NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] The Coming Fascist Internet
The Coming Fascist Internet
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000911.html
Around four decades ago or so, at the U.S. Defense Department funded
ARPANET's first site at UCLA -- what would of course become the
genesis of the global Internet -- I spent a lot of time alone in the
ARPANET computer room. I'd work frequently at terminals sandwiched
between two large, noisy, minicomputers, a few feet from the first
ARPANET router -- Interface Message Processor (IMP) #1, which
empowered the "blindingly fast" 56 Kb/s ARPANET backbone. Somewhere I
have a photo of the famous "Robby the Robot" standing next to that
nearly refrigerator-sized cabinet and its similarly-sized modem box.
I had a cubicle I shared elsewhere in the building where I also
worked, but I kept serious hacker's hours back then, preferring to
work late into the night, and the isolation of the computer room was
somehow enticing.
Even the muted roar of the equipment fans had its own allure, further
cutting off the outside world (though likely not particularly good for
one's hearing in the long run).
Occasionally in the wee hours, I'd shut off the room's harsh
fluorescent lights for a minute or two, and watch the many blinking
lights play across the equipment racks, often in synchronization with
the pulsing and clicking sounds of the huge disk drives.
There was a sort of hypnotic magic in that encompassing, flickering
darkness. One could sense the technological power, the future coiled
up like a tight spring ready to unwind and energize many thousands of
tomorrows.
But to be honest, there was little then to suggest that this stark
room -- in conjunction with similar rooms scattered across the country
at that time -- would trigger a revolution so vast and far-reaching
that governments around the world, decades later, would cower in
desperate efforts to leash it, to cage its power, to somehow turn back
the clock to a time when communications were more firmly under the
thumbs of the powers-that-be.
There were some clues. While it was intended that the ARPANET's
resource sharing capabilities would be the foundation of what we now
call the "cloud," the ARPANET was (somewhat to the consternation of
various Defense Department overseers) very much a social space from
the beginning.
Starting very early on, ARPANET communications began including all
manner of personal discussions and interests, far beyond the narrow
confines of "relevant" technical topics. A "wine tasting enthusiasts"
mailing list triggered reprimands from DoD when it became publicly
known thanks to a magazine article, and I won't even delve here into
the varied wonders of the "network hackers" and "mary hartman" mailing
lists.
In fact, the now ubiquitous mailing list "digest" format was
originally invented as a "temporary" expedient when "high volumes" of
traffic (by standards of the time) threatened the orderly distribution
of the science-fiction and fantasy oriented "sf-lovers" mailing list.
Many other features that we take for granted today in email systems
were created or enhanced largely in reaction to these sorts of early
"social" communications on the very young Net.
The early ARPANET was mostly restricted to the U.S., but as
international points began to come online the wonders expanded. I
still remember the day I found myself in a "talk" (chat) link with a
party at a military base in Norway -- my first international live
contact on the Net that I knew of. I remember thinking then that
someday, AT&T was going to start getting concerned about all this.
The power of relatively unfiltered news was also becoming apparent
back then. One of my projects involved processing newswire data
(provided to me over the ARPANET on a friendly but "unofficial" basis
from another site) and building applications to search that content
and alert users (both textually and via a synthesized voice
phone-calling system -- one of my other pet projects) about items of
interest.
For much of the Net's existence, both phone companies and governments
largely ignored (or at least downplayed) the ARPANET, even as it
evolved toward the Internet of today.
AT&T and the other telcos had explicitly expressed disinterest early
on, and even getting them to provide the necessary circuits had at
times been a struggle. Governments didn't really seem to be worried
about an Internet "subculture" that was limited mostly to the
military, academia, and a variety of "egghead" programmers variously
in military uniforms and bell-bottoms, whether sporting crew cuts,
scruffy longhairs, or somewhere in-between.
But with the fullness of time, the phone companies, cable companies,
governments, and politicians galore came to most intensely pay
attention to the Internet, as did the entertainment industry behemoths
and a broad range of other "intellectual property" interests.
Their individual concerns actually vary widely at the detailed level,
but in a broader context their goals are very much singular in focus.
They want to control the Internet. They want to control it utterly,
completely, in every technologically possible detail (and it seems in
various technically impossible ways as well).
The freedom of communications with which the Internet has empowered
ordinary people -- especially one-to-many communications that
historically have been limited to governments and media empires
themselves -- is viewed as an existential threat to order, control,
and profits -- that is, to historical centers of power.
Outside of the "traditional" aspects of government control over their
citizenries, another key element of the new attempts to control the
Net are desperate longings by some parties to turn back the
technological clock to a time when music, movies, and other works
could not so easily be duplicated and disseminated in "authorized"
fashions.
The effective fall of copyright in this context was preordained by
human nature (we are physical animals, and the concept of non-physical
"property" plays against our natures) and there's been a relentless
"march of bits" -- with text, music, and movies entering the fray in
turn as ever more data could be economically stored and transferred.
In their efforts to control people and protect profits, governments
and associated industries (often in league with powerful Internet
Service Providers -- ISPs -- who in some respects are admittedly
caught in the middle), seem willing to impose draconian, ultimately
fascist censorship, identification, and other controls on the Internet
and its users, even extending into the basic hardware in our homes and
offices.
I've invoked fascism in this analysis , and I do not do so lightly.
The attacks on fundamental freedoms to communicate that are
represented by various government repression of the Internet around
the world, and in the U.S. by hypocritical legislation like PROTECT IP
and SOPA (E-PARASITE), are fundamentally fascist in nature, despite
between wrapped in their various flags of national security,
anti-piracy profit protection, motherhood, and apple pie.
Anyone or anything that is an enabler of communications not willingly
conforming to this model are subject to attack by authorities from a
variety of levels -- with the targets ranging from individuals like
you and me, to unbiased enablers of organic knowledge availability
like Google.
For all the patriotic frosting, the attacks on the Internet are really
attacks on what has become popularly known as the 99%, deployed by the
1% powers who are used to having their own way and claiming the
largest chunks of the pie, regardless of how many ants (that's us!)
are stomped in the process.
This is not a matter of traditional political parties and alliances.
In the U.S., Democrats and Republican legislators are equally culpable
in these regards.
This is a matter of raw power that transcends other ideologies, of the
desire of those in control to shackle the Internet to serve their
bidding, while relegating free communications for everyone else to the
dustbin of history.
It is very much our leaders telling us to sit down, shut up, and use
the Internet only in the furtherance of their objectives -- or else.
To me, these are the fundamental characteristics of a fascist world
view, perhaps not in the traditional sense but clearly in the ultimate
likely impacts.
The Internet is one of the most important tools ever created by
mankind. It certainly ranks with the printing press, and arguably in
terms of our common futures on this tiny planet perhaps even with
fire.
The question is, are we ready and willing to fight for the Net as it
should be in the name of civil rights and open communications? Or
will we sit back compliantly, happily gobble down the occasional
treats tossed in our direction, and watch as the Internet is perverted
into a monstrous distortion to control speech and people alike, rather
than enabling the spread of freedom.
Back in that noisy computer room so many years ago, I couldn't imagine
that I was surrounded by machines and systems that would one day lead
to such a question, and to concerns of such import.
The blossoming we've seen of the Internet was not necessarily easy to
predict back then. But the Internet's fascist future is much more
clear, unless we fight now -- right now -- to turn back the gathering
evil.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com): http://www.vortex.com/lauren
Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org
Founder:
- Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org
- Global Coalition for Transparent Internet Performance: http://www.gctip.org
- PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com
Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Google+: http://vortex.com/g+lauren
Twitter: https://twitter.com/laurenweinstein
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com