Internet could get us into an era of glass breaking through the limits of several dimensions that describe our lives, from the smaller Family: space and time. In many places there's attempts to prevent the advent of this new era and we still do not know if they can postpone the execution.
space is canceled by the speed with which any bit of information goes around the world. Not yet possible to be physically present somewhere else on cable transferring the nerves that transmit sensitive data to our brains, but it certainly can even now see, hear, interact at a distance using technology brokers. The distance is no longer an impediment as it was until recently, when it was necessary to move and move.
Time is set aside to the extent that it becomes impossible to forget something, the amount of information that is stored in the database digital world is immense. No need for extensive research in dusty archives of some remote storeroom to find information, the speed of computers allows us to 'remember' anything in a few seconds, anywhere in the world.
Yet all this is based on a fragile infrastructure. Just cut a cable ocean. A magnetic storm could destroy digital media. The waiver to the area carries the risk of permanent and irrecoverable loss of data. A waiver of the time carries the risk of a memory that never forgets. Political power is able to control the internet in many ways, from a reprimand to espionage, passing laws that regulate access, use, rights and obligations related to freedom of expression, copyright, pornography, violence, invasion of privacy. Economic power is able to impose means of access to the network related to the use of exclusive services, transforming an environment that is free in an unattended with an excuse to protect you from danger and abuse.
This is the great challenge of the Internet, very similar to that of democracy: to demonstrate to earn it. The authority intervened and marketing ploys are getting leverage on human weakness. We can not put cameras because they, too, a citizen, you may have a reason for not wanting to be resumed. The politicians say. We sell this device that forces you to use only the internet that I decide, but that will protect you from harm and makes you feel cool. This says that the company wants you all to herself.
There are the singers of the era of glass. Authors who take creative license sharing: You can do anything you want with the work, except to change it, claim it as yours, get money. Governments to make public statistics on the network, information that makes clear the situations that would otherwise remain a mystery wrapped nell'omertà of ignorance and deliberate defense. There are two main obstacles to overcome: the network is not a place to make money, the network is not a place to keep hidden information.
For example, I read the New York City taxi. Since they were equipped with GPS and computerized management, you can know everything about where they go when they go, which way do, at what time they are many and in what area of \u200b\u200bthe city. If you forget something on the taxi phones, you say where you got and where you come down and they trace the taxi and we'll return what is yours, something that would never happen without it, your stuff would be lost forever.
Another example. Just today we want to make available online all the curriculum of public teachings. You can see who is better than someone else and this gives a lot of discomfort to many. The singers of the era Glass does not bother at all. It might even be useful to shed light on the suspicion that state exams in certain cities are deceptive, since it is not clear why they shoot a lot of people hundreds of miles to do the test right there and not elsewhere. If those who go to make the examination there are also the most poor ... not need a computer to put two and two.
We must make decisions about the fragility of the network infrastructure that could break or cause us to lose an immense amount of data in a flash. We must consider whether to allow the network to 'forget', and what to delete when it is difficult to determine. We must understand that governments and companies have a love / hate relationship with the network, without there being any reason and authority delegated to 'speak' on behalf of the network because the network does not exist legally (does not have an owner does not have a board of directors, has no legal department). We must take a position on privacy far more articulate than the current one, verifying the cost-benefit choices regarding the publication of information that must remain secret for anyone in the name of a principle and not a real rationale.
0 comments:
Post a Comment