Following up, re. Steve, Eddan, Hol, and other re-purposing of the logo:

Re. Steve: 

An hour to re-tune a transmitter.  Yow.  But in those days the Soviet bombers would have taken approx. 6 hours to reach the US, so I would suppose that some stations cut over to 640 or 1240 more quickly and others stayed off-air until they re-tuned.  After ICBMs, the attack time could be as little as 30 minutes, which I suppose is what must have led to the change to EBS.  From your Wikipedia link I found out that the ominous "alert tone" was 960 Hz; I'd guessed it was 1 KHz; close enough "by ear."

"Scam to sell replacement transmitter tubes," nah, probably an un-intended consequence: nobody would have wanted transmitters breaking down as a nuclear war was starting.

"Voters... too late..." Maybe; depends on the tactics used to get their attention;-)

--

Re. Eddan:

Makes sense that you'd know Marvin Ammori.  VERY interesting that his op-ed piece could be actually speaking to the clerks of the court.  As in, "don't make the kind of mistake like the one in that railroad case that turned corporations into persons"?, or something else? 

Re. the libertarians not supporting it: are you pointing to a distinction between left-libertarians and right-libertarians, or something else?

Re. anti-discrimination: ooh, that's good!  Really really good.  Suggests that it could be framed as a _racial_ discrimination issue due to the correlation between economics and race.  "Discriminatory effect" doctrine might apply there, which, when combined with opposition to an "affirmative action" type workaround, produces the result of demanding a level playing field, thus net neutrality. 

There's a potential _religious_ discrimination issue here too: per my item about radio spectrum colonized by a narrow slice of religious denominations, excluding all others, whereby internet broadcasting is a "partial remedy."  Shutting down internet radio and podcasting, effectively takes _minority religious broadcasters_ off the air altogether. 

Even though the Bay Area progressive community is largely non-religious in any conventional sense, there are strong religious progressive traditions in many denominations in the US, for example the Catholic Worker, various Quaker-affiliated groups, etc.  If these groups have counted on their web sites, podcasts, internet broadcast, etc., they are a natural constituency. 

Re. traffic prioritization for hyperlocal:  Interesting point.  I'd be satisfied with a truly level playing field and no Spynet ("tracking").  What I really want is to go back to status quo ante, with a firewall of entity separation between carriers and content.  Carriers that have a stake in content are if anything worse than the old Bell monopoly, which at least was content-neutral and level. 

--

Re. Hol:

Great find you found there. 

Your link is to one of the earlier renditions of the Civil Defense logos, I would guess early to mid 1950s.  That was a scan of an original printed publication. 

By the late 50s, the red "CD" lettering was much larger, touching the boundaries of the triangle; and the lines in the CD letters were slightly thinner. 

BTW, the logo was ubiquitous on public service vehicles in that era, including fire engines, public works vehicles, Post Office vehicles, etc., anything that could be used in disaster recovery.  Anyone who was alive in that era would immediately recognize a modern re-purposing of the logo.

--

And back to Steve:

The "messenger" logo works for things like community wireless.  For underground radio I think the CONELRAD logo from the Wikipedia page is more directly to the point.

--

That page of logos Hol found has all kinds of potential:

Look at the upper right corner of the page, the "Civil Air Patrol" logo.  Grass-roots "drones" or "anti-drone drones" or whatever you want to call them?  And/or use the "Air Raid Warden" logo for anti-drone efforts. 

Also look in the left column toward the bottom, the logo with the pliers in it for "utility repair."  Possible hackers/makers alliance logo? 

And, create new ones, with various things in the white triangle to symbolize elements of the community including coders (a field of 1s and 0s?), crypto (three five-digit groups, a traditional symbol for ciphertext), biohackers (that one's easy: a DNA helix in red), attorneys (oldschool scale representing equal justice), etc.  The "emergency food and housing" logo could be re-purposed to "community home-brewing" with the symbol of a beer mug instead of a coffee cup.  More ideas eagerly welcome....

The common denominator is the idea that community-based "stuff" will not be shut down, no matter what, even if it takes peaceful civil disobedience to protect it.  That's a way of standing up and showing strength in numbers.  "Civil Disobedience IS Civil Defense!"

-G.


=====



On 13-11-05-Tue 3:56 PM, Steve Berl wrote:
Like the image. The messenger one seems appropriate. 

Steve

On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, Hol Gaskill wrote:
I like the cut of your jib, steve.  we can make our own set of roles and insignia:

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/uploads//monthly_08_2011/post-1726-1312487480.jpg
 
 
on Nov 05, 2013, Steve Berl <steveberl@gmail.com> wrote:
Re. CONELRAD:

Interesting stuff. A bit more digging and I did find reference to the low power mode, and stations near the designated frequencies needing to retune their transmitters. One article said that it took the engineer of one station up to an hour to retune to the new frequency. Hope those bombers were flying pretty slow. The round robin thing is also referenced in several articles and how turning the transmitters on and off, as well as transmitting off frequency (which I guess causes a high VSWR). 
 
Sounds like a scam to sell lots of replacement power tubes for transmitters.
 
I like the idea of "Civil Disobedience IS Civil Defense!" and adopting the symbol..
 
As for getting this to be an electoral issue, I have my doubts that you can get a significant number of voters interested enough to care, until it is too late. 
 
-steve
 
 


On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:48 AM, GtwoG PublicOhOne <g2g-public01@att.net> wrote:

Re. Steve:

The nightmare scenario for "after the end of net neutrality" is that the Bigs adopt _time-based_ or _QOS-based_ control of any content that isn't paying through the nose.

For example a typical small biz website's main page is about 2 meg.  Under the new regime they find it takes 60 seconds to load (long enough to chase away customers), so they redo the site and now it's only 200K.  But the 200K version of the page still takes 60 seconds to load.  And if they slimmed it down to 20K it would still take 60 seconds to load. 

Even easier, just assign the lowest QOS priorities to "commoner" traffic, so it's totally unreliable.  Think call-drops in bad cell coverage areas, translated to the entirety of the internet over both wired and wireless media, so it becomes totally but randomly useless.  The reason you hear people say they "don't like to talk on the phone" is because "the phone" has become crappy audio and unreliable connections compared to what it used to be.  Translate that to the whole internet with the exception of the "preferred channels," Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, and of course Fox News.  "I don't go online any more except to buy stuff...."  Right, exactly.

Either of the above would shut down internet broadcasting, and also shut down small business websites, for which reason Main Street USA ought to be up in arms about it, pitchforks & torches included. 

If either of those censorship-by-"nudge" things happens, a huge explosion of pirate radio would not be unexpected, including deliberately stepping on big stations' signals to make the point.  For that matter, revenge-jamming of the entire AM & FM broadcast bands by "outlaws" is a foreseeable consequence.  Think of people running around dropping off disposable jamming transmitters all over a city, that kind of thing.  Argh...

What I'm thinking is:

Make this THE issue of the 2014 Congressional elections.  "The biggest free speech issue of the 21st century."  Every candidate gets grilled on it: where do you stand on net neutrality?  Anyone who isn't with us gets dragged through a nasty primary battle.  And if they lie about supporting it, and get into office and do nothing or worse, then they get primaried in 2016, which will be a high-turnout year. 

And of course, back up the electoral strategy with a barrage of lawsuits covering every possible angle, and with peaceful civil disobedience designed to generate more trials where these issues can be brought up again and again and again. 

Re. CONELRAD:

I've read plenty of Civil Defense material from the Cold War era and it described the low-power broadcast scenario.  That Wikipedia article is the first I've heard of anything like round-robin, and it would be difficult to manage a round-robin system in the middle of a nuclear attack. 

But either scenario might be adaptable to "modern conditions."  "Civil Disobedience IS Civil Defense!"  Heh, may as well adopt the CO

_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss

 


--
-steve