This isn’t surprising. I think many of us just assumed that to some degree this sort of research has been going on. The surveillance state contractor infrastructure expands, and our privacy shrinks, again.
Continue reading Feds want to track your DNA like a licence plate (Yep we’re there)
Despite this latest effort by taxi companies to exploit a tragic accident caused by an Uber driver, the people (aka the market) have spoken.
Continue reading How taxi cartels resort to desperate measures to kill innovation and save their crumbling industry.
The fight for policy is often fought along K Street not in the Capitol or in the White House. In Gucci Gulch the future of industries is worked out. Who gets government largess, who does not. Who gets what contract, who does not. Who gets surveilled and…
Is privacy just dead? Or can we revive at least some of it?
Continue reading EFF and ACLU Lawsuit Against LAPD, License Plate Readers Begins
One of the beautiful things about data is that it gets less expensive with time. This vital commodity for the “digital revolution” is more and more readily available.
By Bill Shireman
A revolution is sweeping the world, transforming nations, corporations, cultures, and markets, and creating new opportunities as well as new risks for individuals.
The agent of this revolution is a new family of technologies – broadband, the Internet, microchips, and software – technologies that for the first time draw the world together into a single, coextensive whole.
This revolution, like all revolutions, holds both promise and peril.
On the positive side, it undermines repression in all its forms – from abusive corporate factories in China to repressive governments across the Middle East – and unleashes powerful forces for democracy.
It empowers individuals – from the once-poor peasants of China and India who are joining the middle class in the tens or hundreds of millions per year, to the brave women and men who advanced the Arab Spring and its fruits, some ripe and some not so.
It decouples prosperity from consumerism – enabling billions to achieve economic abundance, potentially using a fraction of the resources we consume today in the west.
It enables sustainability – holding the promise to move beyond today’s fossil fuel dependent economy, and the increasing economic, military, and environmental costs.
But we all know these ideals do not flow automatically from this emergent revolution. Whether the digital planet approaches these ideals, or advances their opposite, depends on people and institutions – and how we, individually and in our communities, choose to use these technologies.
That is because the digital planet also imposes huge new challenges:
It unleashes democracy – but offers no guarantees that every mob will be a smart mob, a wise mob, or a virtuous mob.
It undermines repressive institutions – but also challenges every nation, culture, and business to be more adaptive than ever.
It links every person on the planet – but virtually eliminates personal privacy, and challenges us to self-correct our tribal instincts, and to respect one another’s differences, even those we do not understand.
It empowers the individual – but extends this power also to the renegade hacker, the online criminal, and the suicide bomber.
It enables sustainable low-carbon prosperity – but also entices billions of us to consume the old-fashioned way, exploiting the planet’s natural systems beyond measure.
Changing the Nation and the Corporation
From Washington to Beijing, Damascus to Cairo, the central powers of the industrial world, weary giants both public and private, are gradually ceding their power to the individual, and the self-arising group.
There is no longer a fixed locus of power in the world, no center from which to govern.
Yesterday saw the disintegration of the empires of eastern Europe. Today sees the continued change of central governments in the Middle East. Tomorrow the west too will be transformed. The path of change, and the ease of transition, will depend on how adaptive we are to the currents swelling beneath us.
Corporations too will be transformed. Today 51 of the 100 largest economic entities on the planet are not nations at all, but corporations. Some worry (or hope) that we are entering an era when corporate power outstrips that of government. Yet big government and big corporations tend to be twins, both parented by industrial-era imperatives. The erosion of central government power may well lessen corporate power as well, and open up whole new opportunities for people to organize individually and in self-chosen communities.
In fact, rather than fixed nations and corporations with clear borders, the world may begin to see fuzzy institutions that emerge to serve particular needs, and morph into other forms or disappear altogether. The new social contract may be more emergent and implicit, and less formal and explicit. Governance may arise according to the conditions facing small or dispersed groups, locally or across the world.
Scarcity and Abundance
Scarcity – the physical reality that industrial society both relieved and perpetuated – is largely undermined in a digital world. The chief catalyst for growth is no longer physical – not pig iron, not coal, not oil. Today it is knowledge and the carriers of knowledge, including broadband.
“We still model the broadband spectrum as if it is like real estate. That is the wrong metaphor. Broadband is more like the aurora borealis – infinitely expandable,” says technology futurist John Perry Barlow. “When we relied on crystal transmitters and receivers, it looked limited, like real estate. But now, we can hop into and out of spectra at lightning speed, and open up vast stretches of white space, where people can create.”
Companies that understand this future, like AT&T, are betting on this abundance model of broadband, figuring that by opening up more and more virtual territory to more people, they will reap more business opportunities there, says Barlow. Others, like Verizon and much of the telecommunications sector, are clinging to the scarcity model, believing their lawyers or the government can control access to their assets and others, he says.
Definitions of property may change in the process. Property rights are fundamental to capitalism. But what happens to capitalism – and socialism – when the most valuable resources are super-abundant and extremely hard to own and control? The economic ideologies of the industrial age are in for a revision.
Transparency and Privacy
One newly-scarce resource will be privacy. The populist ideal is to enjoy personal privacy and institutional transparency – to own and control information about ourselves, yet know everything about the companies and governments that impact us.
Neither of those ideals is likely in the digital age, but the second will be approached more than the first.
As technology makes all things transparent, privacy may become less expected, and individuality more accepted.
Transparency will help to hold in check individual abuses of power. Simple and harmless differences between people, at first fascinating novelties masquerading as shocking revelations, may gradually be accepted as trivial idiosyncrasies.
Personal privacy will be hard to hold on to. “Not on my watch” is every politician’s brave-faced rationale for penetrating more deeply into the private lives of everyday citizens, to stop the one bad-guy-with-a-bomb that always seems about to leave a suitcase in the middle of Grand Central Station, or anywhere.
Privacy laws used to be enforced by government, a fox-in-henhouse problem that is today undeniable. Tomorrow, privacy, if possible at all, will more likely be a result of flooding the Internet with information and disinformation, rather than ridding it of embarrassing truths.
But institutional privacy may also be a relic of the past. Names like Snowden and Assange generate widely disparate opinions on both the left and right, and even within the intelligence community, where debaters quietly argue about whether leaks are examples of virtue or vice.
Either way, their actions won’t be the last cases where sensitive information is released en masse to the public, without much thought to the consequences. Institutions may well have to find more contemporary ways to collaborate and compete – intellectual property may be owned, but it won’t likely be controlled.
In the new ecosystem of power, ethics may be increasingly chosen, not imposed. The individual, as the new hegemon, may be in a position to choose whether to act only in the interest of the self, or also in the interest of the whole.
That makes personal ethics increasingly important, though not necessarily more abundant – at least until the consequences of its lack are widely felt.
Self-consciousness of one’s power, and personal responsibility for how we use our power, will become an increasingly important cultural choice, embraced and enforced, if it is, informally by the individual and the culture.
The rising power of the individual calls for rising humility as well.
The consent to govern, once fixed and formalized, is increasingly emergent and informal. Power now flows, sometimes quickly, from one center to another, and sometimes to none. Governments will no longer rule multi-generationally, but temporarily, always dependent on the daily consent of the governed.
This cyber-revolution will be democracy’s greatest triumph, and its greatest test.
Prosperity, Wealth, and Equality
Prosperity in the new economy may no longer be defined strictly by financial wealth, dictated by control of fossil fuels or physical resources, or held immutably by rigid class. Prosperity is increasingly in the eye of the beholder. It is often immaterial in form, a form of art, knowledge, or agreement, conveyed in transactions, relationships, and thought itself, deployed across the web of our communications.
In a world where prosperity takes multiple forms, income inequalities may become greater, but not necessarily more inequitable. Make no mistake – inequity will be vast. But many will find that they choose to pursue different forms of prosperity, some taking financial form, and some not.
Wealth for a time may be held in more concentrated forms than ever, yet it could become increasingly transitory, especially if unused or abused. Those who hold nominal wealth could find that, in cyber-finance, it can and will vanish quickly.
By Bill Shireman
There are two ways to double the nation’s energy supply.
One way is to dig deeper and broader wells, to extract twice as much of it. The other is to invent smarter products and processes that need half as much of it, doubling the productivity of energy.
The first way is the equivalent of doubling our bank withdrawals – it reduces our wealth. The second is like doubling the buying power of our savings – it increases our wealth.
As advanced information and communications technology becomes embedded in products and processes, it is already enabling leapfrog gains in productivity.
And, as advanced information and communications technology becomes embedded in the energy production and distribution system, it will enable even greater gains in productivity, including the development of entirely new sources of energy.
Think about what has already happened to energy productivity, in the information and communications technology sector so far.
Energy productivity gains for specific activities—some 1000 per cent or more—led to overall gains in economic productivity. But more interesting than the quantitative gains are the qualitative impacts they had. Each major innovation created powerful new tools that could be used by people and institutions.
As this “energy productivity explosion” continues, the net effect may be another economic transformation as great as the transition from the agricultural age to the industrial age and as great as the already dramatic transition from the industrial age to the early information age.
The real potential lies in the shift from an industrial economy refined by information, as exemplified by virtual storefronts like Amazon, toward a truly new economy founded on it—a place where industry is simply part of a new system that transcends it, just as agriculture is part of the industrial world today.
“For those of you keeping score, the dotcom era has ended,” says Henry Jenkins, founder and director of the Comparative Media Studies Program at MIT. “The age of social networks and mobile media has emerged … We are no longer talking about a digital revolution, which envisioned new media displacing the old. We are now talking about media convergence, where old and new media interact in ever more complex ways. We are no longer talking about interactive media technologies; we are talking about participatory culture.”1
And a participatory economy. That economy is being created in real time, by individuals—Tea Partiers and Netroots, gamers and bloggers, Indian villagers and high school hackers, consumers and employees, government leaders and corporate executives. We are all agents in a participatory economy. As Jenkins says, “we are discovering new ways to pool our knowledge and work collaboratively to solve puzzles and master complex tasks. What we are learning as consumers has the potential to change how we think as citizens. And these new social skills and cultural competencies have implications as well for the future of education.”1
In his prescient 1998 essay, Entering the Infosphere, Michael Vlahos, Professor of Strategy at the United States Naval War College, foresaw “the fusion of all the world’s communications networks, databases and sources of information into a vast, intertwined and heterogeneous tapestry of electronic interchange.” People will join it, he predicted, because, while it feels artificial and foreign at first, “it offers tremendous advantages. It gives people the ability to meet and access information anywhere, all the time. And people can meet in groups, share information and make agreements, just like they do in situ. The difference is that they are not site-bound. Eventually, as the environment becomes more familiar, it will become less alien.” Once drawn in, people become part of something new—a whole new social ecosystem.2
Vlahos’ prophetic 1998 vision is today’s emergent reality. Google gave almost everyone access to the world’s information. Facebook gave everyone access to each other. Breakthroughs in “telepresence” are being driven by companies like Cisco, Skype, AT&T, and Intel. New networks and digital concepts are sprouting daily—new Googles and Facebooks have already been born.
The potential quantitative gains in energy productivity are vast, but even more momentous are the qualitative changes, which could transform our lives.
The resulting economy has the potential for dramatic efficiencies. The energy productivity gains just from reduced travel will be substantial. But efficiency alone will not automatically drive environmental sustainability.
That is in part because efficiency happens inside an economy driven by the embedded subsidies that supported the industrial era and its dominant narrative—a narrative that tended to correlate physical consumption with economic value and personal fulfillment.
In the industrial world, it made sense to drive physical consumption, to overcome poverty. In a world where the fundamental resource—information—is both renewable and regenerative, it will not only be possible but lucrative to satisfy more needs and wants with ever decreasing material and energy inputs.
1 Jenkins, Henry. YouTube to YouNiversity. USC Annenberg Center Speaker Series (2007).
2 Vlahos, Michael. Entering the Infosphere. Journal of International Affairs, Volume 51, Issue 2 (1998).