Revised Manifesto

As I re-read my Manifesto, there were several phrases that struck me as being particularly relevant as I consider the scope of the information contained in the course over the past semester. I would not make any changes to any of the information contained in the Manifesto, but would definitely re-emphasize the following phrases if I were to re-write it:

“the buying and selling of knowledge (which is inherently intangible), serves only to inhibit serious intellectual development and growth which may in effect lead to an empire in creative thought.”

The example that comes to mind when re-reading this statement is the debate over MIT Open Courseware. MIT feels that while information can be free, there are still certain procedures in place when it comes to obtaining a degree from their institution. While technological developments in empires such as the internet have led some to admit that certain practices are outdated and ineffective, changes do not have to take place within the hierarchical structure of obtaining a formal degree.

“we reject all forms of censorship”

I think the idea of censorship throughout this class goes far beyond the idea of omitting offensive content from novels such as Lady Chatterley’s Lover or 1984. The fact that The New York Times requires subscriptions to site content could be viewed as a form of censorship. Expanding on the last example, professors in the academic setting who choose to restrict the use of their knowledge on the ground that it is their “intellectual property” also becomes a form of censorship when simple information is not made available to the public. The success of the internet is that it thrives on the fact that knowledge and information are both available. Removing either of these essential components would serve only to inhibit the progress that had been made thus far in the technological fields.