How committed to changing the world are you? Are you? Am I?

I have seen a lot of posts expressing outrage over one thing or another via social media lately, and it’s nothing new, people have been doing it for years now. But how many of these people do anything more than share, re-share, and comment?

I have been posting my fair share of dissenting opinions, I’ve commented plenty, and I’ve re-shared many dissenting opinions with which I agree. But what else have I done?

Nothing.

Nothing except try to make people aware of what’s happening, but I have yet to make anything happen with my own actions, and that needs to change.

That needs to change.

There is so much more that needs to be done, so much more than one can do with armchair activism, that I can no longer rely solely on dissemination of information as a way to participate in effecting change.

We all know the world is on fire, it is burning around us, and yet all many of us seem to do is talk about a need for buckets and hoses. How many of us are running to fill buckets or charge hoses? How many of us are trying to put out the fire?

Big Business, Big Banking, and Big Government are systematically destroying our economy, stripping us of our Rights, and threatening our way of life. The lifeblood of the American experience, small business, has little chance of succeeding as a result. We have lost countless American jobs to mega-corporations exporting work oversees and importing products manufactured elsewhere. Bailout funds intended for the American infrastructure, your tax dollars, are being handed over to banks and corporate entities which paved the way for economic collapse by the very politicians that green lighted their activities. And most of these mega-corporations skirt around paying taxes with loophole after loophole after loophole.

Watching my children growing up in this world, a world that looks not at them as people but rather as profit potential, I am forced to ask myself how I can sit here and cry out for change when it is my responsibility to be that change. How can I expect anything to get better for them, if I am unwilling to stand up and scream ENOUGH!!

I am sick and tired of being sick and tired. I do not want this for my children. I want them to grow up with the same hopes and dreams that I grew up with, but I want their dreams to have a chance of coming true. I want them to see a world with possibilities, not a world with inherent dangers, a world with roadblocks and barriers and cordons. I want them to enjoy Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

So from this moment forth, I will be looking for ways I can become more directly involved in effecting change, being change. I will undertake this journey with the hope of giving my children, your children, the chance to live in a better world than this.

Will you come with me?

.

How committed to changing the world are you? Are you? Am I? is a post from: The Burnman Experience

What is Diaspora?

Diaspora is the social network that puts you in control of your information. You decide what you’d like to share, and with whom. You retain full ownership of all your information, including friend lists, messages, photos, and profile details.

Share what you want, with who you want.

– http://blog.joindiaspora.com/what-is-diaspora.html

Burnman’s Diaspora* Plugin for WordPress

I have been messing about with Diaspora* (the “main pod” at http://joindiaspora.com) for a few weeks, and though that it would be easier to share content I find about the web there if people could simply click a button on a blog article, so I decided to write a WordPress plugin that requires no editing of code by the blogger.  Want to see it in action?  Take a look at the bottom of this post!  The plugin is live on this site.

For more infor­ma­tion about the plu­gin, or to down­load it for free, click [ here ]!

WordPress Plugin: Burnman’s Diaspora* Button is a post from: The Burnman Experience

I am a pretty big fan of the social media plat­form Sub­jot, so I thought I would add a shar­ing but­ton to my blog to help pro­mote the ser­vice, and to pro­mote my blog by allow­ing an easy way for Sub­jot users to com­ment about my arti­cles.  Orig­i­nally, I was going to add the but­ton to my Word­Press theme, but decided to write a plu­gin so oth­ers can enjoy the but­ton as well.

For more information about the plugin, or to download it for free, click [ here ]!

WordPress Plugin: Burnman’s Subjot Button is a post from: The Burnman Experience

Utilizing a different social network than Google+ will not solve the problem which many people wish to address. Google’s policy, and Google’s apparent desire to become an “identity service,” will have a growing impact on the Internet as a whole.

Let’s take privacy and personal safety off the table for the moment. If Google goes forward with integrating Google+ profiles with search, ranking sites up or down based on whether the site author has a Google+ profile or whether or not their profile is verified, people’s real life income could be effected. Web traffic may very well be diverted away from relevant and trustworthy sites simply because the author does not have a Google+ account.  Google’s dominance in Search could allow Google to effectively hold search based traffic hostage, forcing those doing business online to create a Google+ profile, or lose web traffic related revenue.

And what of the people that have been using Google services under one pseudonym or another for years that could suddenly find themselves with a Google Identity Crisis because they are now required to have a Google Profile (now known as the Google+ profile), regardless of whether they would have used Google+ at all? If Google is going to move forward with integration of Google+ into every Google branded service (as has been hinted at, if not stated outright), wouldn’t that eventually be the case?  I imagine it would be a bit overwhelming to segment the TOS by individual Google service, not to mention very confusing for the average user.

A great many of us have been using, promoting, even evangelizing Google services for years. I myself have been doing so since Google Search first hit the scene. And after all this time, building the brand with advertising revenue generated from search results full of pseudonymous and anonymous websites, Google tells us all to piss off.

Someone commented that the “Nymwars” movement is not a constructive effort, that there isn’t enough give and take, that it shouldn’t be “us against them.”  Well, it is “us against them.”  But I can guarantee that for many pseudonym/anonymity supporters, it did not start out this way, and the “Nyms” certainly did not initiate the sentiment.  Take me for example.  I was the biggest Google fan I knew before seeing the naming policy, and how it would be enforced, and the conflicting statements made by Google about pseudonymous eventuality and identity service providing. Now I find myself looking for alternatives to services I have used since last century. I find myself fighting against the tide, trying to inform others of what is at stake, and taking a stand for what I know is right.

The “Nymwars Movement” isn’t simply about privacy and personal security, though both play a significant role. This is about the bigger picture where Google potentially damages a much larger segment of the Internet due to coupling Google+ profiles with Google’s dominance in Search while attempting to generate the largest database of personal information and behavioral patterns ever seen. All while co-funding ventures with the CIA aimed at using just that sort of data to predict the future (it still amazes me that this is actually true). This is about Google attempting to become the Internet rather than be part of it.

This is what Google promised us…

“We have a bias in favor of people’s right to free expression in everything we do. We are driven by a belief that more information generally means more choice, more freedom and ultimately more power for the individual. We believe that it is important for free expression that people have the right to remain anonymous if they choose.”

–Rachel Whetstone, Google Vice President of Global Communications & Public Affairs, April 2009

And this is what we have been given…

The command of the old despotisms was Thou Shalt Not. The command of the totalitarians was Thou Shalt. Our command is Thou Art. No one whom we bring to this place ever stands out against us. Everyone is washed clean.

–from George Orwell’s “1984”

You will likely see a lot of frustration, a lot of anger, a lot of disbelief, venting, ranting, and raving, over Google’s identity policies. This is no different than any other movement throughout history. People are expressing what they are feeling. That doesn’t mean they are not also trying to do something constructive.  Sometimes simply holding one’s ground is as constructive as one can be.

Google Plus and the Big Picture is a post from: The Burnman Experience

Well, the old saying, “The third time’s the charm” may not appear to be true in Google’s latest attempt to enter the social media market.  Google is now testing out their spiffy new social networking platform called Google Plus (often referred to as Google+) in what they call a “limited field trial,” but it looks as though they may end up embroiled in more controversy related to privacy.  Let’s take a brief look at Google’s social history, and then focus on Google’s latest social media experiment:

Google’s First Attempt

Google took its first step into social media with the launch of Orkut in January of 2004, named for its creator, Google employee Orkut Büyükkökten.  Within months, Google would be sued by the social-networking software company Affinity Engines for allegedly stealing much of Orkut’s source code by a former engineer.  Who was the engineer?  That would be Orkut Büyükkökten.  Google sued Affinity Engines one year later, alleging Affinity Engines used source code created by Google employee Orkut Büyükkökten.

The service never really gained traction in the United States, and finds the majority of its users residing in Brazil and India.  The service is now hosted in Brazil.  Orkut had its share of issues over the years including privacy concerns, racism, spam, and some pretty significant security flaws.  Orkut is still in operation, though only 1.4% of its traffic originates from the United States.

Google Gets Buzzed

Google took a second swipe at the social market in 2010 with the launch of Google Buzz, but the service was met with controversy from the very beginning.  The service was integrated into Gmail, and due to some unfortunate default privacy settings, allowed personal information to be disclosed without the consent of the user such as lists of Gmail contacts the user interacted with most.

It didn’t take long for Google to find itself embroiled in legal trouble.  A class action lawsuit against Google was filed alleging that Google Buzz violated Federal privacy laws, with the settlement resulting in Google setting up an US $8.5 million dollar fund to award groups that support privacy and education online.  The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission against Google which resulted in an investigation which found Google guilty of violating its own privacy policies and falsely claiming to handle personal information originating from the European Union correctly.  On March 30, 2011, the FTC published the following:

FTC Charges Deceptive Privacy Practices in Google’s Rollout of Its Buzz Social Network

Google Agrees to Implement Comprehensive Privacy Program to Protect Consumer Data

Google Inc. has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it used deceptive tactics and violated its own privacy promises to consumers when it launched its social network, Google Buzz, in 2010. The agency alleges the practices violate the FTC Act. The proposed settlement bars the company from future privacy misrepresentations, requires it to implement a comprehensive privacy program, and calls for regular, independent privacy audits for the next 20 years. This is the first time an FTC settlement order has required a company to implement a comprehensive privacy program to protect the privacy of consumers’ information. In addition, this is the first time the FTC has alleged violations of the substantive privacy requirements of the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Framework, which provides a method for U.S. companies to transfer personal data lawfully from the European Union to the United States.

Read the full release at: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/03/google.shtm

Soldiers in the Field Test

Enter Google+, Google’s latest attempt to compete in the social media arena.  Google opened the service to a limited number of users in what was dubbed a “limited field test” on June 28, 2011.  The service was heavily advertised as a privacy friendly alternative to Facebook, citing its Circles feature as a way to share content only with the people you want but a growing number of users are voicing concerns related to privacy, one of the biggest being the requirement to use your real identity on the service.

Google+ Circles were designed to resemble circles of friends in real life.  By posting work related content to a work related circle, family announcements and baby pictures to a family circle, and videos of weekend parties to a social circle, one could (in theory) keep the various aspects of ones life separate and avoid all manner of embarrassing or employment altering situations.  But critics believe Circles do not go far enough to protect people’s privacy or prevent accidental disclosure of sensitive information.  I tend to agree.

Public posts (posts not limited to specific circles or individuals) are indexed by Google Search and can be found in regular Google search results.  You can prevent your profile from being indexed by search engines, but not public posts.  One must keep this in mind if posting about sensitive health issues, sexual orientation, religious preferences, political views, or activism.  Your real identity (if you are complying with Google’s current policy) will be associated with your public posts.

One must also take great care when posting potentially sensitive information to circles due to the ability to share other people’s posts.  It is possible to disable the ability for others to share your posts, but it is an extra step utilizing a menu which must be accessed after the post is published, potentially allowing the post to be shared before the option to share it is disabled.  A post that has been shared before the option to share has been disabled will persist as a shared post.  A post that has been shared will persist as a shared post even if the original post has been deleted.  Once it’s out there, it stays out there, and can be re-shared over and over again.

A lesser known way by which people can unknowingly or accidentally associate their real identity with a particular topic is through the use of the +1 button.  The +1 button is a feature similar in nature to Facebook’s “Like.”  You can indicate your approval of a post by simply clicking the +1 button, which adds your name to a list of people who have also clicked the +1 button.  This list is shown on the post, and if the post is public, it will be indexed and your name will now be a relevant search term for that post and its content.  Think about that for a moment.

Of course, all of these privacy concerns could be mitigated by using a pseudonym, but Google+ does not allow them.  Not unless the pseudonym is the name which you are commonly known by.  And if the point is to keep your contributions online separate from your real identity, that does not help you one bit.

Google’s Identity Crisis

If you’ve spent a bit of time on Google+ (or read the news), you may have noticed quite a controversy brewing over Google’s naming policy.  People have been lighting torches and sharpening pitchforks over Google’s insistence that people use their real identities to participate in the service, and I can’t say that I blame them at all.

Google’s current naming policy for Google+ states:

To help fight spam and prevent fake profiles, use the name your friends, family or co-workers usually call you. For example, if your full legal name is Charles Jones Jr. but you normally use Chuck Jones or Junior Jones, either of those would be acceptable.

https://www.google.com/intl/en/+/policy/content.html

A Google Help article entitled “Your name and Google+ Profiles” further states:

Google+ makes connecting with people on the web more like connecting with people in the real world. Because of this, it’s important to use your common name so that the people you want to connect with can find you. Your common name is the name your friends, family or co-workers usually call you. For example, if your legal name is Charles Jones Jr. but you normally use Chuck Jones or Junior Jones, any of these would be acceptable.

https://www.google.com/support/+/bin/answer.py?answer=1228271

While fighting spam is always a noble cause, Google’s naming policy will not prevent spam from making its way through Google+.  In fact, its already there.  Fake profiles are going to happen whether people use an obvious pseudonym like “Uncle Chuckles” or a real sounding Western name like “Richard Weaver,” unless Google has plans to implement some sort of mandatory identity verification system.  I am not sure how well the platform will do with such an Orwellian approach to social profiles.

And what of victims of rape or domestic abuse?  Why should someone be forced to publicly identify themselves as “rape victim” to reach out to other rape victims for support on Google+?  While one person may feel comfortable discussing the subject openly, identifying their real identity as someone who has been raped, others many not wish to continue being identified in their day to day lives with their attack.  Additionally, rape/domestic abuse survivors may well wish to avoid leaving a trail of data online for their attackers to follow.  With each scrap of information which is made available online, the distance between the victim and the attacker shrinks.

Rape/domestic abuse survivors are not the only people who may wish to keep their online activities separate from their offline lives.  Members of the LBGT communities, religiously diverse communities, political dissidents are just a few examples where such a separation can be essential to personal safety.

Privacy concerns and personal safety aside, the policy fails to address people’s desire to express themselves in their own way.  Our real names are not our real identity.  The overwhelming majority of us had our names chosen for us before we developed a personality or had anything to contribute to society.  They do not represent our thoughts, opinions, beliefs, or true nature.  They are merely a reference point to the individual for use on tax forms and drivers licenses.  Many of us go by variants of our real names, or different names altogether (nicknames), when interacting with our friends and family.  We may even have numerous nicknames based on our numerous circles of friends.  If Google+ was designed for “con­nect­ing with peo­ple on the web more like con­nect­ing with peo­ple in the real world,” don’t you think they would have taken this into account?

I do not believe the decision to require real identities had anything to do with spam prevention or community building.  Google+ is not a social media platform.  It is a data mine, we are the miners, and the ore.

Google finally gets Social… or does it? is a post from: The Burnman Experience

I have given much though to what I should do with TheBurnman.com these past few weeks.  I haven’t had much motivation to post anything here, which leads me to believe I ran the blog off course.  I have decided to remove most of the posts here and start relatively fresh.

Many changes coming soon, so stay tuned!

New Direction, New Focus is a post from: The Burnman Experience

Have you ever experienced the wonders of a roasted marshmallow? I don’t mean simply having eaten one.   I mean really living the experience from buying the bag to the gooey goodness.  A properly roasted marshmallow takes a bit of time, effort, and patience to pull off.  It isn’t something you can just rush into.  A truly well roasted marshmallow is a commitment.

Preparing your marshmallow roast

If you are going to roast a marshmallow, you are going to need a few things.  Let’s go over the list, shall we?

• Marshmallows
• Skewers (the longer the better)
• Fireplace
• Quality firewood
• Tinder
• Matches

Now, this list might seem a little exhaustive for a seemingly simple task like roasting marshmallows, but you will definitely see a difference in the end result by using substandard supplies.  When purchasing marshmallows, make sure they move freely in the bag.  If the marshmallows stick together, or to the bag, chances are they were stored in an overly warm environment, and you will have a struggle on your hands.  Literally.  The marshmallows will be difficult to remove from the bag, and you will end up with sticky sweetness all over your fingers.

You will need a place to have a fire.  Whether it is your fireplace in your living room, or a fire-pit in your back yard, you will need a place to burn wood without fear of the fire department coming to say hello.  Personally, I prefer to roast my marshmallows outdoors.  The best scenario is to place stones or bricks around 3 sides of the fire, the last open side facing you.  This will help radiate the heat from the fire, giving you some added warmth from the fire, and providing more even heat for roasting marshmallows.

You should use metal skewers when roasting marshmallows.  If you are doing everything correctly, wooden skewers are not very practical as they have a chance to ignite.  Cheap wooden skewers will sometimes leave wood in the marshmallow, and thus presents a bit of a safety issue.  I have had to remove a splinter from someone’s gum before, and it’s not a pleasant experience for either party.  Not only do metal skewers survive the intense heat of a properly stoked marshmallow roasting fire, they are reusable.  It’s never a good idea to reuse wooden skewers.

Do not use damp, moldy, or rotten wood for cooking anything, especially foods you are going to hold close to the wood and flames.  Damp wood does not burn very well, and may give you trouble getting started.  Moldy or rotten wood many contaminate your food with icky badness.  You want to use dry wood, free of paint or other artificial chemicals.  DO NOT BURN PRESSURE TREATED WOOD! Wood that has been treated to prevent rot and infestation contains chemicals which are toxic, and you should never use it for cooking.

If at all possible, do not use newspaper, magazines, or other printed paper to start a fire you plan to cook with.  The inks and paper used in industrial printing may contain chemicals you do not want in your food.  Your best bet is to use natural tinder such as birch bark.  The bark of a birch tree is loaded with natural oils which make it burn rather well, and it will burn easily fresh from the tree.  Dry grass or hay can work, however, you won’t get the same length length of burn from it, and your kindling (very small sticks) many not catch fire on the first few attempts.  If you do use paper, try to use paper without ink.

I prefer to use wooden matches when lighting a campfire, since the matchsticks can be a big help in lighting your tinder and helping it stay lit long enough to ignite the kindling.  Once you have your fire going, you will need to burn a few pieces of wood to get a nice hot coal bed.

Marshmallows are flammable!

When roasting a marshmallow, it is important to remember that they are rather flammable and very easy to burn.  It only takes a couple of seconds to turn a white and fluffy marshmallow into a bright orange flaming ball of napalm.  If you do manage to set your marshmallow on fire, do NOT wave it back and forth to put the flames out.  The marshmallow could fly off your skewer and hit someone.  They are sticky, and difficult to pull off of someone when they are burning.  Just blow them out like they were a birthday candle.

One mistake many people make when they first begin learning to roast marshmallows, is to put them directly into or above flames.  This greatly increases the chances of burning or igniting your marshmallow.  What you want to do is hold the marshmallow near the bed of hot coals, and rotate it.  Try to hold it in such a way that the sides of the marshmallow receive the greatest amount of heat.  It is very easy to roast the top, while the sides and bottom remain relatively unfazed.  And if you see it start to smoke, pull it out!  It is only a second or two away from bursting into flames when you see it begin to smoke.

Roasted marshmallows are hot.

Once you have achieved a nice golden brown color, your marshmallow is done.  But before you go popping it into your mouth, you need to give it a chance to cool.  The marshmallow’s core is very hot and very sticky.  Eating it too soon after roasting can be dangerous.

Be sure to NEVER eat the marshmallow while it is still on the skewer.  The metal skewer may be hotter than the marshmallow, and I don’t think you want to brand your face with it.  And, of course, there i always the danger of biting the skewer and breaking a tooth.

Happiness in a plastic bag

This really is a rough guide to marshmallow roasting.  The art of campfire building comes into play for the hardcore roasted marshmallow enthusiast, but that’s an article for another day.  In the meantime, practice your roasting techniques!  And remember, if you are able to build a fire, you are able to roast marshmallows.  No need to save the activity for camping trips, dig yourself a fire-pit in the backyard, and get roasting!  Marshmallows are happiness in a plastic bag, and guaranteed to make anyone smile.

Roasted Marshmallows is a post from: The Burnman Experience