by Karl Widerquist | Jul 11, 2018 | Opinion, The Indepentarian
This piece was originally published in Cake: The Nonmusic Music Magazine in 1996. I reproduce it here because the original source is not available online.
“The written word is alive…” but the book is dead, at least the bookstore anyway, and so is the CD, the record store, the VCR, and the video rental shop.
Recently I heard that record stores will soon manufacture CDs on the spot. It’s already possible for record stores to access a database through the internet that has the digital code for any CD in existence. All retailers need to do to generate a CD on demand is “press” the disc, laser print the cover, and insert both into a jewel box. Instead of walking around a store looking at covers, you’ll sit at a computer terminal browsing cover art on a screen and listen to music samples on headphones.
And this is only the beginning. It would not be much more difficult to put together a do-it-yourself CD using a home computer and a color laser printer. Assuming your computer will have enough memory, you can download the music (the digital information) from a central database onto your hard drive, and, if you feel like, you can print the cover–or maybe not. Just call it up on the monitor whenever you want. Or, you could sign up for an online service that lets you play any song ever recorded without having to download the information onto your hard drive. The digital information would come from that same database directly to your speakers. Many people take their activities in the realm of music downloads over to sites like Avoidcensorship which gives them access to Pirate Bay proxies so they can tap into a near limitless supply of on-demand music and film.
The CD as we know and collect it today is dead. By this same logic, the video is dead; newspapers and magazines are dead; the book is dead. Barnes & Nobles, Blockbuster Video, the corner newsstand-all dead.
As the bass player for one of New York’s most underground bands, my immediate reaction was, “Great, this means it will be as easy as to get world-wide music distribution as it is to post something on the internet.” Right now an artist who wants to get his work to the public has to find someone to risk the cost of inventory and shipping. The internet would eliminate these costs. Every book, movie, and song ever made will be compiled on one big database and available to anyone with the hardware and the cash. 
Since most of these books, movies, and songs will be crap, how will you find what you like? Aside from randomly browsing through the voluminous compost heap of information, I can think of two ways: hype and word of mouth. Hype–corporate advertising–creates superstars; word of mouth creates the underground scene. Hype has and always will be around, but the internet, by reducing barriers between artists and listeners, will help the small-time, underground, niche-market, limited-appeal, sub-alternative artist, or whatever you want to call it, flourish.
But then I thought about it some more. “Sure it’ll be great for subversive artists but what will all of this accessible information do for society at large?” Long ago people were born into a culture; now you choose your culture. What is the impact of each person customizing his or her cultural diet? I call it the specialization or the niche-marketization of culture.
In the stone age, the tribe was isolated from each other and members of a particular tribe knew the same songs and stories and shared common knowledge, experiences, and reference points for communication. More recently, a few centuries ago, every European who could read had read the same books: the Bible, the Greek Classics, and the major local authors.
Today we all read different things–the sports column, romance novels, sci-fi–you name it. There’s so much information available that you can’t possibly learn it all, so we go after whatever catches our attention. Whatever niche you choose has its own shared knowledge, vocabulary, and even a canon of literature. I bet there are more Star Trek books in print today than all books on all subjects in print 500 years ago. But, the more we pursue our niche, the less we share with people in our immediate vicinity.
Some Jesus-Freak-Sci-Fi-Geek translated the Bible into Klingon; his professor might not even know (or care) what Klingon is. A teenage girl in Turkey killed herself when she heard about Kurt Cobain’s suicide. Her neighbor who spends his time studying the Koran–like the guy sitting next to me on the subway–probably never heard of Kurt Cobain. A thirty-year-old single woman producing the local TV news in Minneapolis probably has more in common with a newswriter in Seoul, Korea, than with the family in the apartment downstairs.
Just when it looked like global communication would join the world into one monolithic culture, we’ve started to split into smaller cultures again, this time based on what you know instead of where you live.
New age, environmentalism, Gay rights, Socialism, entrepreneurialism, right to life, right to death, turning fifty-ism, natural law, wicken-ism, and thousands of other categories–there are people who make these things their identities, while their next-door neighbors know nothing about them. These categories may not define a person as much as race and nationality do, but they’re getting more important all the time. The buffet is open: Choose your culture.
None of this is good or bad; it’s a fact of life. Regional cultures were the result of isolated communities. Niche-culture is the result of a world with abundant information and sophisticated communication. In some ways, it’s better. We can learn about each other and learn from each other–we don’t have to retreat into our own niche-cultures or lose all sense of shared experience. We don’t have to evolve into a society of strangers. We need a balance between the niche and the community–some common denominators that everyone gets. But what? The first task is to get people from all niches to agree on what these denominators might be. I’ll start by posting this question on the net.
-Karl Widerquist, New York, NY 1996
by Andre Coelho | Jul 10, 2018 | News
Picture credit to: The Conversation.
Approval of a universal basic income (UBI) has risen sharply in the United States. Karl Widerquist cites a 10-year-old poll showing that only 12% of Americans approved an UBI at that time. Now that number is 48%, according to a Gallup poll, conducted at the end of 2017 (on around 3000 adult US citizens).
The cited poll also shows that women show more support than men (52 and 43% respectively), age strongly correlates with that support (54% for youngsters from 18 to 35 years-old down to 38% for people with more than 66 years of age), education level also has an influence (51% for people with less than a bachelor’s degree versus 42% for people with a bachelor’s degree or higher), as well as political orientation (28% for republican voters up to 65% for democratic voters). That same report finds that 73% of Americans think artificial intelligence (AI) will suppress more jobs than those it creates, which might in part justify these results, compared to those 10 years ago.
However, Gallup’s poll shows that, for those in support of UBI, more than half (54%) wouldn’t be available to pay higher taxes in order to finance it. This is more evident in women (57%) then men (51%), and there is a strong educational effect: the higher the educational degree, the more willing supporters of UBI are to pay higher taxes to have it implemented (64% for those with a bachelor’s degree or higher versus 38% for those with less than a bachelor’s degree). Democrats are also more likely (55%) to pay higher taxes to get UBI than republicans (29%). In spite of this result, 80% of all supporters think companies benefitting from AI should pay more taxes (than they do now) in order to finance the UBI policy.
This results for the United States are, in a way, similar to those from a recent survey in Finland, ran by researcher Ville-Veikko and professor Heikki Hiilamo. In the latter, support for UBI, based on the definition by Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN), was also very close to the 50% mark (51%), which clearly shows that the public remains divided when it comes to UBI. Not only in Finland, but also in the United States, even though the survey questions were posed somewhat differently in these two surveys (note 1).
Note 1 – in Gallup’s survey the exact question was “Do you support or not support a universal basic income program as a way to help Americans who lose their jobs because of advances in artificial intelligence?”. In the Ville-Veikko and professor Heikki Hiilamo survey there was no reference to jobs or artificial intelligence.
More information at:
RJ Reinhart, “Public split on basic income for workers replaced by robots”, Gallup News, February 26th 2018
Annie Nova, “Universal basic income: US support grows as Finland ends its trial”, CNBC, May 1st 2018
André Coelho, “Finland: Finland shares unconditional money, but the public view remains polarized”, Basic Income News, February 12th 2018
by Andre Coelho | Jul 7, 2018 | News
Muhammad Yunus. Picture credit to: Yunus negócios sociais (Brazil)
Muhammad Yunus, the 2006 Peace Nobel Prize laureate and founder of the Grameen Bank, is very concerned about artificial intelligence (AI). His fear revolves around the prospects of generalized unemployment, as machines replace most of traditionally human tasks.
Yunus also, like a few other economists, including Nobel Prize winners, has reached the conclusion that one of the downsides of AI is the devaluation of the human being, in relation to machines. This, he argues, will take away the ability of many people, even more than today, to care for their own basic needs. Hence, Yunus concludes, a universal basic income must be implemented now, before artificially intelligent algorithms start treating human beings as if they were “cockroaches”.
He also calls for legislation which can circumscribe AI’s intervention in society, recalling that guidelines exist for many other aspects of our reality, such as medicine, food, engineering, and so on. That would not be a deterrent to the development of novel AI applications, but only the introduction of safety mechanisms that would prevent AI creations from killing people, or making decisions for them abusively, for instance. If humans have created these technologies, then humans can, and should, direct them to socially positive goals, such as healthcare.
According to Muhammad Yunus, basic income will be an important means to bring out the natural entrepreneur in every human being. Humans can and will do many things, given the right conditions. Yunus is convinced, and his Grameen Bank stands out as proof, that people need not be “mercenaries of the whole system”, and that schools should create “life ready” young people, rather than “job ready” ones.
More information at:
Sangeetha Chengappa, “It is time to introduce Universal Basic Income, says Nobel Peace laureate Muhammad Yunu”, The Hindu Business Line, July 2nd 2018
Kate McFarland, “SCOTLAND, UK: Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz cautions again Basic Income during BBC interview”, Basic Income News, November 8th 2017
Kate McFarland, “Nobel Laureate Economist Augus Deaton endorses basic income”, Basic Income News, May 18th 2016
by Toru Yamamori | Jul 5, 2018 | News
Scottish Parliament building.
As reported before on Basic Income News, the Scottish Government has committed to help local government advance their Universal Basic Income (UBI) experiments in four local municipalities (Glasgow, Edinburgh, Fife and North Ayrshire).
Here is an update. On the 20th June 2018, the first official meeting of ‘the Cross-Party Group in the Scottish Parliament on Basic Income’ was held in the Parliament. The group has been formed to examine the options for a basic income as a policy for reform of the current social security system in Scotland, including, where appropriate, its potential sources of funding. It will be co-chaired by Ivan McKee MSP (a member of the Scottish Parliament) and Alex Rowley MSP.
A Scottish Government spokesperson informed on the latest general situation as follows.
“Scottish Ministers have awarded funding to four local authorities in Scotland to undertake feasibility studies and to develop pilot models. This funding covers the financial years 2018-19 and 2019-20. The local authorities will submit a final business case, including proposed pilot models, to Scottish Ministers for consideration by March 2020 – this will set out full details of the ethical, legislative, financial and practical implementation of the pilot on the ground. A decision will be made at this stage whether to contribute to funding the proposed pilots.“
For more details, check Basic Income Scotland.
For more information:
Sara Bizarro, “Scotland: Scottish Government provides £250k to support feasibility work on BI pilots”, Basic Income News, December 2nd 2017
Kate McFarland, “Scotland, UK: Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz cautions again Basic Income during BBC interview”, Basic Income News, November 8th 2017
Claire Bott, “Scotland’s First Minister announces basic income experiments”, September 16th 2017
This article was reviewed by André Coelho.
by Karl Widerquist | Jul 4, 2018 | Opinion, The Indepentarian
This piece was originally published in Cake: The Nonmusic Music Magazine in 1996. I reproduce it here because the original source is not available online. The Magzine’s format was to ask a musician to write on a theme other than music. The theme of this issue, which initially perplexed me but which led me into some very emotional areas, was “Toys.”
What do I know about toys? I haven’t thought about toys in years. But, there was a time they were a big deal to me. What’s that line from Puff the Magic Dragon,
Dragons live forever not so little boys,
Pirate ships and dragon’s tails make way for other toys.
Growing up is a series of giving up the toys of one age for the toys of the next age.
The first toys I can remember playing with when I was about 3, when I wasn’t pretend playing, were stuffed animals, Matchbox cars, and wooden blocks. This was after I had already given up the toddler’s toys I don’t even remember. I loved to build things with blocks. I built roads and entire cities, and I’d push my Match Box cars around my building-block roads, imagining what the drivers were doing. The urban planning might have been simple but there was a complex story behind it.
Some psychologists believe that boys build towers and girls build forts and other enclosures. If that’s true, it took me a while to grow into my masculinity. After a prolonged road period, I started erecting towers, once I started, I just wanted more blocks so I could build bigger towers with RC excavators similar to what you could find more information about at hereon.biz.
In elementary school, bats and balls became toys of mine; I learned to play football and baseball. But, playing sports and playing with toys are two different things. Sports doesn’t involve pretending, which was the only kind of playing I knew as a preschooler. In elementary school, sports and make-believe toys had a peaceful coexistence. I played with Lego blocks, toy guns, learned to ride a bike and how to swim. Even swimming was a make-believe game. I pretended I was a diver searching for sunken treasure. When I was 7 or 8 years old I built model ships. A few years later I blew them up with firecrackers. This was about when I gave up the stuffed animals. I also drew maps of imaginary places, with imaginary stories behind them. This might sound strange, but there are a lot of kids who draw maps. It’s just another way to pretend.
In this Nov. 21, 2016, photo, a boy clutches a toy duck as he views a sculpture depicting the classic children’s story “Make Way for Ducklings” at an exhibit at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. The new exhibition is devoted to Robert McCloskey, the award-winning author of 1941’s “Make Way for Ducklings” and other children’s classics. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)
By the time junior high came around, sports edged out make-believe. I stuck with the Legos ‘till eighth grade, and I still drew maps, but, by that time playing mostly meant playing sports. I preferred backyard disorganized sports to the organized kind because they were less pressure-filled and competitive. But I played organized sports anyway, just ‘cause that was what you did. I still swam, but that had become a sport too. No more deep-sea diver, my friends and I played a vicious brand of tennis-ball tag.
By the time I started high school It was clear I was no jock, and I lost interest in most participation sports. I skied, played board games, cards, euchre, dungeons and dragons, and video games. Correspondingly, although board games like risk were always my favorite, I was happy to play a wide range of different board games! My life changed in my sophomore year when the car and the guitar became my toys. We got a band together. I even knew every part of the guitar parts infographic that I was shown a while back. It may come in handy one day, just like it did back then.
We drove a half an hour to the nearest big city: South Bend, Indiana. Remember when going out for a movie and a pizza or just driving around, was just so cool? It seems so childish now, but compared to what we had been doing up to this point it was just so adult. Only a few years earlier getting together with friends meant playing. Now getting together with friends meant going out for dinner and sitting and talking. For me, there was still one imaginary toy, maps. I drew them throughout high school, whenever class got boring I’d whip out my pencil and draw a world. I finally stopped in college when I had to take notes in pen.
In college, the car became less of a toy and more of a tool. Still the guitar, video games (more than ever), board games, and now beer. I suppose drugs and alcohol are the toys of choice for big kids; a poor substitute for all the imagination we used to play with. This brings me back to “Puff the Magic Dragon” which is about a boy outgrowing his toys. Although Peter Paul and Mary deny it, on another level it’s about a marijuana smoker going on to harder drugs [puff the magic drag, on Jackie’s Papers], but in one way those are the same thing.
Now I’m Thirty-one. I still play the guitar, drive a car, ride a bike, daydream, and I still drink, but not like I did in college. Not long ago I was visiting my five-year-old nephew and he wanted me to play with him. I showed him how to build a road for Matchbox cars out of wooden blocks, and that was fun. When the road was built, I thought we were done, but he wanted to play with it. He told me to, “Take this car and pretend you’re going to work.” But, I couldn’t do it. I was bored. I could still build, but I couldn’t play. I tried to draw a map – couldn’t do it. Right now, I could build a tower or a model, and I could play football or baseball, but somewhere along there I lost my ability to pretend.
I forgot how to play with toys.
-Karl Widerquist, New York, NY 1996
