[ggareau]

Firstly, I'm pretty sure that his buy local/community action thing has nothing to do with local authors. He's arguing that people should buy from local bookshops rather than large chains or over the internet because a part of our culture (the small, welcoming bookshop) is quickly disappearing - like local coffeeshops which are being supplanted by Starbucks.

It's true. And I don't care. I read enough about enough things that I can rarely find what I want in a local bookshop - they don't have the room for a good selection. And on the things they *do* have, I can buy them at a big-box store for much less. Maybe I'm losing the local bookshop experience, but frankly I go to bookshops for books, not conversation. I'm sure others go for the experience - I'm just not one of them.

Secondly, regarding natives (Native Americans, Native Canadians) they really have been screwed over enough for special consideration. There's a lot of prejudice that still goes on between people in rural areas and people on the reservation (some of it warranted, some of it not) and I have no issues with them calling themselves Indians - I know a few who do. Happily Indian isn't so much a grenade as the n-word is though. But no, you shouldn't call natives Indians, though them calling each other that is a non-issue.

And while I'm not a fan of affirmative action-like policies, They're necessary for now. Until people working at comparable jobs with comparable experience get the same pay, something needs to change. In addition, the more viewpoints we have on a topic via cultural reference, the more answers we'll get. There is a point where we need to be actively encouraging non-whites and females into things like computer science. Currently it only reinforces the idea that "my way (which in that particular case is the white male way) is the best way" and that's not good for anyone.

Thirdly, you cannot stop piracy and there's no point trying. Anyone can digitize any book and once one person does, anybody else can access it. DRM can't and won't fix the problem since it's fundamentally flawed from the start. Besides, borrowing books from libraries and other people has led to me spending thousands of dollars over the years. Getting MP3s for free over the internet has led to me spending close to $500/year on music.

The funny thing is that the open source movement has accepted these things and moved on. OSS and Creative Commons are effectively "we can't stop you from doing what you want, so let's try to mitigate the harm to the future." OSS and Creative Commons are the only viable model of copyright and property that I've seen moving forwards outside of a Big Brother-esque police state. I have no idea how Alexie takes open source and turns it into big brother but doesn't see big brother as the only option for the type of copyright control that he wants.

Lastly, don't kid yourself - Colbert knows exactly what's going on. He's encouraged people to remix his own stuff despite his character's strict capitalistic view. He's repeatedly gotten people on to talk about creative commons, copyright, and alternate revenue sources for artists. Generally he just lets them run their mouths though - he seems to want to take in as many opinions as possible - and that's fine. Colbert is not the thought police.