Archive for the 'trust' Category

Page 2 of 7

future of university

Published by nesson on February 10, 2008 in berkmania, beyondbroadcast, family, harvard, IVY, lessig, nessons evidence, poker, rhetorical space, trust and university. Closed

feb092008.mp3

the_mission.mp3
here

hear it now

im-the-real-charlie-nesson.mp3

my-name-is-charlie-nesson.mp3

slideshow of open university opening up

GPSTSBusiness – 16 Feb 2008
subject Fwd: bracken on obama on the

i want license to use the wire in my online school. is this within the realm of fair use. i want colvin and pryzbylewski in my classrooms. i want to take it with me in a box to kingston prison and run my class for real in our prison lab. omar, as obama says, is a man of character playing by his code. the lessons of the wire are profound

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: wayne marshall
Date: 2008/1/15
Subject: bracken on obama on the wire!
To: Charles Nesson

http://bracken.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/what-obama-may-learn-from-omar/

inner mind

Published by nesson on January 30, 2008 in poker, rhetorical space and trust. Closed

where does it go from how crazy is that
should it go crazy
off into the eon dance
should it go sane

what is hunter thompson’s message
what was his freedom

don’t click that

Published by nesson on January 21, 2008 in rhetorical space and trust. 2 Comments

Don’t click here!

DoNotClick.org‘s power lies in its simplicity. The project’s main argument is that actions taken on the web have real consequences. When I initially saw this argument, my first thought was, “well, duh.” Obviously what I do on the internet affects the real word – when I buy books on Amazon.com, they show up on my door (with Amazon.com SuperSaver™ savings!) 5-9 business days later, as promised; when I register for classes on the Harvard MyPlan website, I get stuck in the queue for forty minutes and them am booted from the interface, just as expected. But as I read deeper into DoNotClick.org I found that my opinions about the nature of the internet weren’t as objective and informed as I had imagined.

It is the implicit position of most internet users that actions taken on the internet have no consequences. The nature of the internet fosters a set of assumptions and attitudes that can make a user feel that he or she inhabits a space of complete anonymity and, as DoNotClick.org shows, this sense of (false!) anonymity can have expensive, even disastrous consequences.

What makes this argument so effective is that it presents an overt message that seems so intuitive as to be obvious, and then shows just how counterintuitive that message actually is.

Visitors to DoNotClick.org inhabit both sides of the argument by first presenting a position that almost anyone can agree with (clicking has consequences) and then showing how the person being argued to is, in fact, you, the internet user with all your assumptions about anonymity – a really nice, satisfying, and powerful maneuver.

Berkman@10 Report

Published by nesson on December 28, 2007 in berkmania, harvard, poker, rhetorical space and trust. Closed

the-mission.mp3 ten years out

liberty – remember me – remember us – give thanks for the american jury

Published by nesson on November 22, 2007 in liberty, marijuana and trust. Closed

A presumption of liberty
Give me liberty or give me death
Live free or die
Liberty
This is what America is supposed to be about
This is the original understanding

Common sense in common wealth
An equilibrium reached by men who had achieved personal liberty and saw the benefits of sharing in community
Framing a constitution to capture in words the very best of their intelligence expressing all that’s good in life in common without sacrificing their essential personal liberty
Freedom
Freedom with responsibility makes common sense

What do we human have in common
I say common sense

Imagine ourselves as free men and women who sit together to decide what is best for us in common

Common sense says we agree first and foremost that we will not give up what is most precious to us. liberty. At the least we can agree to maintain a presumption of liberty as we thrust ourselves forward into the developing thicket of statutory Law. Understand, we are gathering to create a government which will make statutes. Statutes are made by men for citizens to follow, not to lead. Can we agree then that as we go forward into the thicket of the statutes our government will generate in our future that we proceed with a presumption of liberty against arbitrary override by whim special interest reflected in exercise of legislative and executive power.

Let us articulate as best WE can this presumption in broad strokes of freedom of religion and speech and trial by jury drawn from among us, expressing our underlying commitment to liberty in our own fundamental rules here to be made. Let us leave a presumption of liberty to the future to stand as a beacon above all other presumptions our government may make after this one. This is our foundation and our goal, our original understanding and our polestar to wisdom in the future.

The essential constitutional role of the american jury is to preserve our liberty. To perform this function the jury must be informed of its function, its power, and its responsibility.

the judiciary quite rightly presumes reason and requires only rationality in legislative statutes which do not tread on explicitly articulated constitutional rights. to do otherwise would assert judicial prerogative into legislative sphere.

this means that the judiciary provides no check on legislative statutes which though rational lack wisdom yet are backed by special interest. such statutes intrude upon the liberty of citizens in a manner which the authority of judges does not check. the check for that abuse of citizen liberty in our constitutional system is trial by jury.

A JURY OF OUR PEERS
a jury of our peers was to have been our protection, the gateway through which legislative edict would have to march before taking a citizen’s liberty away.

from the vantage of the people, and the subset of us which is the jury in a criminal case, our trial system frames a question to us which we answer with our verdict. the indictment frames a question in terms of the violation of a statute.

what is the question to which we want an answer before we see a man’s liberty taken away

is it:
(a) did he violate a legislative statute
(b) did he do something covered by a legislative statute that is wrong
(c) did he do something wrong

balance is the essence of our constitutional ideal

a massachusetts referendum asserts the legality of possession of small amounts of marijuana
this is an assertion of legality
we the people are the keepers of our liberty
we the people decide whether the legalisms of the law intrude too deeply upon us

we need neither judges and nor legal training to tell us that our liberty is infringed by arbitrary law

this is not a judgment that requires legal education
all the logic of education is on the other side
on this side is the justice in our hearts

it requires our willingness to speak truth from the justice in our hearts

verdict – speak truth – guilty or not guilty

veritas – gpsts

Published by nesson on July 31, 2007 in harvard, poker, rhetorical space, SET and trust. Closed

“To avoid destruction, the United States need only measure up to its own best traditions and prove itself worthy of preservation as a great nation.” george kennan

lovely thought
but a huge problem

the ideal of our nation is a government under law, not under men
yet now ingrained deep in our government is an attitude that deploys law as a weapon rather than follows law as an ideal

this ingrained ends justifies means attitude to the weilding of prosecutorial power corrupts the ideal of law.

imagine the universe of people divided among three groups in relation to law.
one group consists of those who obey rules because that’s what they have been taught to do. think of this group as a flock that asks and perhaps needs to be taken care of. another group consists of individuals who see rules for what they are and rises above them or sneaks below them when there is need. this second group subdivides between those who constrain them selves by belief in and expression of law as an ideal expressed in ethical behavior, make this group two, and those who abuse the credibility of law by abuse of power, group three.

my goal is to lead group two in its tension with group three to become self aware and combine its rhetorical force to express enlightening truth.

i teach law at harvard law school. i teach about truth and evidence of truth sufficient to persuade. i’ve been teaching Evidence at hls for enough years to have an army of students who might welcome from their old teacher and help propagate a new approach to truth and persuasion

truth, not just logical but emotional and physical. i believe there is truth in our hearts which we can seek to know in our minds and express in our actions. i am a student of truth. each of us has our own. i am we are students expressing truth. i am teacher. we are teachers. i want my students to find truth in themselves and express it.

truth for our future lies in a balance of power which has seen for profit legal corporations influence law in their self interest to the point of crushing public information space with law. but now a new form of organization is capable of thriving, made possible by the internet’s enabling people to connect. as legal architects we are able to conceive and propagate new forms of legal organization

my path to teaching my conception of truth leads to and through teaching poker as skill in seeing and understanding from another’s point of view. i teach this as a fundamental skill not just for lawyers but for anyone who is eager to learn how the rhetorical world works and connect it to the physical. i teach the teaching of it as exemplar and research.

there is corruption of law in relation to poker. our government seeks to kill online poker as collateral damage to its gambling hypocrisy, passing a midnight bill that never saw committee as part of a terrorism act, prosecuting the founding companies and individuals who made online poker possible, and thumbing its nose at little Antigua and no doubt soon to give the finger to the WTO which has ruled in Antigua’s favor against our govt.

this is exemplary of the corruption of law i would like to see our government foreswear.

i want to array the intelligent forces of the poker playing poker thinking world against it.

the united states government v. the intelligent forces of the poker playing poker thinking world

–announcing a trial on the issue of the legitimacy of teaching games of skill and of learning how to create environments in which to learn and play–

–announcing a poker strategic thinking workshop in singapore–

Online Poker – Internet Freedom – Open Education

Organized by the newly forming Global Poker Strategic Thinking
Society, this workshop combines open philosophy, internet strategy,
instructional entertainment, and vision of a line of development for
integrated real and virtual education fueled by human interest in
mastering games of skill, poker in the lead. We will begin by
distributing in advance of our workshop a paper on education in
virtual worlds. We will aim our trajectory going forward as projection
of a new way of thinking embodied in the learning and understanding of
a game. We will demonstrate the teaching of the game to beginners. We
will talk about why it is a good idea to teach poker to kids. We will
demonstrate transition to an integrated real and virtual internet
environment. We will introduce team play. We will examine
critical issues relating to poker and other games of skill in
education and beyond. What are the key strategic thinking points of
departure? How far should we go in promoting poker in the field of
education? Should poker be taught to children on the $100 laptop?
Can poker and poker strategic thinking serve as a departure point for
openness on the Internet, global education, and beyond. We do not
expect any previous knowledge of poker. We invite participation by those with
curiosity to learn.

international poker

Published by nesson on July 26, 2007 in General, poker, rhetorical space and trust. 1 Comment

so exciting for me to read rachel brewster’s paper on reputation. she teaches me evidence of truth at the level of nation states. she speaks of agreements that are “enforced” by mutual benefit, of agreements enforced by fear of sanction, of agreements enforced by fear of loss of reputation for keeping agreements.

so how did it go at cato

meeting itself disappointing but informative of how unrecognized and unrecognizable the antigua story is
set-up by cato not bad
thank you sally james
mendel begged for negotiation and made clear that he’s been wanting negotiation all along
jackson remarkably uninformed and obtuse but clear that the us govt defense will be mistake and then fight on the form and size of the award and bet that when the chips are down the wto won’t want to go there
vision a rhetorical poker table with players sitting round
antigua, us govt, EU, developing nations, WTO
so imagine
wto says antigua can violate us copyright
what happens next

cheating

Published by nesson on June 3, 2007 in poker and trust. Closed

i cheated in mr. hatch’s latin class. i used a trot. had i to chose a point in my life where i lost it that was it. instead of doing the job myself i copped someone else’s work. that’s when i stopped learning latin.

on my fiftieth birthday i drove back to exeter to pay george&co for the pair of grey flannel pants i stole. this cheat with hatch is even deeper back. i could forgive myself i suppose. it was latin got me in with high honors on the admissions test but i didn’t love it. around the harkness table translating latin, hatch roamed in back of you with a yard stick he would at times crack on the table. Yet even if i forgive myself, still, i learned to cheat. i explored its path. i have ever since felt the weakness it built into me. i retreated from expressing myself to a slightly scared being who lost the opportunity to build his confidence with the knowledge that he could do it for real. i have been in quest of a personal truth ever since that i let slip away from me. i feel more focused on the quest than if i’d been a natural.

is it better never to learn how to cheat or to learn how and then learn knot to?

deception

All warfare is based on deception.
SUN TZU ON THE ART OF WAR

synonyms DECEPTION, FRAUD, DOUBLE-DEALING, SUBTERFUGE, TRICKERY mean the acts or practices of one who deliberately deceives. DECEPTION may or may not imply blameworthiness, since it may suggest cheating or merely tactical resource . FRAUD always implies guilt and often criminality in act or practice . DOUBLE-DEALING suggests treachery or at least action contrary to a professed attitude . SUBTERFUGE suggests the adoption of a stratagem or the telling of a lie in order to escape guilt or to gain an end . TRICKERY implies ingenious acts intended to dupe or cheat .

On Wednesday, with the Yankees leading, 7-5, in the top of the ninth inning, Jorge Posada hit a two-out high pop that third baseman Howie Clark settled under. But as Rodriguez casually ran behind him toward third, he shouted something — “Ha!” according to Rodriguez; “Mine!” according to Clark.
Clark scooted away. The ball dropped.
It was ruled a hit for Posada, not an error on Clark. Hideki Matsui scored and Rodriguez was safe at third. Jason Giambi singled to drive in Rodriguez and Posada, and the Yankees went on to win, 10-5.

i like poker because it offers opportunity for deep study of deception. i want sun tzu to be my general. i want a president of my country who is a good poker player. i want my leader to have an instinct for sizing up a game.

i cheated john dimitri negroponte at bridge in the butt-room of wentworth hall, me and my partner, lee lescaze, when we were sixteen.

in poker as in baseball deception within rules and norms of play is accepted and respected. mastering deception means not only mastering skill at its accomplishment but also mastering wisdom in using it. now i’m sixty-eight.

tawfiq, are you a poker player? which translation of the koran do you prefer? what do you take its meaning to be?

Yusuf Ali

They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: “In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit.”

Pickthall

They question thee about strong drink and games of chance. Say: In both is great sin, and (some) utility for men; but the sin of them is greater than their usefulness.

i am curious about “gambling” in the first and “games of chance” in the second, thinking that poker is certainly a form of gambling but is surely to be distinguished from the casting of lots. i know neither mohammed nor jesus would cast lots with me, but would Mohammed play poker with me? would Jesus play poker with me?

poker

Published by nesson on May 1, 2007 in berkmania, General, harvard, poker, rhetorical space and trust. Closed

poker is quintescentially an american game, american invention, universal in its appeal, open as the frontier to anyone to learn the skill of bid and call and bluff and raise and fold. no better game to learn how to win and lose and how to feel about it. no finer way to come to terms with your personal relationship to risk and resource, finding balance in the flow of signals in the brain for defense, for aggression, for neutrality, women, men, old, young, every race, every religion, a moment to learn a lifetime to master, understanding that the ante and the blinds buy you the privilege of neutrality in the choice you have to fold, but every time you fold you pay a little. you need a little aggression to offset this leak in the assets you have to live with. you start to feel and see that this is how you play not just this game but the game of life.

here’s email from amwoods at hlcentral

“Andrew M. Woods”
to me

show details
7:25 pm (7 hours ago)

Professor-

I happened upon this the other day, and have been meaning to forward it to you:

http://media.www.hlrecord.org/media/storage/paper609/news/2006/03/16/News/FirstTimer.Wins.Charity.Poker.Tournament-1688977.shtml

While the article isn’t exactly a stirring defense of the importance of skill in poker – a first time player won the tournament, you may be interested to notice at the bottom of paragraph 2 the article describes the faculty participation in the public interest charity tournament. That faculty included one Professor Charles Nesson, “who hung in for several rounds before being knocked out by 1L Andrew Woods”. 🙂

(While I may have put you out, you do look better in the photo – they only got the side of me…)

-Andrew

——————————–

Andrew M. Woods
Director of Events
HL Central
(310) 254-5218
amwoods@law.harvard.edu

as we spoke last night poker university took shape
enquiry into the genius of the game top down
professor and professor with sister annie
andy bloch producer
full tilt on a table of ten
avatars driven by students of all ages in classrooms round the globe
global classrooms to engage our poker curriculum in which the culmination course is tournaments
open to developing nations as an expression of american democracy

eon here
the crazy guy of lessig’s dedication
let poker be the message that goes out through libraries and classrooms
it’s the spirit of america we are fighting for

assume you are playing poker with a fundamentalist
schelling’s madman at the door
are you bargaining with him or is he bargaining with you

this is a better game than the game with bombs and guns
people who make bombs and guns are the enemy
why prefer their game to ours

we make the bombs and guns and the markets into which to sell them
we are on a road to blowing ourselves apart if we can’t figure out how to find our norms

one thing you can say about a fundamentalist
their action is grounded in deep spirit
twisted we may think to evil ends yet spirit nonetheless

suppose a poker game between the avatar of our spirit and the avatar of his
what would be our conversation
what have i got that he wants that i can give him
what is he looking for
he says he’s looking for one thing but you know he is looking for another

suppose the chips in the game are the minds of people
the question in each individual mind which spirit speaks truth in its understanding of the world
quick
the stick
fight
youre right

so okay let’s get to it
teresa and librarians of the world
eIFL.net consortium of consortia of libraries
communia thematic network
where better to assemble to play a global online poker game than is community libraries and schools starting with solar power electricity, hardware to structure and control the flow of electric bits, connection to the net and thus to UNIVERSITY

the berkman center has a grant from the state department of the united states of america to teach democracy. american democracy is spirit in US to express.

as i type into this blog i am listening to the recording of our poker meeting before the formal meeting began, low murmers and talk of separate conversations with lovely jokes. annie tells the story of a man addicted to water, was drinking eight gallons a day, he died, and me telling the story of last year’s public service poker tournament pictured above in which andrew m woods knocked me out, how we couldn’t do it this year because of government regulation.

uploading it to z share
hope it works
i’ll bet there are some folks out there deep enough into the game to listen to poker pros talking poker to each other
yes it does! here it is: http://www.zshare.net/audio/poker1-mp3.html

last night another berkman book party, david weinberger, everything is miscellaneous, a gift to all librarians as we come to see internet as library. david, a poker question. i have written to game theorists asking them how they classify texas hold’em poker in the taxonomy of their rigorous systematic way of understanding our reality. in answer to the conceptual question of relationship of one think to another miscellaneous doesn’t tell us much. are you speaking to scientists as well as to librarians?

hello wiki/wikia – hello clippinger – hello fern

Published by nesson on April 20, 2007 in berkmania, family, General, rhetorical space and trust. Closed

first fern
read up from the bottom
which way does mind flow go
i & i
want to know

pteridologist

A fern is any one of a group of about 20,000 species of plants classified in the phylum or division Pteridophyta, also known as Filicophyta. The group is also referred to as polypodiophyta, or polypodiopsida when treated as a subdivision of tracheophyta (vascular plants). The study of ferns is called pteridology; one who studies ferns is called a pteridologist.

a fern sleeps upstairs dreaming of a man: is it me?
is she complement to me with all my waking energy
going somewhere else.

i rise now to fly down the mountain having told myself the story i am changing
charge out to meet and play with men
how many times have i left her this way only to get high and come rushing back to her
no good
she does not love me when i’m high
she loves that other guy

she wants straight love
i am crooked
she wants attention
i place it else where
she has a grievance
i can see
she wants me
needs me
where am i
here with you ready to rush to her again
while she is with another guy

how high is high
where does it go
how do i get down

don’t rush back
signal welcome
let her come to you
here i am
talking to myself

clippinger
thank you for a lovely party
thank you for a crowd of one
thank you to a lovely group
please invite them to my party
is2k7

i want everyone to come
i want the world to see
university
a smoother cooler version of reality
in real virtuality

john starts his lovely book
way in north new hampshire
follows his thought
all the way to war
feel this man
he is a man of peace

listen to this man
feel peace in him
feel peace in where he comes from
trust you can approach

pteridologist
what does it mean?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fern

i have just requested a wikia in the name of eon
http://requests.wikia.com/wiki/Eon
in the cause of university
wikia university
we come in peace
we are firm and friendly
well, some times maybe knot

admire the process by which the process is made
click here