4 ms·

It won't just be China. The Internet was, initially, a terra incognita for governments. (Which is ironic given its origins.) At first any wilderness is home on

It won't just be China. The Internet was, initially, a terra incognita for governments. (Which is ironic given its origins.) At first any wilderness is home only to pioneers, explorers, and other kinds of people who love the freedom that a frontier (Wild West) region gives. But inevitably (as is the way of humans) more humans appear, business pops up, government follows, laws are made, property is titled, walls go up, and freedom goes down. All valuable wilderness inevitably becomes civilized. Eventually governments will simply cut the cables (so to speak) to make the digital borders match the geographical borders, only allowing international traffic via heavily supervised data-ports for registered and licensed data-traders. The Big Companies will love and encourage this, as it means even less possible competition for them. A cyber-war might speed up things as well, but it seems inevitable anyway. (GDPR has already added a new row of bricks for the wall, with some sites just refusing to serve my EU-based browser at all.)

madrox 8y ago
This echoes speeches given even by the likes of John Perry Barlow. The internet is a frontier slowly being tamed.
- ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
  Ok then, where's the next frontier? I can't see myself happy while continuing to work in an increasingly oligopolized, regulated industry. I'm young enough that I can switch to another career if it's worth the personal satisfaction and some monetary reward.
  - lainga 8y ago
    Space?
  - sputknick 8y ago
    I'm not sure the proper term but maybe crypto currency/dapps/blockchain. A feature there is it's decentralized and anonymous nature.
    - admax88q 8y ago
      Those operate over the internet. If nations start yo control the flow of data in and out of their borders they'll just block any crypto/anonymous network.
      - gremlinsinc 8y ago
        The answer is probably mesh nets... I think these would be harder to control, esp if a company with good intentions controlled the backbones that it connected to.
        pariahHN 8y ago
        The problem is the physical connectivity across borders and oceans. Undersea cables are expensive, ground cables not so much but still vulnerable to border patrols, and wireless broadcasts can be picked up by anyone with the right sized antenna - the only realistic possibility I think would be point to point microwave/laser for backbone stuff, and I'm not sure how cheap that could be made or if crossing the Pacific/Atlantic is feasible. Another possibility I think might be an implementation of the Iridium satellite system but on an open, consumer/hobbyist level (CubeSats maybe?) where anyone with the spec and access to common parts can build a satellite receiver/transmitter - but then how do we get them into space without a gov/corp noticing? A truly independent, physical network is critical but I can't see how to practically implement it in the areas where it would be most needed...except on a local level. Which, to be fair, may be all that's needed for that area. I doubt revolutionaries/activists are too concerned about accessing American cat videos, but communication to outside supporters would be important I would think. Most of the crypto enthusiasts I've met seem to forget how expensive the international infrastructure is and how easy it is for a central org to break it completely if they really want.
myko 8y ago
This depresses me greatly. Is this inevitable?
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  At this point it feels like a race between getting a global government vs. splitting up the Internet. Sadly, the latter is much more likely.
  - dzhiurgis 8y ago
    99% of people would tremble just from hearing Global Government
  - remir 8y ago
    I guess it depends how far in the future we're looking. Seems like, long term, the formation of a global government is inevitable if we take in consideration global resource management, climate change and environmental degradation.
    - tonyedgecombe 8y ago
      If you look at what is going on in the EU and the Euro problems it seems people don't have much of an appetite for it. Even the US struggles with reconciling the different requirements of local and federal government. Unless we have WW3 and somebody wins.
      - remir 8y ago
        Today is one thing, but in 2050, 2080, things could be vastly different.
    - patrickg_zill 8y ago
      It's inevitable because of the evil people who promote it. A little more cynicism and skepticism about politicians' motives is in order, I think.
  - 8y ago
achairapart 8y ago
Then, I hope there will always be deep and dark webs where someone will sell some freedom instead of dope.
mc32 8y ago
I wonder if this means they will seriously look into something like the hoaxy[?] IPv9[1] from way back when, which according to some was to remove reliance on "western" technology, but others made different claims to its purpose. [1]https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg30679.html https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg30679....
jeffbax 8y ago
Big biz generally want a global marketplace given winner take all dynamics of digital companies. Still, hopefully countries will learn the same lesson as they tend to begrudgingly do: free markets mean prosperity. Also hope that we don't give foreign aid to countries with a censored internet. Probably a good (though diminishing as China buys good will... Until they realize the terms of the bargains they've struck aren't so great long term)
Eridrus 8y ago
I don't think the concept of what a bifurcated/multiple internets is has really been clarified. China's internet is the most split, but it is still technically connected and operates on a blacklist system. I think what we're really seeing is a reenvisioning of where an internet services is considered to be operating, and governments are saying that, even if your servers are in the US, you may be considered to be operating in the EU, which is new, but also doesn't imply that we're going to cut the cables, because governments are usually ok with post-hoc enforcement efforts, rather than preventative measure. This could change if people try to undermine the laws. As with many things on the world stage, the results will depend on how powerful each negotiating entity is. Russia has it's own search engine and could probably just turn off Google, etc. Turkey not so much; they don't need to roll over and take what Google provides, but they could find themselves aligning with Chinese or Russian service providers if Google refuses to do what they want. So I think this sort of power blocks model is more likely than a national borders model in any case.

madrox 8y ago

This echoes speeches given even by the likes of John Perry Barlow. The internet is a frontier slowly being tamed.

ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
Ok then, where's the next frontier? I can't see myself happy while continuing to work in an increasingly oligopolized, regulated industry. I'm young enough that I can switch to another career if it's worth the personal satisfaction and some monetary reward.
- lainga 8y ago
  Space?
- sputknick 8y ago
  I'm not sure the proper term but maybe crypto currency/dapps/blockchain. A feature there is it's decentralized and anonymous nature.
  - admax88q 8y ago
    Those operate over the internet. If nations start yo control the flow of data in and out of their borders they'll just block any crypto/anonymous network.
    - gremlinsinc 8y ago
      The answer is probably mesh nets... I think these would be harder to control, esp if a company with good intentions controlled the backbones that it connected to.
      - pariahHN 8y ago
        The problem is the physical connectivity across borders and oceans. Undersea cables are expensive, ground cables not so much but still vulnerable to border patrols, and wireless broadcasts can be picked up by anyone with the right sized antenna - the only realistic possibility I think would be point to point microwave/laser for backbone stuff, and I'm not sure how cheap that could be made or if crossing the Pacific/Atlantic is feasible. Another possibility I think might be an implementation of the Iridium satellite system but on an open, consumer/hobbyist level (CubeSats maybe?) where anyone with the spec and access to common parts can build a satellite receiver/transmitter - but then how do we get them into space without a gov/corp noticing? A truly independent, physical network is critical but I can't see how to practically implement it in the areas where it would be most needed...except on a local level. Which, to be fair, may be all that's needed for that area. I doubt revolutionaries/activists are too concerned about accessing American cat videos, but communication to outside supporters would be important I would think. Most of the crypto enthusiasts I've met seem to forget how expensive the international infrastructure is and how easy it is for a central org to break it completely if they really want.

myko 8y ago

This depresses me greatly. Is this inevitable?

TeMPOraL 8y ago
At this point it feels like a race between getting a global government vs. splitting up the Internet. Sadly, the latter is much more likely.
- dzhiurgis 8y ago
  99% of people would tremble just from hearing Global Government
- remir 8y ago
  I guess it depends how far in the future we're looking. Seems like, long term, the formation of a global government is inevitable if we take in consideration global resource management, climate change and environmental degradation.
  - tonyedgecombe 8y ago
    If you look at what is going on in the EU and the Euro problems it seems people don't have much of an appetite for it. Even the US struggles with reconciling the different requirements of local and federal government. Unless we have WW3 and somebody wins.
    - remir 8y ago
      Today is one thing, but in 2050, 2080, things could be vastly different.
  - patrickg_zill 8y ago
    It's inevitable because of the evil people who promote it. A little more cynicism and skepticism about politicians' motives is in order, I think.
- 8y ago

achairapart 8y ago

Then, I hope there will always be deep and dark webs where someone will sell some freedom instead of dope.

mc32 8y ago

I wonder if this means they will seriously look into something like the hoaxy[?] IPv9[1] from way back when, which according to some was to remove reliance on "western" technology, but others made different claims to its purpose. [1]https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg30679.html https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg30679....

jeffbax 8y ago

Big biz generally want a global marketplace given winner take all dynamics of digital companies. Still, hopefully countries will learn the same lesson as they tend to begrudgingly do: free markets mean prosperity. Also hope that we don't give foreign aid to countries with a censored internet. Probably a good (though diminishing as China buys good will... Until they realize the terms of the bargains they've struck aren't so great long term)

Eridrus 8y ago

I don't think the concept of what a bifurcated/multiple internets is has really been clarified. China's internet is the most split, but it is still technically connected and operates on a blacklist system. I think what we're really seeing is a reenvisioning of where an internet services is considered to be operating, and governments are saying that, even if your servers are in the US, you may be considered to be operating in the EU, which is new, but also doesn't imply that we're going to cut the cables, because governments are usually ok with post-hoc enforcement efforts, rather than preventative measure. This could change if people try to undermine the laws. As with many things on the world stage, the results will depend on how powerful each negotiating entity is. Russia has it's own search engine and could probably just turn off Google, etc. Turkey not so much; they don't need to roll over and take what Google provides, but they could find themselves aligning with Chinese or Russian service providers if Google refuses to do what they want. So I think this sort of power blocks model is more likely than a national borders model in any case.