amazing to see a three-dimensional model of the table in front of you get drawn in real time in just a few seconds by a smartphone….”
(((What a cool sticker from the ol’ Chocolate Factory, eh? I’d like to have those on every object I possess, shoes, frying pan, necktie, whatever.)))
World Economic Forum Global Risks 2014
*Such an interesting video document. It’s futuristic and speculative, but there’s nothing in there about opportunity, progress or improvement. It’s entirely about risk, fear, and the protection of a gravely imperiled status quo.
*It’s not that the WEF can do much else by themselves, really; they’re just a seminar for rich guys and their guests, and boy do they worry a lot. The ideal WEF swag-trinket is a big briefing-book full of close analysis of misery and crisis. Their cure-all, as this video suggests, would be a fraternal and purposive unity of business, government and civil society that just doesn’t exist at all in modern times; there’s no new-world-order to appeal to, so the road ahead is nothing but this quadrant catalog of axle-wrecking potholes.
*It reminds me of the way the Left used to gather to petition and obstruct the World Trade Organization, as if these minor-league neoliberal trade racketeers were capable of actual administration. Now the WTO doesn’t do anything, and who misses them? If the WEF closed down nobody would miss them either; they’re like vacationers setting up lawn-chairs for a weekend in an imaginary castle.
http://www.weforum.org/reports/global-risks-2014-report
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GlobalRisks_Report_2014.pdf
Bruce Sterling's Blog
- Bruce Sterling's profile
- 1195 followers
