Arsehole Security At Festivals

I understand that the moral majority with their ignorant lives find it hard to understand youth culture. I understand that for many the idea of 15000 people getting wrecked in a field listening to loud repetitive beats is such an alien concept that it may actually appear threatening or dangerous. I understand that for the neighbouring villages of large outdoor music events the increased traffic and noise can probably be considered a disturbance.

I can understand these viewpoints, but that doesnt mean to say i think they are right. When an event costs £125 a ticket, its fair to expect a certain amount of freedom, after all decent people go to these places to enjoy themselves, to get away from the endless monotony of day to day life. In this particular case i am referring to Glade Festival but this could apply to any number of similar events.

What i find hard to understand is the logic that security at this festival need to be as bad as they are. Upon arriving at the site we were engulfed by a gang acting like hustlers clearly intent on trying to see what they could confiscate. The fact that we ended up haggling over how much of our beer they were going to take only made the whole situation even worse. I use the word "gang" here intentionally because thats exactly how they behaved, not like the reasonable responsible agents of the law they are surely meant to be.

So what kind of logic goes into this decision? I know its not the organisers idea to employ these wannabe thugs, they know as well as we do that the best people for the job are the sort of people that attend these events. Clearly some sort of authority has decided that tougher security is required. I just cannot understand how anyone smart enough to be in a position of authority could really think that security like that should placed in such a role.

Worse still, though was the sheer number of security guards wandering around the place Saturday night, no doubt looking to see what else they could confiscate and how much force they could use in the process. All those hi-vis jackets (once a classic piece of raving attire) create a real feeling of tension and paranoia at the event.

Well, clearly at festies, clubs, free-parties etc there is a lot of activities that are (unfairly and wrongly) illegal. I'm not going to get into a discussion about the law here. But the powers at be make a lot of money out of taxes and licenses through these events, even (albiet indirectly) through free-parties, so they are in no great hurry to stop them happening. But by treating us this way, the message is clear:

WHAT WE ARE DOING IS ILLEGAL AND WRONG!!!!

These thugs are employed for one real purpose, to try and spoil our weekends. They are there to remind us that the system is more powerful than us, that we must ultimately conform and that the few pleasures we allow ourselves to indulge in should be avoided in order to fit in with society and the system.

Every time a free-party gets shut down, every time another noise restriction gets put in place, every time another mind-enhancing substance gets criminalized, we are reminded that we are the outcasts, the outlaws. Freedom only really exists for those that do not want us to be free.

However, we can still challenge the system, many of us do every day in our own little way. Morality is the only law that really matters in this world and i know myself and many people like me are on the right side of it.

Internet Privacy... Or Lack Of

Funny, just as i was feeling like i wanted to talk about this subject i couldn't help but notice MySpace's disclaimer here:

Warning - Please be aware that MySpace is accessed by thousands of users every day; since you do not know every user on the MySpace site, excercise caution when posting personally identifiable information.

In light of recent events this warning could not be more important. I'm talking about the recent court ruling in favour of the TV corporation Viacom having access to all of YouTube's information regarding what EVERY user has viewed, and their IP addresses.

So basically if you have used YouTube to watch an illegally uploaded recording of a TV show or movie then they will know about it. Whether you will be prosecuted is highly unlikely (unless you were the one who uploaded it in the first place), but you may well find yourself, or your computer at least, on some sort of database of unlawful viewers.

The reality, as far as i can see, is that in this one case alone we dont have any real worry about anything on an individual level. What is of serious concern is the blatant abuse of our rights that is the result of this ruling. This is surely the first stage in what could well become a Big Brother situation whereby we have no privacy online. If our every virtual movement is logged and can be seen by anyone with the appropriate power (governments, corporations etc) then can we ever be truly free online?

I dread to think how many different databases have my details, think about forums, shops, mailing lists, even MySpace itself. So many organisations know my name, address, date of birth, answers to secret questions etc. The whole world potentially can find out my opinions on stuff just by reading these blogs or other forum posts. I've always been careful not to incriminate myself because every word i type into these sites could well form a permanent record of my life.

There are a lot of people oblivious to this though, social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook are used as a means for people to record their life for anyone to see. We are told that we should be careful, after all there are all manner of undesirables online that prey on potential victims through sites like this. What we are not told is that these undesirables could very well include governments and corporations.

If this latest ruling is anything to go by, we could find that in the future our privacy online will become practically non-existent.

On a similar note there are more and more people being prosecuted or at the very least receiving warnings for filesharing. Without wanting to get into a discussion about the morality of filesharing, again i can only see that there is a point when the privacy of the individual becomes compromised, and for many it already has.

So what can we do? I'm sure, if there isn't already, there will be a number of online petitions against this ruling however "signing" one of these is just another case of putting yourself on a database. Lets not forget how anti-terrorism laws are being created all the time solely to deny the people the right to protest. By no means am i suggesting we should passively sit here in silence, i would encourage anyone who has a view on this subject to make it known. If there are petitions, make sure you know fully what you are signing.

Search Google for more information, after all this stems from a lawsuit AGAINST Google. Most importantly think before you type, especially on here and Facebook. There are a lot of good, honest people whose lives are not entirely legit, there are a great number of laws that are unfair and do not serve the public. The internet is built upon free speech, by no means should we let this ruling become a form of censorship, but we do need to be smart. Big business has become threatened by the shift in balance the internet has given the people. Money is all-powerful, but the world is changing, the music and film industries are changing. The outcome of these changes is, as yet, unknown but the corporations won't go down without a fight.

Maybe i have just incriminated myself with this blog, but i refuse to sit here in silence, i can however choose which words i use.