Podcast appearances and mentions of Lawrence Lessig

Send us a textWe are a little late this week, but with good reason: Paul Breitbarth and Dr. K Royal were attending the IAPP Global Privacy Summit in Washington D.C. and bring you their report from the Opening General Session of the conference. The speakers during this session were professor Lawrence Lessig, Hans Peter Brøndmo and Catie Cuan, each reflecting on 25 years of IAPP and what is next for us privacy professionals. Apparently: it's robots! Powered by TrustArcSeamlessly manage your privacy program, assess risks, and stay up to date on laws across the globe.With TrustArc's Privacy Studio and Governance Suite, you can automate cookie compliance, streamline data subject rights, and centralize your privacy tasks—all while reducing compliance costs. Visit TrustArc.com/serious-privacy.If you have comments or questions, find us on LinkedIn and Instagram @seriousprivacy, and on BlueSky under @seriousprivacy.eu, @europaulb.seriousprivacy.eu, @heartofprivacy.bsky.app and @igrobrien.seriousprivacy.eu, and email podcast@seriousprivacy.eu. Rate and Review us! From Season 6, our episodes are edited by Fey O'Brien. Our intro and exit music is Channel Intro 24 by Sascha Ende, licensed under CC BY 4.0. with the voiceover by Tim Foley.

On The Tape’s Dan Nathan explains the stock market’s very, very bad reaction to Donald Trump’s policies. The New York Times David Enrich details his latestest book Murder the Truth: Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful. PLUS! Harvard Professor Lawrence Lessig explores how a populist DOGE could benefit the Democrats.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Elon Musk is different than prior American business tycoons. Arguably, he is more powerful. More poignantly, as my guest argues, he is less dedicated to democracy, and that makes him frighteningly more dangerous. In this interview, I discuss the following with my guest scholar: ►Who was Andrew Carnegie? ►How was he similar to Musk? ►How was Carnegie - once the richest man in the world - different than Musk? ►What was Carnegie's political relationship with Washington and his outlook for America? ►Who was William Randolph Hearst? ►How was his promotional reach bigger than Musk's?►Was Hearst a Nazi? ►How was Hearst's relationship with politics and Washington different than Musk's? ►How did Hearst finally get into trouble with the people? ►Who was Joseph P. Kennedy? ►How did he make his money? In what aspects was he similar to Musk? ►Was Kennedy a Nazi sympathizer? ►How was Kennedy's relationship with FDR different than Musk's relationship with Pres. Trump?

Sajna a hang ezúttal nem sikerült túl jól, pedig sokat küszködtünk vele. De aki mégis nekiveselkedik az új adásunknak, az megtudhatja Tóka Gábor (Vox Populi) vendégünktől, honnan ered a „gerrymandering” kifejezés, miért olyan nehéz igazságos választókerületi beosztást készíteni, és még azt is, hogy szerintünk reális-e egy előrehozott választás. 00:00 - beköszönés és a pártos térképrajzolásról általánosságban 24:40 - gerrymandering magyar módra 30:25 - hozzá nyúlhatnak-e a választási szabályokhoz még? 31:40 - lesz-e szerintünk előrehozott választás 39:00 - közvéleménykutatások követése: aggregált módszer 44:00 - jobbak vagy rosszabbak a közvéleménykutatások manapság? 55:19 - refutálás 1:00:51 - podcast ajánló ℹ️ SHOWNOTES ℹ️ • Vox Populi választási kalauz (Tóka Gábor): https://www.facebook.com/valasztasi.kalauz/ • Vox Populi weboldal: https://kozvelemeny.org/ • Vox Populi a 444-en: https://voxpopuli.444.hu/ • Gerrymandering, wiki: https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A1laszt%C3%B3ker%C3%BClet-manipul%C3%A1ci%C3%B3 • Még jobban lejt a pálya: így változtatja meg az esélyeket a választási térkép átrajzolása, atlatszo.hu: https://atlatszo.hu/adat/2024/11/20/meg-jobban-lejt-a-palya-igy-valtoztatja-meg-az-eselyeket-valasztasi-terkep-atrajzolasa/ • Térképen, hogy miként változik meg Budapest választókerületi beosztása, telex.hu: https://telex.hu/belfold/2024/11/19/terkepen-budapest-valasztokeruletei-valtoznak • Választási Földrajz: Így lehetne új és arányos választókerületi rendszerünk 2026-ban, telex.hu: https://telex.hu/valasztasi-foldrajz/2024/08/12/uj-valasztasi-rendszer-2026-aranytalansag • Év végi kvíz: Miért lett 2025-re előre hozva annak a 8,4 milliárd forintnak az elköltése...: https://www.facebook.com/valasztasi.kalauz/posts/1242434817391304 • Egy költségvetési tételből úgy tűnik, mintha előrehozott választásra készülne a kormány, 444.hu: https://444.hu/2024/12/31/egy-koltsegvetesi-tetelbol-ugy-tunik-mintha-elorehozott-valasztasra-keszulne-a-kormany • Unger Anna: Nincs kőbe vésve, hogy 2026 tavaszán lesz a következő választás, szabadeuropa.hu: https://www.szabadeuropa.hu/a/unger-anna-nincs-kobevesve-hogy-2026-tavaszan-lesz-a-kovetkezo-valasztas-elemzo-podcast/33220414.html

Ten years ago, political scientists Martin Gilens of Princeton and Benjamin Page of Northwestern took an extraordinary data set compiled by Gilens and a small army of researchers and set out to determine whether America could still credibly call itself a democracy. They used case studies 1,800 policy proposals over 30 years, tracking how they made their way through the political system and whose interests were served by outcomes. For small D democrats, the results were devastating. Political outcomes overwhelmingly favored very wealthy people, corporations, and business groups. The influence of ordinary citizens, meanwhile, was at a “non-significant, near-zero level.” America, they concluded, was not a democracy at all, but a functional oligarchy.  Fast forward to 2024 and a presidential campaign that saw record support by billionaires for both candidates, but most conspicuously for Republican candidate Donald Trump from Tesla and Starlink owner Elon Musk, the world's richest man. That prompted outgoing President Joe Biden, in his farewell address, to warn Americans about impending oligarchy—something Gilens and Page said was already a fait accompli ten years before. And as if on cue, the new president put billionaire tech bro supporters like Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg front and center at his inauguration and has given Musk previously unimaginable power to dismantle and reshape the federal government through the so-called Department of Government Efficiency. So what does it mean that American oligarchy is now so brazenly out in the open?  Joining host Ralph Ranalli are Harvard Kennedy School Professor Archon Fung and Harvard Law School Professor Larry Lessig, who say it could an inflection point that will force Americans to finally confront the country's trend toward rule by the wealthy, but that it's by no means certain that that direction can be changed anytime soon. Archon Fung is a democratic theorist and faculty director of the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at HKS. Larry Lessig is the Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School and a 2016 presidential candidate whose central campaign theme was ridding politics of the corrupting influence of money. Archon Fung's Policy Recommendations:Involve the U.S. Office of Government Ethics in monitoring executive orders and changes to the federal government being made by President Trump, Elon Musk, and other Trump proxies.Demand transparency from Musk and the so-called Department of Government Efficiency about their actions in federal agencies, what changes and modifications they are making to systems, and an accounting of what information they have access to.Lawrence Lessig's Policy Recommendations:Build support for a test court case to overturn the legality of Super PACs, which are allowed to raise unlimited amounts of money from corporations, unions, associations and individuals, then spend unlimited sums to overtly advocate for or against political candidates.Experiment with alternative campaign funding mechanisms, such as a voucher program that would give individuals public money that they could pledge to political candidates.Urge Democratic Party leaders to lead by example and outlaw Super PAC participation in Democratic primaries.Episode Notes:Archon Fung is the Winthrop Laflin McCormack Professor of Citizenship and Self-Government and director of the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at the Kennedy School. at the Harvard Kennedy School. His research explores policies, practices, and institutional designs that deepen the quality of democratic governance. He focuses upon public participation, deliberation, and transparency. His books include “Full Disclosure: The Perils and Promise of Transparency” (Cambridge University Press, with Mary Graham and David Weil) and “Empowered Participation: Reinventing Urban Democracy” (Princeton University Press). He has authored five books, four edited collections, and over fifty articles appearing in professional journals. He holds two S.B.s — in philosophy and physics — and a Ph.D. in political science from MIT.Lawrence Lessig is the Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School. Prior to returning to Harvard, he taught at Stanford Law School, where he founded the Center for Internet and Society, and at the University of Chicago. He clerked for Judge Richard Posner on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals and Justice Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court. Lessig is the founder of Equal Citizens and a founding board member of Creative Commons, and serves on the Scientific Board of AXA Research Fund. A member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the American Philosophical Society, he was once cited by The New Yorker as “the most important thinker on intellectual property in the Internet era,” Lessig has turned his focus from law and technology to institutional corruption and the corrupting influence of money on democracy, which led to his entering the 2016 Democratic primary for president. He has written 11 books, including “They Don't Represent Us: Reclaiming Our Democracy” in 2019. He holds a BA in economics and a BS in management from the University of Pennsylvania, an MA in philosophy from Cambridge University, and a JD from Yale.Ralph Ranalli of the HKS Office of Communications and Public Affairs is the host, producer, and editor of HKS PolicyCast. A former journalist, public television producer, and entrepreneur, he holds an BA in political science from UCLA and a master's in journalism from Columbia University.Scheduling and logistical support for PolicyCast is provided by Lillian Wainaina.Design and graphics support is provided by Laura King and the OCPA Design Team. Web design and social media promotion support is provided by Catherine Santrock and Natalie Montaner of the OCPA Digital Team. Editorial support is provided by Nora Delaney and Robert O'Neill of the OCPA Editorial Team.  

Does AI pose a threat to democracy? Law professor Lawrence Lessig dissects how this emerging technology could influence democratic institutions, warning that we've already passed a point (before superintelligence or AGI) that deserves a lot more attention. After the talk, Sherrell reflects on the importance of media literacy and the need to remain vigilant and engaged to defend our democracy. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

There never will be enough independent fact checking of online political advertising and their ecosystems. Can we develop methods and tools to demonetize or at least disincentivize the behaviors of disinformation producers as well as the ad firms and content providers in business with them? 2023-24 CASBS fellow Ceren Budak navigates the disinformation marketplace and illuminates pathways for better design of online communities and platforms in conversation with Pulitzer Prize-winning tech journalist and former CASBS fellow John Markoff. CEREN BUDAK: Faculty webpage | Personal website | Referenced in this episode:"Misunderstanding the harms of online misinformation." Nature 630, 45–53 (2024)The Prosocial Ranking Challenge (Center for Human-Compatible Artificial Intelligence)"Intermedia agenda setting during the 2016 and 2020 U.S. presidential elections." Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 18(1), 254-275. Lawrence Lessig's Pathetic Dot Theory (Wikipedia)----Read John Markoff's latest book, Whole Earth: The Many Lives of Stewart Brand  (Penguin Random House, 2022)  Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (CASBS) at Stanford UniversityExplore CASBS: website|Bluesky|X|YouTube|LinkedIn|podcast|latest newsletter|signup|outreach​Human CenteredProducer: Mike Gaetani | Engineer & co-producer: Joe Monzel |

OA1111 - The Eastman Dilemma: Lawfare or Justice?  We're giving everyone half of this Law'd Awful Movies! We watched John Eastman's... documentary? Whatever it is, a strange nonprofit called the Madison Media Fund produced it, and held the premiere at Mar-a-Lago ahead of its, you guessed it, January 6th release date. You'll hear straight from Eastman, Alan Dershowitz, Jeff Clark, and...Lawrence Lessig regarding Eastman's election "theory." Special Guest Lydia joins us to tackle the folks behind the making of this film, and you won't believe the stuff she's uncovered. John Eastman's first “draft” memo (12/24/20) John Eastman's second memo (early 2021) The 65 Project's complaint re: John Eastman to the CA bar (7/28/22) Record of John Eastman CA disbarment proceedings (6/12/23) CA Bar Court Judge Yvette Roland's recommendation in John Eastman's disbarment proceedings (3/27/24) To be sure you get access to all previous and future bonus content, be sure to sign up at patreon.com/law!

Dr. Lawrence Lessig, Prof. of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School, formerly professor at Stanford Law School, former clerk for Justice Antonin Scalia and author of numerous books and articles on democracy and its accelerating decline, spoke with Ruth and occasional co-host James Moore on money's corrupting influence over our democracy and what we as individuals and as a nation can do about it.

... and he might actually be right! Listen in and hear why. OA1105 - Harvard Law professor and anti-corruption advocate Lawrence Lessig is almost certainly the only person on Earth to have had a personal relationship with both visionary hacker Aaron Swartz and former Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia. We warmly welcome Professor Lessig back to OA to share--among many other things--his experiences with each of these very different people, why he remains optimistic about campaign finance reform going into the second Trump administration, and the originalist argument against Super PACs. “Why They Mattered: Aaron Swartz,” Lawrence Lessig, Politico (12/22/2013) They Don't Represent Us: Reclaiming Our Democracy, Lawrence Lessig (2024) Republic Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress--and a Plan to Stop It, Lawrence Lessig (2011) Support End Super Pacs Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Does AI pose a threat to democracy? Law professor Lawrence Lessig dissects how this emerging technology could influence democratic institutions, warning that we've already passed a point (before superintelligence or AGI) that deserves a lot more attention.

Anonymous Super PACs' money has replaced the power of 19th century party bosses. Dark money doesn't stop us from voting. It just limits who we can vote for! In this interview, my guest explains how dark money controls our elections and how big money is responsible for institutional corruption in America. *****

Does AI pose a threat to democracy? Law professor Lawrence Lessig dissects how this emerging technology could influence democratic institutions, warning that we've already passed a point (before superintelligence or AGI) that deserves a lot more attention.

Does AI pose a threat to democracy? Law professor Lawrence Lessig dissects how this emerging technology could influence democratic institutions, warning that we've already passed a point (before superintelligence or AGI) that deserves a lot more attention.

Perhaps best known for his novels Motherless Brooklyn (1999), The Fortress of Solitude (2003), and Chronic City (2009)—or, more recently, Brooklyn Crime Novel (2023)—the author, essayist, and cultural critic Jonathan Lethem could be considered the ultimate modern-day Brooklyn bard, even if today he lives in California, where he's a professor of English and creative writing at Pomona College. His most celebrated books take place in Brooklyn, or in the case of Chronic City, on Manhattan's Upper East Side, and across his genre-spanning works of fiction, his narratives capture a profound sense of the rich chaos and wonder to be found in an urban existence. Lethem is also the author of several essay collections, including the newly published Cellophane Bricks: A Life in Visual Culture (ZE Books), which compiles much of his art writing from over the years written in response to—and often in exchange for—artworks by friends, including Gregory Crewdson, Nan Goldin, and Raymond Pettibon.On the episode, Lethem discusses his passion for book dedications; the time he spent with James Brown and Bob Dylan, respectively, when profiling them for Rolling Stone in the mid-aughts; how his work is, in part, a way of dealing with and healing from his mother's death in 1978, at age 36; and why he views his writing as “fundamentally commemorative.”Special thanks to our Season 10 presenting sponsor, L'École, School of Jewelry Arts.Show notes:Jonathan Lethem[5:35] Cellophane Bricks[5:35] High School of Music and Art[5:35] Motherless Brooklyn[5:35] The Fortress of Solitude[5:35] The Disappointment Artist[5:35] Maureen Linker[7:15] Carmen Fariña[8:26] Julia Jacquette[8:26] Rosalyn Drexler[9:08] The Great Gatsby[9:08] Brooklyn Crime Novel[10:59] Lynn Nottage[13:08] Bennington College[13:08] Bret Easton Ellis[13:08] Donna Tartt[23:41] The Collapsing Frontier[23:41] Italo Calvino[23:41] Cold War[23:41] Red Scare[23:41] J. Edgar Hoover[27:37] Dada movement[27:37] Ernest Hemingway[27:37] Gertrude Stein[27:37] Dissident Gardens[29:38] Reaganism[29:38] “Does intergenerational transmission of trauma skip a generation?”[31:21] John Van Bergen[31:21] Nan Goldin[34:33] “The Ecstasy of Influence”[34:33] Lawrence Lessig[35:31] Copyleft movement[35:31] Hank Shocklee[38:46] Hoyt-Schermerhorn Station[42:32] “Being James Brown: Inside the Private World of the Baddest Man Who Ever Lived”[42:32] “The Genius and Modern Times of Bob Dylan”[51:00] Chronic City[54:04] The Thalia[55:50] “Lightness” by Italo Calvino[1:06:26] Jorge Luis Borges

MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell tries to calm our nerves as the election nears. Harvard professor Lawrence Lessig details why VP Harris may need fake electors.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

* Kamala Harris Can Politically Neutralize Dangerous SCOTUS Presidential Immunity Ruling; Lawrence Lessig, Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School; Producer: Scott Harris. * Can Gov. Tim Walz's Minnesota Progressive Legislative Victories be Replicated Nationally?; Branko Marcetic, staff writer with Jacobin magazine; Producer: Scott Harris. * In NYC Climate Protest Citibank Orders Arrest of Activist Classical Cellist Performing Bach; John Mark Rozendaal an activist with Extinction Rebellion NYC; Producer: Melinda Tuhus.

Lawrence Lessig visits Google's New York office to discuss his book “Free Culture.” Lawrence Lessig could be called a cultural environmentalist. One of America's most original and influential public intellectuals, his focus is the social dimension of creativity, or how creative work builds on the past and how society encourages or inhibits that building with laws and technologies. In his two previous books, CODE and THE FUTURE OF IDEAS, Lessig concentrated on the destruction of much of the original promise of the Internet. In FREE CULTURE, he widens his focus to consider the diminishment of the larger public domain of ideas. In this powerful wake-up call he shows how short-sighted interests blind to the long-term damage they're inflicting are poisoning the ecosystem that fosters innovation. All creative works—books, movies, records, software, and so on—are a compromise between what can be imagined and what is possible. For more than two hundred years, laws in America have sought a balance between rewarding creativity and allowing the borrowing from which new creativity springs. The original term of copyright set by the First Congress in 1790 was 14 years, renewable once. Now it is closer to two hundred. Lessig shows us that while new technologies always lead to new laws, never before have the big cultural monopolists used the fear created by new technologies, specifically the Internet, to shrink the public domain of ideas, even as the same corporations use the same technologies to control more and more what we can and can't do with culture. As more and more culture becomes digitized, more and more becomes controllable, even as laws are being toughened at the behest of the big media groups. What's at stake is our freedom—freedom to create, freedom to build, and ultimately, freedom to imagine. Originally published in March of 2007. Visit http://youtube.com/TalksAtGoogle/ to watch the video.

William Saunders is an ex-OpenAI Superallignment team member. Lawrence Lessig is a professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School. The two come on to discuss what's troubling ex-OpenAI safety team members. We discuss whether the Saudners' former team saw something secret and damning inside OpenAI, or whether it was a general cultural issue. And then, we talk about the 'Right to Warn' a policy that would give AI insiders a right to share concerning developments with third parties without fear of reprisal. Tune in for a revealing look into the eye of a storm brewing in the AI community. ---- You can subscribe to Big Technology Premium for 25% off at https://bit.ly/bigtechnology Enjoying Big Technology Podcast? Please rate us five stars ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ in your podcast app of choice. For weekly updates on the show, sign up for the pod newsletter on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/6901970121829801984/ Questions? Feedback? Write to: bigtechnologypodcast@gmail.com

Secret Recordings of Trump's Dirty Trickster Reveals Plans to Steal the Next Election | How the Next Election Can Be Stolen and What to Do About It backgroundbriefing.org/donate twitter.com/ianmastersmedia facebook.com/ianmastersmedia

Original Air Date: 12/11/2021 Today we take a look at the many structures of American government that tilt to favor minority rule and conservatism which, in our case, is one and the same. Some structures like the Senate and the filibuster were intentionally designed to give extra weight to the minority while others like gerrymandering and the influence of large-dollar political donors were, well, I suppose they were designed for about the same reason but just in a different way. Be part of the show! Leave us a message or text at 202-999-3991 or email Jay@BestOfTheLeft.com BestOfTheLeft.com/Support (Members Get Bonus Shows + No Ads!) Join our Discord community! SHOW NOTES Ch. 1: Lawrence Lessig on Unrepresentative Democracy - Network for Responsible Public Policy - Air Date 10-1-21 Ch. 2: Why Wyoming Has More Power Than California in the Senate - AJ+ - Air Date 10-14-20 Ch. 3: Perpetual Minority Rule with David Faris - Battleground with Amanda Litman and Faiz Shakir - Air Date 6-10-21 Ch. 4: Biden's DOJ is SUING Texas For Their Brazenly Discriminatory Gerrymandering - The Humanist Report - Air Date 12-7-21 Ch. 5: Andrew Perez on the Filibuster - CounterSpin - Air Date 6-18-21 Ch. 6: A To-Do List for Senate Democrats - Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick - Air Date 7-17-21 MEMBERS-ONLY BONUS CLIP(S) Ch. 7: Chauncey DeVega On Why Democracy Might Not Survive - The Muckrake Political Podcast - Air Date 12-7-21 FINAL COMMENTS Ch. 8: Final comments on public policy, human nature and Cold War talking points Produced by Jay! Tomlinson Visit us at BestOfTheLeft.com

Suppose we don’t like how our governmental powers are separated. Perhaps we think the executive branch has too much power. Or perhaps we think that it is doing more than the original meaning of “the executive power” would suggest, but we think that is a good thing. What are the legitimate methods of constitutional change in our republic? Must we amend the Constitution? How should an originalist approach these questions?Featuring:Prof. Sherif Girgis, Associate Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law SchoolProf. Lawrence Lessig, Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership, Harvard Law SchoolProf. Stephen E. Sachs, Antonin Scalia Professor of Law, Harvard Law SchoolModerator: Hon. Britt C. Grant, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Richard Hasen, author of A Real Right to Vote, Sarah Isgur, senior editor of The Dispatch, and Lawrence Lessig, author of How to Steal a Presidential Election, join Jeffrey Rosen for a health check on the state of American democracy. They look ahead to potential areas of vulnerability in the run-up to the 2024 election, and identify ways to strengthen our democratic processes in response. This program was streamed live on March 21, 2024, as part of our America's Town Hall series. Resources:  Richard L. Hasen, A Real Right to Vote: How a Constitutional Amendment Can Safeguard American Democracy (2024) Lawrence Lessig and Matthew Seligman, How to Steal a Presidential Election (2024) National Constitution Center's We the People podcast, “The Supreme Court Says States Can't Keep Trump Off the Ballot," (March 7, 2024) Sarah Isgur and David French, “Indictment Watch: The Supreme Court Decides Whether States Can Disqualify Trump,” Advisory Opinions, The Dispatch (March 5, 2024) Richard L. Hasen, “The Supreme Court Just Delivered a Rare Self-Own for John Roberts,” Slate (March 5, 2024) Conference Report, “Carter-Baker Commission: 16 Years Later” (2021) Amicus brief of Richard L. Hasen, Edward Foley and Ben Ginsburg, Trump v. Anderson Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.   Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr.   Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.   You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library. 

If you enjoyed our discussion, please check out the following media we talked about:Films/TV: Office Space (1999; dir. Mike Judge)Books: The Declaration of Cyberspace by John Perry Barlow; Free Culture by Lawrence Lessig; Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace; The Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright (watch the Hulu Miniseries Adaptation, as well)Pynchon In Public Day is 08 May 2024. Feel free to send a picture to the Pynchon In Public Twitter page @pynchoninpublicAs always, thanks so much for listening!Email: ⁠mappingthezonepod@gmail.com⁠Twitter: https://twitter.com/pynchonpodInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/mappingthezonepodcast/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D

There are several perfectly legal ways to steal a U.S. presidential election, according to election law expert Lawrence Lessig. Lessig says the U.S.'s election and legal systems are vulnerable – and need immediate correction. About: On Point is WBUR's award-winning, daily public radio show and podcast. Every weekday, host Meghna Chakrabarti leads provocative conversations that help make sense of the world.

Some of Lessig's notable works on Amazon: Free Culture – https://amzn.to/4aFonuS Code: And Other Laws of Cyberspace, Version 2.0 – https://amzn.to/4aYaEz3 Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress—and a Plan to Stop It – ⁠https://amzn.to/4cZsdAF Lawrence Lessig's entire collection of books – ⁠https://amzn.to/4b4hcfP Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you. __________________________________________________ Lawrence Lessig is the Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School. (The Roy Furman chair is in honor of this extraordinary alumnus.) Prior to rejoining the Harvard faculty, where he was the Berkman Professor of Law until 2000, Lessig was a professor at Stanford Law School, where he founded the school's Center for Internet and Society, and at the University of Chicago. Lessig clerked for Judge Richard Posner on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals and Justice Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court. He serves on the Board of the AXA Research Fund, and is an Emeritus member of the board at Creative Commons. Lessig is a Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Association, and has received numerous awards, including the Free Software Foundation's Freedom Award, Fastcase 50 Award. In 2002, he was named one of Scientific American's Top 50 Visionaries. Lessig holds a BA in economics and a BS in management from the University of Pennsylvania, an MA in philosophy from Cambridge, and a JD from Yale.⁠ Audio source⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Buy me a coffee⁠ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theunadulteratedintellect/support

Richard Hasen, author of A Real Right to Vote, Sarah Isgur, senior editor of The Dispatch, and Lawrence Lessig, author of How to Steal a Presidential Election, provide a health check on the state of American democracy, and look ahead to potential areas of vulnerability in the run-up to the 2024 election. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Additional Resources Richard L. Hasen, A Real Right to Vote: How a Constitutional Amendment Can Safeguard American Democracy Lawrence Lessig and Matthew Seligman, How to Steal a Presidential Election Jeffrey Rosen, “The Supreme Court Says States Can't Keep Trump Off the Ballot," We the People, National Constitution Center Trump v. Anderson (2024) Sarah Isgur and David French,“Indictment Watch: The Supreme Court Decides Whether States Can Disqualify Trump,” Advisory Opinions, The Dispatch Richard L. Hasen, “The Supreme Court Just Delivered a Rare Self-Own for John Roberts,” Slate (March 5, 2023) Conference Report, “Carter-Baker Commission: 16 Years Later” (2021) Trump v. Anderson, Amicus brief of Richard L. Hasen, Edward Foley and Ben Ginsburg Stay Connected and Learn More Continue today's conversation on social media @ConstitutionCtr and #AmericasTownHall Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.  Please subscribe to Live at the National Constitution Center and our companion podcast We the People on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app.

"Since 2010, lawyers in America have assumed that SuperPACs are required by the First Amendment. But this assumption is based on a clear mistake," Equal Citizens founder and Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Lessig joins us to discuss SuperPACs and the Equal Citizen's crowdfunded video competition to promote the need for their regulation.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/facepalm-america--5189985/support.

As the 2024 presidential election approaches, a vital question is whether the legal architecture governing the election is well crafted to prevent corruption and abuse. In their new book, “How to Steal a Presidential Election,” Lawrence Lessig and Matthew Seligman argue that despite the Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022, serious abuse of the presidential election rules remains a live possibility. Jack Goldsmith sat down with Lessig to learn why. They discussed the continuing possibility of vice presidential mischief, the complex role of faithless electors, strategic behavior related to recounts, and the threat of rogue governors. They also pondered whether any system of rules can regulate elections in the face of widespread bad faith by the actors involved.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As US Bombing of Syria and Iraq Continues, Will Iraq's Government be Forced to Eject 2,000 US Personnel Who Could Become Hostages? | Conflicting Reports of Rifts in Ukraine's Leadership | Did SCOTUS Give Trump and Republican Legislatures a Way to Steal the 2024 Election? backgroundbriefing.org/donate twitter.com/ianmastersmedia facebook.com/ianmastersmedia

Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig joins Matt to discuss the Trump ballot disqualification case and how the Supreme Court will handle it, plus Matt discusses a bizarre murder case posted in a YouTube video, Ilhan Omar and Cori Bush's latest controversies, and much more.

Dennis Prager Discusses the Article by Bret Stephens: The case for Trump … by someone who wants him to lose Dennis Prager Podcasts MLK Day  Jan 15 2024   Other Episodes Martin Luther King deserves his own special holiday. But so do George Washington and Abraham Lincoln… Bret Stephens, a full-on Trump despiser, makes (to his great credit) an excellent case as to why so many Americans find the former president to be such an attractive candidate… The world of the left is the world of lies. Dennis continues with his deconstruction of Brett Stephens' brave NY Times column explaining Trump's appeal to at least half of America. Dennis talks to Jeff Barke, MD. Internal Medicine doctor in Newport Beach, CA. His new book is Morning Message - Dispelling the Myths You've Been Told about Optimal Health.  Thanks for listening to the Daily Dennis Prager Podcast. To hear the entire three hours of my radio show as a podcast, commercial-free every single day, become a member of Pragertopia. You'll also get access to 15 years' worth of archives, as well as daily show prep. Subscribe today at Pragertopia dot com.  --------------------------------------------------------------------------   Article mentioned- Bret Stephens: The case for Trump … by someone who wants him to lose By Bret Stephens The New York Times. Jan 14, 2024   Barring a political miracle or an act of God, it is overwhelmingly likely that Donald Trump will again be the Republican Party's nominee for president. Assuming the Democratic nominee in the fall is Joe Biden, polls show Trump with a better-than-even chance of returning to the White House next year. Lord help us. What should those of us who have consistently opposed him do? You can't defeat an opponent if you refuse to understand what makes him formidable. Too many people, especially progressives, fail to think deeply about the enduring sources of his appeal — and to do so without calling him names, or disparaging his supporters, or attributing his resurgence to nefarious foreign actors or the unfairness of the Electoral College. Since I will spend the coming year strenuously opposing his candidacy, let me here make the best case for Trump that I can. Begin with fundamentals. Trump got three big things right — or at least more right than wrong. Arguably the single most important geopolitical fact of the century is the mass migration of people from south to north and east to west, causing tectonic demographic, cultural, economic and ultimately political shifts. Trump understood this from the start of his presidential candidacy in 2015, the same year Europe was overwhelmed by a largely uncontrolled migration from the Middle East and Africa. As he said the following year, “A nation without borders is not a nation at all. We must have a wall. The rule of law matters!” Many of Trump's opponents refuse to see virtually unchecked migration as a problem for the West at all. Some of them see it as an opportunity to demonstrate their humanitarianism. Others look at it as an inexhaustible source of cheap labor. They also have the habit of denouncing those who disagree with them as racists. But enforcing control at the border — whether through a wall, a fence or some other mechanism — isn't racism. It's a basic requirement of statehood and peoplehood, which any nation has an obligation to protect and cherish. Only now, as the consequences of Biden's lackadaisical approach to mass migration have become depressingly obvious on the sidewalks and in the shelters and public schools of liberal cities like New York and Chicago, are Trump's opponents on this issue beginning to see the point. Public services paid by taxes exist for people who live here, not just anyone who makes his way into the country by violating its laws. A job market is structured by rules and regulations, not just an endless supply of desperate laborers prepared to work longer for less. A national culture is sustained by common memories, ideals, laws and a language — which newcomers should honor, adopt and learn as a requirement of entry. It isn't just a giant arrival gate for anyone and everyone who wants to take advantage of America's abundance and generosity. It said something about the self-deluded state of Western politics when Trump came on the scene that his assertion of the obvious was treated as a moral scandal, at least by the stratum of society that had the least to lose from mass migration. To millions of other Americans, his message, however crudely he may have expressed it, sounded like plain common sense. The second big thing Trump got right was about the broad direction of the country. Trump rode a wave of pessimism to the White House — pessimism his detractors did not share because he was speaking about, and to, an America they either didn't see or understood only as a caricature. But just as with this year, when liberal elites insist that things are going well while overwhelming majorities of Americans say they are not, Trump's unflattering view captured the mood of the country. In 2017, demographer Nicholas Eberstadt joined this pessimistic perception with comprehensive data in an influential essay for Commentary. He noted persistently sluggish economic growth and a plunging labor force participation rate that had never recovered from the 2008 financial crisis. There was a rising death rate among middle-aged white people and declining life expectancy at birth, in part because of sharply rising deaths from suicide, alcoholism or drug addiction. More than 12% of all adult males had a felony conviction on their record, leaving them in the shadowlands of American life. And there was a palpable sense of economic decline, with fewer and fewer younger Americans having any hope of matching their parents' incomes at the same stages of life. Far too little has changed since then. Labor force participation remains essentially where it was in the last days of the Obama administration. Deaths of despair keep rising. The cost of living has risen sharply, and while the price of ordinary goods may finally be coming down, rents haven't. Only 36% of voters think the American dream still holds true, according to a recent survey, down from 48% in 2016. If anything, Trump's thesis may be truer today than it was the first time he ran on it. Finally, there's the question of institutions that are supposed to represent impartial expertise, from elite universities and media to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FBI. Trump's detractors, including me, often argued that his demagoguery and mendacity did a lot to needlessly diminish trust in these vital institutions. But we should be more honest with ourselves and admit that those institutions did their own work in squandering, through partisanship or incompetence, the esteem in which they had once been widely held. How so? Much of the elite media, mostly liberal, became openly partisan in the 2016 election — and, in doing so, not only failed to understand why Trump won but also probably unwittingly contributed to his victory. Academia, also mostly liberal, became increasingly illiberal, inhospitable not just to conservatives but to anyone pushing back even modestly against progressive orthodoxy. The FBI abused its authority with dubious investigations and salacious leaks that led to sensational headlines but not criminal prosecutions, much less convictions. The CDC and other public health bureaucracies flubbed the pandemic reaction, with (mostly) good intentions but frequently devastating consequences: “If you're a public health person and you're trying to make a decision, you have this very narrow view of what the right decision is, and that is something that will save a life,” former National Institutes of Health director Francis Collins acknowledged last month. “You attach zero value to whether this actually totally disrupts people's lives, ruins the economy, and has many kids kept out of school in a way they never quite recovered.” Trump and his supporters called all this out. For this, they were called idiots, liars and bigots by people who think of themselves as enlightened and empathetic and hold the commanding heights in the national culture. The scorn only served to harden the sense among millions of Americans that liberal elites are self-infatuated, imperious, hysterical and hopelessly out of touch — or, to use one of Trump's favorite words, “disgusting.” A few readers might nod their heads in (partial) agreement. Then they'll ask: What about the election denialism? What about Jan. 6? What about the threat Trump poses to the very foundations of our democracy? All disqualifying — in my view. But it's also important to stretch one's mind a little and try to understand why so many voters are unimpressed about the “end of democracy” argument. For one thing, haven't they heard it before — and with the same apocalyptic intensity? In 2016, Trump was frequently compared to Benito Mussolini and other dictators (including by me). The comparison might have proved more persuasive if Trump's presidency had been replete with jailed and assassinated political opponents, rigged or canceled elections, a muzzled or captured press — and Trump still holding office today, rather than running to get his old job back. The election denialism is surely ugly, but it isn't quite unique: Prominent Democrats also denied the legitimacy of George W. Bush's two elections — the second one no less than the first. Many rank-and-file Republicans regard the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol as a disgrace and the lowest point of Trump's presidency. But they also believe that it wasn't so much an insurrection as it was an ugly temper tantrum by Trump and his most rabid supporters that never had a chance of succeeding. One reason for that is that the judges Trump appointed to the federal bench and the Supreme Court rebuffed his legal efforts — and he had no choice but to accept the rulings. An American version of Vladimir Putin he simply is not. That's why warnings from Biden and others about the risk Trump poses to democracy are likely to fall flat even with many moderate voters. If there's any serious threat to democracy, doesn't it also come from Democratic judges and state officials who are using never-before-used legal theories — which even liberal law professors like Harvard's Lawrence Lessig regard as dangerous and absurd — to try to kick Trump's name off ballots in Maine and Colorado? When liberal partisans try to suppress democracy in the name of saving democracy, they aren't helping their cause politically or legally. They are merely confirming the worst stereotypes about their own hypocrisy. As it is, the 2024 election will not hinge on questions of democracy but of delivery: Which candidate will do more for voters? That will turn on perceptions of which candidate did more for voters when they were in office. Biden's supporters are convinced that the president has a good story to tell. But they also think that Trump has no story at all — only a pack of self-aggrandizing lies. That's liberal self-delusion. Excluding the pandemic, a once-in-a-century event that would have knocked almost any sitting president sideways, Americans have reasons to remember the Trump years as good ones — and good in a way that completely defied expert predictions of doom. Wages outpaced inflation, something they have just begun to do under Biden, according to an analysis by Bankrate. Unemployment fell to 50-year lows (as it has been under Biden); stocks boomed; inflation and interest rates were low. He appealed to Americans who operated in the economy of things — builders, manufacturers, energy producers, food services and the like — rather than in the economy of words — lawyers, academics, journalists, civil servants. And he shared the law-and-order instincts of normal Americans, including respect for the police, something the left seemed to care about on Jan. 6 but was notably less concerned about during the months of rioting, violence and semi-anarchy that followed George Floyd's murder. As for foreign policy, it's worth asking: Does the world feel safer under Biden — with Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Hamas' and Hezbollah's assault on Israel, Houthi attacks on shipping in international waters, the Chinese open threat to invade Taiwan — than it did under Trump? Trump may have generated a lot of noise, but his crazy talk and air of unpredictability seemed to keep America's adversaries on their guard and off balance in a way that Biden's instinctive caution and feeble manner simply does not. Ordinary voters care typically about results. What many care less about is Trump's purported offensiveness. It's at least worth asking whether his occasional Archie Bunkerisms are any more obnoxious than the incessant offense-taking, finger-wagging and fake prudishness of his opponents. Many of the same people who seemed to have suffered fainting spells when the notorious “Hollywood Access” tape came to light had, only a few years before, been utterly indifferent to much more serious allegations of sexual assault by Bill Clinton as Arkansas attorney general, governor and later president. You can fault Trump for coarseness, but you can't pretend we don't live in a coarse age. What about the other Republicans in the field? Why aren't they at least preferable to GOP primary voters than Trump, with all of his baggage and bombast? It's a good question. My pet theory is that if Republican voters think the central problem in America today is obnoxious progressives, then how better to spite them than by shoving Trump down their throats for another four years? If somehow Nikki Haley were to win the nomination and then the general election, her victory would be a matter of disappointment for Democrats but not the wailing and gnashing of teeth that went with Trump's victory in 2016. For many Republicans, the visceral satisfaction of liberal anguish at a Trump restoration more than makes up for his flaws. But there's a deeper reason, too — one Trump's opponents ought to consider in thinking about how to beat him. As writers like Tablet's Alana Newhouse have noted, brokenness has become the defining feature of much of American life: broken families, broken public schools, broken small towns and inner cities, broken universities, broken health care, broken media, broken churches, broken borders, broken government. At best, they have become shells of their former selves. And there's a palpable sense that the autopilot that America's institutions and their leaders are on — brain-dead and smug — can't continue. It shouldn't seem strange to Trump's opponents that a man whom we regard as an agent of chaos should be seen by his supporters as precisely the man who can sweep the decks clean. I happen to think that's exactly wrong; you don't mend damaged systems by breaking them even further. Repair and restoration is almost always better than reaction or revolution. But I don't see Trump's opponents making headway against him until they at least acknowledge the legitimacy and power of the fundamental complaint. If you're saying it's “Morning in America” when 77% of Americans think the country is on the wrong track, you're preaching to the wrong choir — and the wrong country. Trump's opponents say this is the most important election of our lifetime. Isn't it time, then, to take our heads out of the sand?   --------------------------------------------------------------------  Visit Pragertopia  https://pragertopia.com/member/signup.php  The first month is 99 cents. After the first month the cost is $7.50 per month. If you can afford to pay for only one podcast, this is the one we recommend. It is the best conservative radio show out there, period. ACU strongly recommends ALL ACU students and alumni subscribe to Pragertopia. Do it today!  You can listen to Dennis from 9 a.m. to Noon (Pacific) Monday thru Friday, live on the Internet  http://www.dennisprager.com/pages/listen  ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For a great archive of Prager University videos visit- https://www.youtube.com/user/PragerUniversity/featured   Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2eB2p0h Get PragerU bonus content for free! https://www.prageru.com/bonus-content Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips. iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/2aozfkP JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2aoz2y9 -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Rational Bible: Exodus by Dennis Prager   NATIONAL BESTSELLER "Dennis Prager has put together one of the most stunning commentaries in modern times on the most profound document in human history. It's a must-read that every person, religious and non-religious, should buy and peruse every night before bed. It'll make you think harder, pray more ardently, and understand your civilization better." — Ben Shapiro, host of "The Ben Shapiro Show" "Dennis Prager's commentary on Exodus will rank among the greatest modern Torah commentaries. That is how important I think it is. And I am clearly not alone... It might well be on its way to becoming the most widely read Torah commentary of our time—and by non-Jews as well as by Jews." — Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, bestselling author of Jewish Literacy Why do so many people think the Bible, the most influential book in world history, is outdated? Why do our friends and neighbors – and sometimes we ourselves – dismiss the Bible as irrelevant, irrational, immoral, or all of these things? This explanation of the Book of Exodus, the second book of the Bible, will demonstrate that the Bible is not only powerfully relevant to today's issues, but completely consistent with rational thought. Do you think the Bible permitted the trans-Atlantic slave trade? You won't after reading this book. Do you struggle to love your parents? If you do, you need this book. Do you doubt the existence of God because belief in God is “irrational?” This book will give you reason after reason to rethink your doubts. The title of this commentary is, “The Rational Bible” because its approach is entirely reason-based. The reader is never asked to accept anything on faith alone. As Prager says, “If something I write does not make rational sense, I have not done my job.” The Rational Bible is the fruit of Dennis Prager's forty years of teaching the Bible to people of every faith, and no faith. On virtually every page, you will discover how the text relates to the contemporary world and to your life. His goal: to change your mind – and then change your life.   Highly Recommended by ACU. Purchase his book at- https://www.amazon.com/Rational-Bible-Exodus-Dennis-Prager/dp/1621577724   The Rational Bible: Genesis by Dennis Prager  USA Today bestseller Publishers Weekly bestseller Wall Street Journal bestseller Many people today think the Bible, the most influential book in world history, is not only outdated but irrelevant, irrational, and even immoral. This explanation of the Book of Genesis, the first book of the Bible, demonstrates clearly and powerfully that the opposite is true. The Bible remains profoundly relevant—both to the great issues of our day and to each individual life. It is the greatest moral guide and source of wisdom ever written. Do you doubt the existence of God because you think believing in God is irrational? This book will give you many reasons to rethink your doubts. Do you think faith and science are in conflict? You won't after reading this commentary on Genesis. Do you come from a dysfunctional family? It may comfort you to know that every family discussed in Genesis was highly dysfunctional! The title of this commentary is “The Rational Bible” because its approach is entirely reason-based. The reader is never asked to accept anything on faith alone. In Dennis Prager's words, “If something I write is not rational, I have not done my job.” The Rational Bible is the fruit of Dennis Prager's forty years of teaching the Bible—whose Hebrew grammar and vocabulary he has mastered—to people of every faith and no faith at all. On virtually every page, you will discover how the text relates to the contemporary world in general and to you personally. His goal: to change your mind—and, as a result, to change your life.   The Rational Bible: Deuteronomy: God, Blessings, and Curses by Dennis Prager Is the Bible, the most influential book in world history, still relevant? Why do people dismiss it as being irrelevant, irrational, immoral, or all of these things? This explanation of the Book of Deuteronomy, the fifth book of the Bible, will demonstrate how it remains profoundly relevant - both to the great issues of our day and to each individual life. Do you doubt the existence of God because you think believing in God is irrational? This book will cause you to reexamine your doubts. The title of this commentary is The Rational Bible because its approach is entirely reason-based. The listener is never asked to accept anything on faith alone. In Dennis Prager's words, “If something I write is not rational, I have not done my job.” The Rational Bible is the fruit of Prager's forty years of teaching to people of every faith and no faith at all. In virtually every section, you will discover how the text relates to the contemporary world in general and to you on a personal level. His goal: to change your mind - and, as a result, to change your life.

Marta Peirano nos lleva hasta el 18 de noviembre de 1928, fecha en la que Mickey Mouse llegó al mundo, eso sí, a bordo de un barco a vapor y llamándose Steamboat Willie, para hablarnos de la ley del copyright. El ratón más famoso de todos los tiempos ha influido (¡y mucho!) en esta norma. Como ya decía Lawrence Lessig, el gran académico especialista en derecho digital, en su libro Cultura libre: “La ley del copyright en América se renueva cada vez que Mickey va a entrar en el dominio público porque Disney no quiere que otros hagan con su legado lo que Disney ha hecho con el legado de los hermanos Grimm”. Derechos de autor, dominio público y una cuantas conjeturas sobre el porvenir de Mickey Mouse, ahora que el ratoncito ha entrado en el dominio público, son todo lo que te espera en estos minutos.Escuchar audio

Professor Lawrence Lessig and Matthew Seligman detail their new book, 'How to Steal a Presidential Election.' Robin Marty, author of 'New Handbook for a Post-Roe America' and Executive Director of West Alabama Women's Center, gives us an on-the-ground look at women's health care in the South.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, I'm talking to internet policy legend Lawrence Lessig. He's been teaching law for more than 30 years, and is a defining expert on free speech and the internet — and something of a hero of mine, whose works I've been reading since college. You'll hear us agree that the internet at this moment in time is absolutely flooded with disinformation, misinformation, and other really toxic stuff that's harmful to us as individuals and, frankly, to our future as a functioning democracy. But you'll also hear us disagree a fair amount about what to do about it. The First Amendment, AI, copyright law — there's a lot to unpack here. Links:  https://asml.cyber.harvard.edu/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/10/17/1081194/how-to-fix-the-internet-online-discourse/ https://www.protocol.com/facebook-papers https://www.tiktok.com/@aocinthehouse/video/7214318917135830318?lang=en https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/sensitive-claims-bias-facebook-relaxed-misinformation-rules-conservative-pages-n1236182 https://bigthink.com/neuropsych/repetition-lie-truth-propaganda/ https://www.theverge.com/23883027/alvarez-stolen-valor-first-amendment-kosseff-liar-crowded-theater https://fortune.com/2023/05/30/sam-altman-ai-risk-of-extinction-pandemics-nuclear-warfare/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law/publications/landslide/2019-20/september-october/into-fandomverse/ Transcript: TK Credits:  Decoder is a production of The Verge and is part of the Vox Media Podcast Network. Today's episode was produced by Kate Cox and Nick Statt. It was edited by Callie Wright.  The Decoder music is by Breakmaster Cylinder. Our Executive Producer is Eleanor Donovan. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The new season of Another Way is finally here! In this episode, Lawrence Lessig outlines his plan for the season, which will eventually be turned into a book. Listeners are invited to reconceptualize the crisis that American democracy faces and to join Lessig in the search for democracy's "lifeboats".   

In this episode, Lawrence Lessig outlines our plan to fight back against SuperPACs. He explains the logical mistake in SpeechNow v. FEC, why we launched a video competition (with a $50,000 prize!), and the legal strategy that could render SuperPACs largely powerless.For more information on the video contest, visit:cancelsuperpacs.com

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_laws_that_choke_creativity ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/165-academic-words-reference-from-lawrence-lessig-laws-that-choke-creativity-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/CkUyG40SxtU (All Words) https://youtu.be/DEaTF0mhjvk (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/KlvY8z2Hm-Y (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_re_examining_the_remix ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/172-academic-words-reference-from-lawrence-lessig-re-examining-the-remix-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/_4pdwr-u6CU (All Words) https://youtu.be/0WysujZybiY (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/t9C1_ntYo6A (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/153-academic-words-reference-from-lawrence-lessig-we-the-people-and-the-republic-we-must-reclaim-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/cmvTK6s9q4c (All Words) https://youtu.be/SK3j4ivhLMw (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/gc9puaqM-fE (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

Join me for a one-on-one discussion with Harvard Law Professor, founder of Equal Citizens & author of They Don't Represent Us: Reclaiming Our Democracy, Lawrence Lessig.

In this episode we had the pleasure of speaking to Lawrence Lessig, the legal scholar known for coining the term "code is law" which if you've been in crypto, you'll know that this phrase has been very influential on the space. During the discussion we talk about the original design of the internet, how it has opened up a Pandora's box of overlapping sovereignties, and  the role of code in regulation and its implications for democracy. Check out a previous episode to learn more about our framework for out network state alternative,  coordi-nations.JOIN THE BLOCKCHAINGOV DISCORD SERVER HERE IF YOU WANT TO TAKE PART IN THE CONTINUED OVERTHROW AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE RISE OF COORDI-NATIONS.Overthrowing the Network State (OTNS) is a series in collaboration with Blockchaingov where we critique The Network State  by Balaji Srinivasan while also pulling out the salvageable parts and concepts in discussion with a variety of guests. You can find the first episode of OTNS where we give our initial criticisms and  alternatives here.Blockchaingov is a 5-year long, transdisciplinary research effort aimed at restoring trust in institutions at the community and global levels, by promoting better on chain and off chain distributed governance practices. Throughout the series, each discussion will include me and a member of Blockchaingov with either a new guest each episode or a discussion between us to tackle various topics from the book.If you liked the podcast be sure to give it a review on your preferred podcast platform. If you find content like this important consider donating to my Patreon starting at just $3 per month. It takes quite a lot of my time and resources so any amount helps. Follow me on Twitter (@TBSocialist) or Mastodon (@theblockchainsocialist@social.coop) and join the r/CryptoLeftists subreddit and Discord to join the discussion.Support the showICYMI I've written a book about, no surprise, blockchains through a left political framework! The title is Blockchain Radicals: How Capitalism Ruined Crypto and How to Fix It and is being published through Repeater Books, the publishing house started by Mark Fisher who's work influenced me a lot in my thinking. The book is officially published and you use this linktree to find where you can purchase the book based on your region / country.

What if the laws that allow billions of dollars of dark money to drive American politics are based on...a mistake? One of America's most prominent legal scholars thinks that's exactly what's happened, and he's going to give someone $50,000 to help him prove it. Lawrence Lessig is the Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School and the founder of Equal Citizens, an advocacy group whose mission is to fix democracy by establishing truly equal citizenship. On Labor Day, September 4, 2023, Equal Citizens will launch a video competition with (at least one) $50,000 prize for whoever can help clearly and concisely explain the legal argument for why SuperPACs can be regulated. To find out more about the contest and enter, go to the contest page: https://equalcitizens.us/crowdfund-video/ And to watch a longer explanation of Professor Lessig's argument, see this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPTY327iRJA&feature=youtu.be

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_the_unstoppable_walk_to_political_reform ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/106-academic-words-reference-from-lawrence-lessig-the-unstoppable-walk-to-political-reform-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/O0D-os-HgEE (All Words) https://youtu.be/NxioOG6xeic (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/A2IqZxETyas (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

Lawrence Lessig of Harvard University is the nation's foremost thinker and advocate for campaign finance reform around SuperPAC's. He joins the show to argue for governing political campaigns and SuperPAC's under the same rules.  Lessig's website and contest: https://equalcitizens.us/crowdfund-video/

In this episode, Lawrence Lessig speaks to Tristan Harris, the co-founder and Executive Director of the Center for Humane Technology, a nonprofit organization whose mission is to align technology with humanity's best interests. Lessig and Harris discuss the (real, not sci-fi-inspired) threats posed by generative A.I. (artificial intelligence) technology and some potential guardrails that could guide the technology in a way that benefits — not harms — society. This episode is the first of two previews for the upcoming season of Another Way.

"Since 2010, lawyers in America have assumed that SuperPACs are required by the First Amendment. But this assumption is based on a clear mistake," Equal Citizens founder and Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Lessig joins us to discuss SuperPACs and the Equal Citizen's crowdfunded video competition to promote the need for their regulation.Facepalm America: facepalmamerica.comTwitter: @FacepalmUSAFind Beowulf: @BeowulfRochlenThis show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/5189985/advertisement

How much does knowledge cost? While that sounds like an abstract question, the answer is surprisingly specific: $3,096,988,440.00. That's how much the business of publishing scientific and academic research is worth.  This is the story of one woman's battle against a global network of academic journals that underlie published scientific research. In 2011, Alexandra Elbakyan had just moved home to Kazakhstan after a disappointing few years trying to study neuroscience in the United States when she landed on an internet forum where a bunch of scientists were all looking for the same thing: access to academic journal articles that were behind paywalls. That's the moment the very simple, but enormously powerful, website called Sci Hub was born.  The site holds over 88 million articles and serves up about a million downloads to people in practically every country on the globe. We travel to Kazakhstan to meet the mysterious woman behind it all and to find out what it takes to make everything we know about anything available to anyone anywhere, for free.Special thanks to Vrindra Bhandari, Balázs Bodó, Stephen Buranyi, Ian Graber-Stiehl, Joel Joseph, Noorain Khalifa, Aparajita Lath, Steve McLaughlin, Marcia McNutt, Randy Scheckman Tanmay Singh, Deborah Harkness, Joe Karaganis, Lawrence Lessig, Glyn Moody, and Steven Press. Episode Credits:Reported by - Eli CohenReporting help from - Karishma MehrotraProduced by Simon Adlerwith help from - Eli CohenOriginal music and sound designed by - Simon AdlerMixing by - Jeremy BloomEdited by - Alex Neason Our newsletter comes out every Wednesday. It includes short essays, recommendations, and details about other ways to interact with the show. Sign up (https://radiolab.org/newsletter)! Radiolab is supported by listeners like you. Support Radiolab by becoming a member of The Lab (https://members.radiolab.org/) today. Radiolab is on YouTube! Catch up with new episodes and hear classics from our archive. Plus, find other cool things we did in the past — like miniseries, music videos, short films and animations, behind-the-scenes features, Radiolab live shows, and more. Take a look, explore and subscribe! Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @radiolab, and share your thoughts with us by emailing radiolab@wnyc.org.   Leadership support for Radiolab's science programming is provided by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Science Sandbox, a Simons Foundation Initiative, and the John Templeton Foundation. Foundational support for Radiolab was provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.  

Robot ethicist Kate Darling offers a nuanced and smart take on our relationships to robots and the increasing presence they will have in our lives. From a social, legal, and ethical perspective, she shows that our current ways of thinking don't leave room for the robot technology that is soon to become part of our everyday routines. Robots are likely to supplement, rather than replace, our own skills and relationships. Darling also considers our history of incorporating animals into our work, transportation, military, and even families, and shows how we already have a solid basis for how to contend with, and navigate our future with robots. Dr. Kate Darling works at the intersection of law, ethics and robotics; as a researcher at MIT Media Lab, author and intellectual property policy advisor. Her work with Dr. Lawrence Lessig, the Harvard Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, and other institutions explores the difficult questions that lawmakers, engineers, and the wider public will need to address as human-robot relationships evolve in the coming decades. Darling's work is widely published and covered in the media; and her new book is The New Breed: What Our History With Animals Reveals About Our Future With Robots.