I found this weeks readings rather interesting, particularly Barlow's 'A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace.' When reading the article I was constantly thinking to myself that this sounds too good to be true. Having a place where everyone is equal, there is no control or rule by a certain party and the thoughts and relationships of anyone can be freely expressed is extremely hard to comprehend. That's not to say that its impossible, but highly unlikely.
What stuck in my mind from the article was the continued reference to Government, and the sense of a higher power that it presents. Most of us living in western society are used to this, as in most cases there are things or people that have some sort of control in how we live our lives. Whether that be something related to religion, a boss, adults, friends, politicians, morals, ethics, laws and codes of conduct these things influence and can assert control on our lives. We are free to an extent, but there is always something bigger that determines what we can and cannot do in the world. Cyberspace changed this whole idea, by presenting the notion of a utopian system, and I think this is why Governments in particular, are worried and scared about it's potential.
Now in a perfect world a utopian society would be exactly what is described in Barlow's declaration. However, we all know that nothing is perfect. If we were to remove all the laws, ethics and various other guidelines that control the real world today it would be chaos! I cannot begin to imagine what it would be like. So having these rules in place is for a good reason, and I can understand why Governments have implemented them. The problem with cyberspace is that it has been designed to be a free world, open to anyone and devoid of a higher level of control. Why this worries Governments is because they are used to having some level of control of the people they govern. Whether this be for personal gain, to protect, to align with, no matter what the case they are always associated with control. When a Government or higher party is not in control, another group arises to take the mantle and implements a whole new level of control. You only need to look at uprising's, rebellions, riots, civil wars etc to see when this occurs.
The potential of cyberspace is limitless and Governments know that when they aren't in control, it's never a good thing. In a world, albeit synthetic, where everyone is equal and free speech reigns it is easy to understand why they should be worried and why they are now trying to assert some level of control in cyberspace. Should they intervene? Or should cyberspace be left as it was always intended to be?
I think the governments of the world already have intervened. I mean, they do have the power to disconnect the internet and the like. Also, there are 'cyberpolice' who prevent harmful acts from happening. Just as an example, this article on the London riots and the use of Facebook to incite a riot: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/four-years-jail-for-facebook-post-that-incited-no-one-20110817-1ix4h.html
ReplyDeleteThis saw two guys locked up, all because the police were monitoring the guys facebook pages. So I think there has already been an intervention, and it's not really that bad. We still have our freedom of expression on the net, and we are sort of all equal and free, it's just if you are going to do something blatantly illegal, you will probably get caught.
I completely agree, There is something almost touching about the way in which early creators of Web communities and activists believed that the internet would provide a genuinely new environment, one in which traditional notions of power, ownership and control were abolished, and in which property was held in common (e.g. John Perry Barlow’s – ‘A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace’). There is this belief that it is the ability to communicate directly and instantaneously that allows a true democratic community to arise. Unfortunately its just not reality.
ReplyDelete