I have a post on space politics at the WashingtonWatch.com blog. “If you think Washington politics is restricted to the debates among politicians, think again.”
I’m sure TLFer Berin Szoka knows this better than I do.
Articles by Jim Harper 
Jim is the Director of Information Policy Studies at The Cato Institute, the Editor of Web-based privacy think-tank Privacilla.org, and the Webmaster of WashingtonWatch.com. Prior to becoming a policy analyst, Jim served as counsel to committees in both the House and Senate.
Follow @Jim_Harper
Arts+Labs, a new coalition “committed to a better, safer internet that works for both artists and consumers,” has written up Friday’s Cato Institute book forum on The Crime of Reason on their ArtLab blog. Author Robert B. Laughlin of Stanford University will present his book, then we’ll have comments from Tom Sydnor of the Progress and Freedom Foundation.
I’ve gotten a glimpse at the slides Dr. Laughlin will be using, and this Nobel laureate in physics also turns out to be something of an artist.
Join us Friday to learn what this drawing is all about.
Members of Congress whose votes changed, allowing the financial services bailout bill to pass.
Information Week has an article in its September 29th issue that illustrates why regulatory interventions to temper Google’s dominance are folly – things like antitrust scrutiny of the Yahoo! deal. But it takes a little understanding of how markets work.
The article lists all kinds of innovative startups that plan to challenge Google and take the field of search in all kinds of new directions. “The burst of activity over the past 12 months is more befitting a land rush than a market dominated by one powerhouse,” it says. Read it. There’s lots of interesting stuff going on.
But it’s not going just because. It’s going on because there’s a dominant player in the market. It’s going on because venture capitalists, innovators, and entrepreneurs can see the large profit that Google is making, and they want a piece of it. Excess profits act as an invitation and a spur to others, bringing new businesses and business ideas to that market.
If profits are “managed” and “brought under control” by curtailing a company’s ability to make deals (like Google would make with Yahoo!), that signal – that there is money to be made here – dissipates. Fewer innovators come to the market.
A second signal also goes out: “If you come up with something truly revolutionary in this field, we’re going to reward you with a haircut.” That dissuades investors – telling them that high profits will not come to them if they produce something great.
It’s a shame that the federal government is working to stanch the flow of innovation coming to search by going after Google.
I received the most fascinating email from a group called ASTRA just now. I don’t think I ever even heard of them before, but apparently I’m on their mailing list. ASTRA is the Alliance for Science and Technology Research in America, a nonprofit, tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Most people know that non-profits are not allowed to lobby for passage or failure of legislation. So let me now share with you ASTRA’s email to me. It may not be orginated by ASTRA and there could be several innocent explanations, but on the surface this looks like a clear violation of non-profit rules by an over-excited Washington, D.C. supplicant group.
[Update: Cooler heads have it right. Non-profits are allowed to spend some percentage of their funds on lobbying. What I’ve noted here is an unclear violation of non-profit rules. What’s clear is that ASTRA is a big-government supplicant group not to be trusted by proponents of liberty and limited government.]
I recorded a video interview about the financial services bailout with Mark “Rzzn” Hopkins and Sean P. Aune of Mashable recently, focused particularly on the tech sector. We focused on making sense of things, something that hasn’t happened in Congress yet.
I think it’s pretty informative, and somewhat calming, as it should be. I’m less and less convinced that there’s a “crisis” that taxpayers ought to take pay for taking care of.
If you find the title of this post provocative, you’ll be interested in a Cato Institute book forum on Friday, October 10th.
In The Crime of Reason, Nobel laureate in physics Robert Laughlin argues that intellectual property laws and government security demands threaten the development of new knowledge. Without change, we risk bequeathing our heirs a world where knowledge is criminalized and our intellectual tradition of unfettered inquiry is lost.
The event should be a fascinating inquiry into the role of information and information rules in our society. Thomas Syndor of the Progress & Freedom Foundation will comment. I’ll be your humble moderator. It’s noon on Friday, October 10th, at the Cato Institute, 1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. Luncheon to follow.
You can register for the event here.
I’ve posted a copy of the proposed bailout legislation online in html format, which is easier to read, copy, and paste. Considering its size and significance, I urge you to review it and share it with others.
I pointed out before that my employer, the Cato Institute, has several experts on the bailout, and media producer Caleb Brown has ably drawn them out. Give a listen to his podcasts with Bill Niskanen, Jagadeesh Gokhale, Arnold Kling, and Gerald P. O’Driscoll. [all mp3 format]
There are a couple of elements of the legislation where I might add some insight, so here goes.
Congressional Oversight? Nope. $700 Billion Spent
The bill made available Sunday devotes a good deal of verbiage to oversight of the proposed $700 billion bailout. But it doesn’t do anything to prevent that money being spent.
Continue reading →
The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.