 |
 |
||
|
|
|
 E-Speech: The (Uncertain) Future of Free ExpressionPosted on Oct 28, 2008
By Aram Sinnreich and Masha Zager (Page 2) Yet another hindrance to free speech and open communications online is asymmetrical access (the “A” in “ADSL”). Nearly all broadband ISPs—even in the age of YouTube, Skype and MySpace—offer downstream speeds (from the Internet to the user) that are much faster than upstream speeds (from the user to the Internet). This is a legacy of the cable networks’ origins in the unidirectional world of TV programming, and of the antiquated vision of the Internet as an “information superhighway” by which consumers would access information. Few people anticipated that Americans would be as interested in producing content as they were in consuming it, or that they might want to use video for communicating. So regulators failed to address communication to the Internet, and the original vision of the Internet became enshrined in industrywide technology standards. Today, most providers still use technologies that are downstream-oriented. A few new technologies (Active Ethernet, GPON, VDSL2) support high upstream speeds, but it will take years, and hundreds of billions of dollars, to upgrade all of our networks to use them. Finally, free speech online is threatened by “walled garden” services and technologies, in which the ISP or wireless provider determines what content the user has access to, what software the user can install, and even what formats are permissible for encoding audio or video. Walled garden services for the PC had their heyday in the 1990s (remember AOL, CompuServe and Prodigy?), but we are only beginning to see the extent to which they will dominate the Internet on wireless devices. A great example of a walled garden is Apple’s iPhone. Spending several hundred dollars to purchase one doesn’t give you permission to install the software of your choice or distribute software to other users. Apple has already used its power to block software providers attempting to compete with Apple’s own software, such as the e-mail application that comes bundled with the device. Even more worrisome, Apple CEO Steve Jobs has acknowledged that iPhones are equipped with a “kill switch” that allows the company to remotely delete applications from your phone. The company calls this a last-ditch security protocol to disable malware, but it comes at the cost of consumer control. Imagine if General Electric could remotely remove food from your fridge that it deemed unsafe. Now imagine that GE is also one of the top providers of meat, cheese and veggies to American supermarkets. Clearly, this is not a combination in the consumer’s best interest. (To be fair, most wireless phones have even more “walls” and less “garden” than the iPhone does.)
Advertisement • User-owned or unmanaged networks with very-high-speed connections. For the sake of argument, let’s dismiss the first of these as impractical, or at least unlikely in the current political climate. But how about the second? In theory, you could buy a length of fiber optic cable (which can support tremendous symmetrical bandwidth over long distances) and run it directly from your house to the nearest Internet point of presence (POP). You then buy an electronic gadget for each end of the cable. You plug one gadget into your computer and the other one into the Internet. Now you can upload and download whatever you like, and there’s no ISP to tell you what you can or can’t do—or turn over your records to some inquisitive government agency. Is this any more feasible than passing a bunch of laws opposed by telecom providers? Well, not exactly. It’s expensive, and complicated. It won’t work unless there’s also fiber at the POP. And what will your neighbor say when you run your cable through her backyard? The solution would be viable if you were, say, a hospital with a lot of money and an IT staff and a need to upload and download gigantic medical image files. In fact, customer-owned fiber is a reality today for such large organizations. For smaller companies, however, “condominium fiber” may be a better option. Condo fiber providers install the fiber backbone and negotiate rights of way with the neighbors. Then they sell individual strands of fiber to their customers and collect a small annual maintenance fee. For individuals, no such solution has been developed. But different organizations are inching toward it from different angles, and if we can take the best aspects of each approach, an e-speech solution might emerge. Here are four of the partial solutions being proposed: • In Canada, CANARIE—the public/private organization that runs Canada’s advanced research network—is trying to jump-start a residential condo fiber project. Bill St. Arnaud, CANARIE’s chief research officer, asked residents in an Ottawa neighborhood whether they wanted their own fiber connections to the Internet; about a third said they did. He then convinced a business fiber provider to run a trunk line through the neighborhood, and to agree to run a connection to the nearest Internet POP for any neighborhood resident who could pay about $1,500. He also worked out a complex financing scheme (he calls it “green broadband”—don’t ask) to make the fiber easily affordable for those who can’t buy it outright. At the POP, customers will have to connect their fiber to an ISP’s equipment. In theory, customers can choose among ISPs. But there’s a slight hitch: As of this writing, no ISPs have agreed to participate. • Many Swedish cities operate publicly owned systems that work in ways similarly to the CANARIE scheme. These municipal fiber networks are open to any ISP—some have dozens of competing ISPs—and the operator will run fiber to any building where the owner pays for a connection. Individual homeowners finance their fiber connections by adding around $10 to their monthly mortgage payments (a better investment than granite countertops in terms of resale price). As in the CANARIE plan, customers can decide whether and when to install the fiber; once connected, they can change ISPs at the click of a mouse. Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
America’s Confused Approach to Afghanistan
Email
Print
Share
Digg
Facebook
TwitThis
StumbleUpon
Reddit
YahooBuzz
Email
BlinkList
del.icio.us
Fark
Furl
Google
LinkedIn
Mixx
MyShare
NewsVine
Propeller
SphereIt
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
Become a Fan
Follow Us
Subscribe
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation
Copyright © 2010 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.
By Mbadger, August 19, 2009 at 9:25 am #
The creation of the internet and new age methods of usability such as mobile broadband and Iphones will ensure that freedom of speech and civil liberties will continue to exist. Just take a look at the recent iranian elections, mobile phones, twitter and internet access allowed people to connect to each other, expose harsh governmental tactics and show the world what’s really happening.
Report thisBy Folktruther, October 31, 2008 at 12:38 pm #
Free Expression is one of the major power delusions of American ideology. It supposedly exists because it and Free Speeeh, etc is written down on legal pieces of paper somewhere. And is enshrined in the US Constitution in a paranthetical phrase.
Free Expression in the US is and has always been historically, a political fraud. The learned and mass media are largely owned or in other ways controlled by the American power structure which formulates the mainstream truth from the perspective of power rather than from perspective of the population.
Simple holistic truths about people and power are ideologically repressed in the mainstream media, largely being de-emphasized to the point of exclusion. The American people are deluded by false media truths that are incompatible with the reality based truth. This creates a mainstream consensus which ideological represses deviant truths, especially those which subvert power.
Freedom of communication is possible not only when one can TELL the truth, but when one can SELL the truth. Telling the reality based truth about people and power is useless if no one is listening, or if they can’t hear. Or if they do not possess the conceptual language to understand what is being said.
So under the Bushite political conterrevolution the US power system has devised Freedom Zones, away from the population, where protesters can tell their truths. And Freedom Cages where protestors are comfined to enjoy Freedom of Expression.
Report thisBy George, October 31, 2008 at 12:09 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Congrats to the authors. This is one of the best explanations I’ve read on the issue of net neutrality and thank you for mentioning our service COPOWI.
When we first launched last year it became really clear that it would be almost impossible for us to break outside what we call “the believers”. These are people who clearly understand the problem and are prepared to act.
Just dealing with the term “net neutrality” was a nightmare from a marketing and promotional standpoint.
It was while we were developing new promotional ideas that the economic crisis struck. At first our reaction, like everyone, was utter shock and disbelief.
But then, on reflection, this was something we as a group have been discussing and predicting for some time. The global economic system, predicated on perpetual asset growth, was simply unsustainable.
A new economic, political and social system is being built right now and, as usual, we as the people, have no say.
It was then we realized why we have been fighting so hard to keep the Internet open and fair. We now have an opportunity to mobilize, on a global scale, to ensure what develops is not just for the elites, but for all of us.
Please read our free report: Preventing the Depression: Learn the truth about what is behind the economic crisis and why we cannot rely on politicians and business leaders to decide our future and the future of our children.
You can download the report from http://www.consumerdirectaction.com.
We’re at prelaunch at the moment and all input would be most appreciated.
Report thisBy cyrena, October 30, 2008 at 8:24 pm #
Tricia writes:
• “A politician may well accept donations from corporations for aiding them in the achievement of their objectives, but the politician has no value if unelected. That is where the true power lies… in the hands of the elector - people like you”… “Distancing oneself from the political process is to invite anarchy, which inevitably places one in the wrong and encourages even more curtailment of civil rights.”
And, I thank her. This is exactly what I’ve been trying to articulate, successfully or not.
Report thisBy eileen fleming, October 29, 2008 at 9:46 am #
The Industrial Military Media Security/Surveillance Complex:
Naomi Klein, in her book “The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism” wrote:
After the dot-com bubble burst in 2000, Israel’s economy was devastated, but then came 9/11, and “suddenly new profit vistas opened up for any company that claimed it could spot terrorists in crowds, seal borders from attack and extract confessions from closed-mouthed prisoners.
“Many of the country’s most successful entrepreneurs are using Israel’s status as a fortressed state, surrounded by furious enemies, as a kind of twenty-four-hour-a-day showroom—a living example of how to enjoy relative safety amid constant war.
“Israel now sends $1.2 billion in “defense” products to the United States—up dramatically from $270 million in 1999…
“Much of this growth has been in the so-called ‘homeland security sector. Before 9/11 homeland security barely existed as an industry. By the end of this year, Israeli exports in the sector will reach $1.2 billion—an increase of 20 percent.
“The key products and services are …precisely the tools and technologies Israel has used to lock in the occupied territories. Israel has learned to turn endless war into a brand asset, pitching its uprooting, occupation and containment of the Palestinian people as a half-century head start in the “global war on terror.”
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070702/klein
In totalitarian regimes the people are afraid of the government.
In healthy democracies the government is afraid of the people.
We have no freedom or liberties, unless we seize them.
“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” UN Universal declaration of Human Rights, Article 19.
Report thisEileen Fleming, Citizen Journalist and Founder WAWA:
http://www.wearewideawake.org/
Author “Keep Hope Alive” and “Memoirs of a Nice Irish American ‘Girl’s’ Life in Occupied Territory”
Producer “30 Minutes With Vanunu” and “13 Minutes with Vanunu”
By Purple Girl, October 29, 2008 at 9:30 am #
Why don’t we start from the beginning and hit these corps on Infringement Rights, Piracy and technological Espionage?
Report thisFrankly the Claim the Corps have a right to charge US for anything they have POACHED is ridiculous.They Stole His invention, His intented Gift to Humanity.
Granted the set up is not part of the ‘Gift’ so they can charge for their work to get you connected- physically…But should never been given the right to charge US to accesss it.
The survaillence for securtiy issue is even more outrageous.Whether would be ‘terrorist’ communicate over the iternet, the phone or face to face, they are determined to pull their attack off. Really, if you are hell bent on murdering someone, you’ll do it with a gun, a knife,poison,strangulation….The tool used is Mute, Irrelevant. Thus stopping Terrorism by cruising the internet is Useless! If we are not going to Hotwire all Individuals up to Survaillenace Tech to monitor their thoughts,words and actions the rest is Feudal.
The resent apprehension of the Neo Nazi’s proves this..They didn’t catch them from internet communications (only discovered afterwards) They were Caught Holding up a Gun Store!
We couldn’t also stop the Virginia Tech mass murderer, they only found out his plans after the fact….couldn’t read his mind.
The Reich claims an ‘increase in Chatter’ as evidence of a potential attack, unfortunately they can’t truely decipher what is being communicated, so they still have no way of Preventing It. If they type or say XYZ we have no idea if that is a code word or not.So their premise they are working off is innately flawed, no matter what they can’t read minds nor even real code words if related face to face to begin with.
Only dumbass with no real ability to pull off anything communicate via E-mail, not those who have spent years and funds on a Big ‘project’ would Willy nilly discuss it on the open Wire.
Shit the FBI couldn’t even catch the Teflon Don until his top hit man rolled, and they had they SOB Wired to the Hilt, And HE KNEW IT,so he adjusted his communications. ONLY through a face to face with a ‘trusted’ insider did they Catch him not using his code.
So to catch ‘Terrorist’ , Just like the Mafia, you must infiltrate and record Face to face ‘secure’ communications.And OUR Gov’t KNOWS this!They are instituting Big Brother under the Guise of natioanl security.
So while they monitor me because I want Cheney’s Head on aRecylced Paper plate, They are missing the guys at the coffee shop gearing up for their ‘Grand finale’.
By 911truthdotorg, October 28, 2008 at 11:51 pm #
Not only are we losing our free speech, but we’re going to have to hand over our VERY personal information to the Gestapo starting in Jan if we want to fly. And if you don’t hand it over, they’ll PUT you on the no-fly list! This is OUTRAGEOUS! This country is DONE!
-DHS to Take Over Airline Passenger Screening
Starting in January, the responsibility for checking airline travelers’names against the passenger watch and no-fly lists will pass from the airlines to the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Passengers will be required to provide their full names, birthdates and genders to board commercial aircraft. The additional required information is intended to reduce significantly the number of false positives, or people whose travel is “wrongly” delayed or prevented. The no-fly list has fewer than 2,500 names on it; just 10 percent of those are US citizens. The selectee list, which identifies people who are subject to additional questioning, contains fewer than 16,000 names, and less than half are US citizens. The shift comes with the release of the Secure Flight Final Rule.
Report thishttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/22/AR2008102202646_pf.html
http://www.tsa.gov/press/releases/2008/1022.shtm
By trisha, October 28, 2008 at 11:46 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Why is it becoming the normal practice to come up with a workaround when government and corporations fail us? To follow this philosophy is to admit defeat; to decide that our representatives and form of government have become the enemy. A politician may well accept donations from corporations for aiding them in the achievement of their objectives, but the politician has no value if unelected. That is where the true power lies… in the hands of the elector - people like you… The recent revolt over the bailout plan was effective, for a while, but poorly organized. Instead of telling people how to get around the mischief of the government, try telling them how to find out more, explain the legislation (when and if it is planned) and what they can legally do to thwart it.
Distancing oneself from the political process is to invite anarchy, which inevitably places one in the wrong and encourages even more curtailment of civil rights.
Report thisBy Big B, October 28, 2008 at 8:40 pm #
As a former “comcaster” I can assure people that comcast’s stand against net neutrality is less sinister in nature, and more profit related. Since comcast doesn’t posses the cash cow that is a wireless network(ala verizon and AT&T;) they are forced to try and create new revenue streams through their existing service platforms, like preventing other ISP’s from their systems, and charging downloaders through the nose for “extra” data.
The other more recent problem with the information superhighway infrastructure is that, during tough economic times, major system upgrades, be they fiber or WIFI, may get back burnered because of costs alone.(Verizon and AT&T;have deep pockets, but can they afford 15-20 billion dollar system upgrades during a recession?) They may not feel completion of these projects that urgently anyway because competition from the large Cable operators is limited because of their aging coaxial/fiber hybrid systems that depend primarily on digital compression to make up for a lack of bandwidth. And with no wireless revenue stream, they will be hard pressed to compete with the baby bells anyway, because they don’t have their deep pockets or credit ratings.
As for net security, well, hopefully no one out there in TV land is under the impression that the feds have not been creating a huge data base from internet activity going all the way back to the 90’s.
Report thisBy libertarian, October 28, 2008 at 8:09 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
A good, detailed, important article on a subject of which most are unaware. My two simplistic remedies are : term-limits for Congress (no agenda snowballing) and the purchase of a monthly SSH/SSL offshore server account which will protect both your privacy and anonymity.
Report thisBy TheRealFish, October 28, 2008 at 6:09 pm #
Though listed as a writer of science fiction, for those who haven’t been exposed to him before, I’d like to introduce Cory Doctorow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow
More than just an author, he is an expert in the world of Internet security and is a strongly in favor of keeping the Internet lanes free.
He wrote a recent book, titled “Little Brother” that he allows folks to download *for free*—having to do with issues of loss of privacy and freedoms in today’s world. The setting of the story is something like day-after-tomorrow.
You can get it here (a must read):
http://craphound.com/littlebrother/download/
Report this