[consider] The future of the internet, and freedom of the network (http://health20.kr/2053)
Today I want to write on a somewhat heavier topic. After the Jasmine Revolution, the world is once again rethinking the role of the internet and social media. Do we have freedom? And going forward, in a more decentralized environment, I want to argue that we need new technologies and systems for the network.
The internet is certainly far more open to bottom-up change than it was in the past, and it has become decentralized. Originally, the U.S. Department of Defense designed it so that even if a nuclear strike occurred, the network would not be destroyed and communication could survive — so the power of a distributed network has already been demonstrated in many places. When the earthquake hit Haiti and all means of communication were cut off, the internet survived and the situation could be relayed through interviews on YouTube. And in Iran and various Middle Eastern countries that entered situations where all media were controlled, the fact that they were ultimately able to convey their stories to the outside world was, undeniably, only made possible because the internet existed.
However, whether today's internet really is that free a creature, and whether it is really that satisfactory, is open to a lot of reconsideration. The internet is still operated by some kind of centralized management system. Recent cases show that it is entirely possible to easily impose control by gripping and operating the Domain Name Server (DNS) which translates IP addresses into names, as well as the ISPs (Internet Service Providers) that provide internet service. For example, when WikiLeaks published U.S. diplomatic cables, the U.S. government took the measure of blocking the entire top-level domain related to it, and selectively filtering specific IP addresses is already very simply done from homes and companies all the way up to governments. In countries like China, even preemptive censorship and control over potentially problematic words and keywords are possible through ISPs, and many governments and companies in other countries that find such technologies attractive will likely try to develop or adopt similar technologies for their own use.
Fundamentally, the reason this situation is unavoidable is that the high-speed communication backbone underpinning today's internet is in fact owned and operated by a number of corporations. When the internet first started, the role of ISPs connecting to the internet network was held by universities and media companies that represented the public, but now the service itself has been commercialized and has long since been effectively privatized into corporate hands. And we, through our transactions with them, are unwittingly agreeing to clauses that can infringe on our freedom while using their services. Depending on the case, in line with the company's interests or by order of the state, they can at any time block access to various kinds of content, close ports so that sharing is impossible, or prevent new applications we have created from running. Fundamentally, the internet is not a "free space" at all but a "controllable space."
Let's take a quick look back. Before the internet, how did we use network communication? The first thing that comes to mind is the so-called PC communication services. Companies like Chollian and Hitel provided services and many people of that time were enthusiastic about PC communication. But these were systems that were even easier to control than today's internet. However, what about the private BBSs that were popular at the time? Many local services like Hoongbool gathered people privately and were able to form networks. They built servers in their own homes, took out phone numbers that didn't matter if they were busy, and ran services around them. These countless private BBSs, before the phone network was controlled, ran their own services according to their own judgment and the judgment of the community. Some operated 24 hours, but mostly they ran briefly at night, sharing the warmth of small communities. Skilled operators even gave out email accounts. Looking back at that time, if the connection service to the network and the operating structure itself were decentralized, an internet much freer than today would become possible.
So what kind of technology should appear from now on? In any case, this is no longer the era of wired networks. What if, like amateur ham radio or walkie-talkies of the past, we set up a public frequency, and let them connect by crisscrossing each other's networks? Today's smartphones are computers that far exceed the level of the PCs of the past. If they each play the role of server and client and connect to one another, couldn't another kind of internet be born? Perhaps the various mesh technologies being researched as offshoots of WiMax or WiFi will be one such breakthrough. In that case, each node could play the role of an ISP, like ants connected via the internet, and even if there's a problem on one side, the technology could be developed to allow detouring to another side.
It's the same with social networks and the social web. Ultimately, owning and managing the social graph is at the heart of it, and having everything taken by a single company is extremely dangerous. That's why we need to be wary of Facebook. Even if it's not yet powerful and the level is poor, we should pay much more attention to technologies like Diaspora that can build distributed social networks. The future of humanity, in the end, is when each individual's power grows stronger, when distributed systems where they can produce the energy needed to live and take care of food, clothing, and shelter on their own are reinforced — that's when, undaunted by state control or huge natural disasters like the one that struck Japan, we can protect our happiness. Shouldn't we pour much more attention into various technologies that allow not only the logic of capital but the dispersion of power and self-sufficiency?
Source: from the High Concept & High Touch blog http://health20.kr/2053
p.s.
As the blogger who wrote the source piece said when starting the article, this is a somewhat heavy topic.
But as I read it.. it felt like a piece carrying important insights,
so I added emphasis to the parts I personally thought were important to make it a little easier to read..
So what kind of technology should appear from now on? In any case, this is no longer the era of wired networks. What if, like amateur ham radio or walkie-talkies of the past, we set up a public frequency, and let them connect by crisscrossing each other's networks? Today's smartphones are computers that far exceed the level of the PCs of the past. If they each play the role of server and client and connect to one another, couldn't another kind of internet be born? Perhaps the various mesh technologies being researched as offshoots of WiMax or WiFi will be one such breakthrough. In that case, each node could play the role of an ISP, like ants connected via the internet, and even if there's a problem on one side, the technology could be developed to allow detouring to another side.
It's the same with social networks and the social web. Ultimately, owning and managing the social graph is at the heart of it, and having everything taken by a single company is extremely dangerous. That's why we need to be wary of Facebook. Even if it's not yet powerful and the level is poor, we should pay much more attention to technologies like Diaspora that can build distributed social networks. The future of humanity, in the end, is when each individual's power grows stronger, when distributed systems where they can produce the energy needed to live and take care of food, clothing, and shelter on their own are reinforced — that's when, undaunted by state control or huge natural disasters like the one that struck Japan, we can protect our happiness. Shouldn't we pour much more attention into various technologies that allow not only the logic of capital but the dispersion of power and self-sufficiency?
Source: from the High Concept & High Touch blog http://health20.kr/2053
p.s.
As the blogger who wrote the source piece said when starting the article, this is a somewhat heavy topic.
But as I read it.. it felt like a piece carrying important insights,
so I added emphasis to the parts I personally thought were important to make it a little easier to read..
- Open in Google Docs Viewer
- Open link in new tab
- Open link in new window
- Open link in new incognito window
- Download file
- Copy link address
- Edit PDF File on PDFescape.com
