I found some of Aaron Swartz’s ideas interesting, reading his work I found after I learned he had died.
Specifically the decentralization of political motivation which is, without the billions of dollars that big business has to throw around, the only power that grass roots movements can hope to wield in the face of such monstrosities.
And even then, I disagree about what is potential achievable if you are able to motivate such a significant portion of the population. I don’t see a perpetual change on the horizon, just a very narrow window in which you can reset the expectations of legal ramifications for wealth generating entities, which are probably to be expected.
I say you get a few years grace, maybe even a couple of decades before it’s business as usual.
You need;
A massive ground swell of public opinion (which even now, is barely concerned, so you have your work cut out for you) that can be motivated into generating a nationally recognised political dialogue which defines the landscape, terms and talking points and effectively drowns out the multi-nationals memes.
You must be swept into power, whatever that means in the political landscape so defined.
A quick and unimaginably skilful manipulation of the definitions of many major tenants of international business practice and law, with near immediate results showing positive gains (read as new technology, there are no more gains to be had).
The real solution is just responsibility, creating a corporation centralised on responsibility and humanity is still apt for mutation at the higher levels of interaction of it’s interacting, processing systems.
Some kind of limit on the extension of one’s phenotype, or of the phenotype of your collective. We need rules for meta-humanity that have barely been touched on in the net’s young life, never mind formalised.
If your new corporation isn’t to turn into another monster that just swallows individuals whole, there are a lot of uncomfortable considerations to be made.
