There are a few forces which could reshape the way we function in cyberspace. The tug o’ wars on the Wikileaks issue, handling of ‘net neutrality’, and the increasing concern over online privacy are pointers in this direction.
Take the most-discussed threat in cyberspace this year — it’s about ‘Transparency’. It may sound a bit naive and premature to hail the internet as one of the most powerful forces which can usher in transparency in governments the world over. But consider the way governments around the world have reacted to Julian Assange, the face of Wikileaks, putting up ‘very sensitive’ documents on the internet.
Critics of Assange say he’s not being prudent and is putting governments at risk by sharing state secrets which could compromise a country’s stand or lay bare a transgression that could embarrass it across the world. They also argue that the Wikileaks issue could prompt governments to be more guarded. Governments may add more layers of secrecy and classification.
Transparency advocate Steven Aftergood, who is a senior research analyst at the Federation of American Scientists, favours the exposure of corruption, including classified corruption. But he simultaneously believes that Wikileaks has invaded personal privacy, published libelous material, violated intellectual property rights, and above all, launched a sweeping attack not simply on corruption, but on secrecy itself. He has gone on record to state that it’s “…both a strategic and a tactical error”.
On the other hand, thinkers like Glenn Greenwald, constitutional law attorney and political/legal blogger at Salon.com, counter that WikiLeaks is just four years old and operating completely unchartered territory. Greenwald believes the amount of corruption and injustice in the world that WikiLeaks is exposing, not only in the US, but around the world — where WikiLeaks single-handedly uncovered very pervasive and systematic improprieties — would not have otherwise been uncovered.
Assange is due for another hearing at London’s City of Westminster court on January 11. The complete extradition (to Sweden for alleged sex crimes and not espionage) hearing may take place in February.
Meanwhile, ‘anonymous’ supporters attacked sites of Visa, Mastercard and PayPal over the past fortnight for discontinuing online payments to Wikileaks (a case for crippling Wikileaks financially). Some of the ‘supporters’ or ‘hacktivists’ have reportedly been arrested.
But the fight, it appears, will not be over soon. Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a former deputy to WikiLeaks founder and CEO Julian Assange, plans to launch a rival site soon called OpenLeaks. He had accused WikiLeaks of straying from its missions. OpenLeaks, which currently reads: ‘Coming soon!’ on its site, promises to unravel more ‘secrets’ in cyberspace.
Net Neutrality The second battle is around who will own the internet? The question itself is an oxymoron since no one owns cyberspace. Online activists allege the scene could change if Google and Verizon have their way. The duo had put forward a proposal to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), to allow broadband operators and network operators (read wireless) to offer new services that might be discriminate in terms of their price and speed.
The public internet (read wireline) will remain untouched, assure Google and Verizon. But critics are aghast. They argue the move goes against the grain of network neutrality (also known as net neutrality or internet neutrality) which enshrines a principle whereby internet service providers (ISPs) and governments would not place restrictions on content, sites, platforms, on the kinds of equipment that may be attached, and on the modes of communication allowed.
It could, they believe, increase the cost of setting up a business on the internet and put many small netpreneurs out of business. Venture Capital (VC) players, too, are offering differing opinions on what the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) net neutrality proposal could spell out for investors.
The FCC, which had put to vote the proposal, approved network neutrality rules on December 21, but many consumer groups believe the new regulations as weak and full of loopholes. Moreover, the FCC is likely to find itself in court defending its legal authority to enforce net neutrality rules.
Privacy That governments, telecom services providers and internet service providers have data on individuals is well known. But netizens, for the last couple of years, have been also concerned about their personal data being misused on the internet by social networking sites like Facebook, Orkut and major search engines like Google, Yahoo! and now Bing.
There have been many protests to stem the threat. There were online calls to even abandon sites like Facebook. And now there’s incresed concern over sites that have began providing geo-location services too. For instance, moments after Facebook introduced a new feature called Facebook Places (similar to Foursquare, Layar, etc.) recently — that allows its users to share their location and find their friends — advocates again raised flags over online privacy.
Nevertheless, many netizens, suggests a Pew research done this May, find that sharing a certain amount of information online has clear benefits. Internet users are now twice as likely to be found by friends from the past — 40 per cent of internet users say they have been contacted by someone from their past who found them online, up from 20 per cent who reported the same in 2006.
Half of online adults (48 per cent) agree that getting to know new people now is easier and more meaningful because you can learn things online about the people you meet.
So while privacy remains a major concern, this year more young people have started taking charge of the identities on the internet, according to the Pew research. It suggests that young adults are the most active online reputation managers in several dimensions. When compared with older users, they more often customise what they share and whom they share it with.
Those aged between 18- and 29, the research reveals, are more likely than older adults to take steps to limit the amount of personal information available about them online. They change privacy settings, delete unwanted comments, and remove their name from photos. Compared with older users, they are also generally less trusting of the sites that host their content.
Link to the story in Business Standard
