It's not just about the social media, it's about the limits of the speech

Statue of Johannes Gutenberg at Strasbourg
(Picture I)  

http://kimmontaidearvioita.blogspot.com/p/its-not-just-about-social-media-its.html

Kimmo Huosionmaa

In the trial against MV-lehti and Ilya Janitskyn, is the question about the right to write about thigs, what would be not tolerated in the old fashion media, and at the same time the court is metering the limits of the writings in social media. And at the same time would somebody looking for the decision about the writer of social media right to use the name "magazine" in their homepages.  But also we are facing the problem of the journalism, what is the very complicated thing.


Normally freedom of speech is meaning, that every person has right to make that kind of writings what he or she wants, but there would be no answer, what to do when if the opinion of the writer is against the opinion of the line of the magazine. And it is problematic because the journalist is in the similar relationship for the employer as the normal worker. So if the employer wants, the content of the text should follow the line of the magazine or media house.


But is the case, where the head journalist wants that the henchman changes the content against freedom of speech? And what to do, if some journalist would make the publications same time in the magazines like MV-lehti, what are actually the social media channels? Here we must also ask another question about the publications like MV-lehti, and that is very complicated: should that channel mention, that there is a "Facebook-style" channel, and would the persons, who own that channel also have the responsibility to moderate the writings, what are published in that media.


And what to do, if some journalist would write to those social media- magazines in their free time.  That means that nothing limits the journalists work when that person is not in the office. The big question is,  would that cause the divorcing if those writings are against the line of the workplace? Those are difficult questions, and there would not be right answers for this kind of things.

Picture I

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/Statue_of_Johannes_Gutenberg_on_Place_Gutenberg%2C_Strasbourg.jpg

Writing about the song "Year 2525"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yesyhQkYrQM

Kimmo Huosionmaa

In the beginning and end of this text links to the famous song "2525", where is mentioned many things, that could be true even today. In this text, you might look at some maybe quite disturbing things. One of those things is the pill, what can give us all information, what we need. This small pill can be some radio tracking or GPS-system, and when the person takes one of them, then there would be drone above this human's head, and then it would begin infrasound transmission to that person. When the person eats some information pill, would the signal go to the central computer, and that would tell them what kind of information that person needs, and then the drone would find the target.


This would be the conventional model to send information for some man or woman. Also, there might be the more dangerous version, and in that version, the drone or "X-helicopter" would lay the modified EEG-machine to above the person's head, and then begin the brain core stimulation, and that would be the very good way to drive information for the brains of some people. When we are thinking about the future and control societies, we might think that inside every person head would install the electrodes, what allows to send the radio broadcasts in the brains of humans. Also in this controlled society, those brain waves can be surveillance by using radio or WLAN technology.


And in the most advanced model of those information pills, the pills are forming the nano-technological components, what would travel thru the body and lay in the layer of the brains. And then that person would get the radio broadcast about that information, what this targeted man or woman needs. I hope that this would not be the future of mankind. The "Orwellian" control system can be real in the near future, and terrorism is the very good excuse for making the control systems. But when we are creating the society, where every single thought have been observed, we are going the little bit too far.


But nowadays the superconducting radio-technology allows to catch EEG-waves from quite long distances, and that technology is very attractive because this so-called "remote-MEG" could uncover the potentially violent persons on the streets. And then those drones would lay ring-type magnets over those person's head, so could this mysterious "Project Saint".  Pentagon claims that this means Satellite interceptor, but they can lie about this thing for political reasons because the brainwashing is not so-called "politically correct thing", and those things afraid people across the world.  Superconducting sensors can use SQUID-technology, and they can be installed to the drones or on the roof of some nightclub. And those sensors can record human brain electricity from the long distance. In some scenarios that kind of technology can use high power radio waves to modify human thoughts. This is very dangerous technology in wrong hands.

Sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetoencephalography  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQUID

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_SAINT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yesyhQkYrQM

http://kirjabloggaus.blogspot.fi/p/writing-about-song-year-2525.html

What kind of person doesn't make difference between gangs and official law enforcement?

(Picture: Pixabay)

Kimmo Huosionmaa

All of the people have sometimes faced the person, who doesn't even know what the word "customer service" actually means. This kind of person just sits behind the desk and looks at some screens or reads the books, when some customer wants to ask something. When will we start to think, "what kind of person is that, does that person wants to be kicked off the job"? In this kind of things, we must realize, that this person will not do those things the first time of the working career. They are done those things somewhere before, and somebody must give those people an example of that kind of service. In some cases, those people are recognized as the members of some gangs.


And the attitude what those people has is that they can do anything that they want because of their organization is so frightened, that it's members have right to do anything that they want.   Sometimes I read the newspapers about the things when some policeman or another kind of person will write threats against some persons. Or this kind of actions is defended by the journalist. Those newspaper stories are full of things, where the gangsters and another kind of gang members are defended with supporting the violence.


Those writers believe, that those actions are not seen by the officials, and they believe, that there will happen nothing if they show everybody, that they are some kind of members of some gangs. In the real world, those writings are very unthinking actions, because if somebody owns illegal guns or deliver the ammunition for illegal purposes, will that bring law enforcement to this person door. This is the thing, what will happen if somebody threats another person in the newspaper.


If we are talking about the gangs and membership in some motorcycle gangs, the membership is not criminalized, but if the person is some kind of "weapon sergeant" or weapon deliver, who will give weapons for illegal actions, will that process too far. If some gang uses collective weapons and keeps some part of the city as some kind of "no-go zone" must the officials do something about it. If we pay taxes, we have right to get protection against the violence.


But when we will return the bad customer service, I sometimes wonder does all cab and bus-drivers in the western relationships with some kind of an MC-clubs if they can't drive their vehicles. I have faced this kind of things all the cities, where I visited, and there were problems with the drivers. Very often they claim that they are "full members of the MC's". And sometimes the reporters write that there will be trouble if somebody mentions about those things.

Do you want to be famous?

Kimmo Huosionmaa

When we are talking about famous people, we will normally think that people are born as famous. That is not true. Or of course, there are a very famous people, who are very popular and famous, because they are born in the famous families. But when we are talking about social media or something like that, we can say that many people are more famous as they believe, and if somebody wants to say that social media has no effect, I must say those people are wrong.


If some blogger or whatever they are doesn't mean anything, why those people who so hate those people must interview the persons like the commander in chief of the military forces. When are we talking about persons who mean nothing, why we see sometimes very aggressive writing against those people? When people are living in the modern world they must understand that we all have opinions, and when I'm writing something, I must not accept those writings by my daddy.


But when we are talking about some journalistic "pranks", we will see in some comments or in some kind of published news the little things, what makes us believe that those journalists use some "dirty tricks" when they are making their stories. In those stories was seen, that those people have got some passwords in their hands, what is used in some employment services. And do you know that is a crime? And the memberships of the sex clubs and another kind of that societies are normally confidential if those societies say that they are confidential.


And also salmonella and AIDS- tests are confidential if some club member has been given those papers to the media, and that test is actually free. When we are talking about taking care and sense of responsibility about the people, we must say, that many people make love in the real life.  That is what the normal people do together. Also, the information of the incompetent person is confidential. So in the real world, the delivering that kind of information will sometimes cause the prosecution process. If somebody misunderstands that their neighbor is the person, who is incompetent, that would cause the very big refund, when that makes trouble for that person's businesses.


But when we are writing something, it doesn't mean that somebody must always cry, when those people are writing their texts. There is a little thing, what the media makers usually didn't see before social media. That was the texts where reporters and other journalists were criticized. They were the persons, who wrote what they wanted, and if some things were not accessible for those people, the things just changed for satisfying. And many journalists used the term "many people" in their stories, what represented only single person's opinion of those things. That's why we must say, that social media has been changing the role of media forever.