Oversight will happen on the net.  It happened with other major networks,
rail, highways, radio, air, and so the info highway will eventually have
some widely agreed upon rules of the road.

arthur

 

 

Driver's licenses for the Internet?

Suggests   Craig Mundie, Microsoft's chief research and technology officer

 

Posted by Barbara Kiviat
<http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/author/bkiviat/>  Saturday, January
30, 2010 at 5:16 a


Read more:
http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2010/01/30/drivers-licenses-for-the-
internet/#ixzz0eIRXdeaR

 

Davos round-up: Day 3

 

I just went to a panel discussion about Internet security and let me tell
you, it was scar-y. Between individual fraud, organized crime, corporate
espionage and government spying, it's an incredibly dangerous world out
there, which, according to one panelist, is growing exponentially worse.

These are incredibly complex problems that even the smartest of the smart
admit they don't have a great handle on, although Craig Mundie, Microsoft's
chief research and technology officer, offered up a surprisingly simple
solution that might start us down a path to dealing with them: driver's
licenses for the Internet.

The thing about the Internet is that it was never intended to be a worldwide
system of mass communication. A handful of guys, all of whom knew each
other, set up the Web. The anonymity that has come to be a core and
cherished characteristic of the Internet didn't exist in the beginning: it
was obvious who was who.

As the Internet picked up steam and gathered more users, that stopped being
the case, but at no point did anyone change the ways things worked. The Web
started out being a no-authentication space and it continues to be that way
to this day. Anyone can get online and no one has to say who they are.
That's what enables a massive amount of cyber crime: if you're attacked from
a computer, you might be able to figure out where that particular machine is
located, but there's really no way to go back one step further and track the
identity of the computer that hacked into the one that hacked into you.

What Mundie is proposing is to impose authentication. He draws an analogy to
automobile use. If you want to drive a car, you have to have a license (not
to mention an inspection, insurance, etc). If you do something bad with that
car, like break a law, there is the chance that you will lose your license
and be prevented from driving in the future. In other words, there is a
legal and social process for imposing discipline. Mundie imagines three
tiers of Internet ID: one for people, one for machines and one for programs
(which often act as proxies for the other two).

Now, there are, of course, a number of obstacles to making such a scheme be
reality. Even here in the mountains of Switzerland I can hear the worldwide
scream go up: "But we're entitled to anonymity on the Internet!" Really? Are
you? Why do you think that?

Mundie pointed out that in the physical world we are implicitly comfortable
with the notion that there are certain places we're not allowed to go
without identifying ourselves. Are you allowed to walk down the street with
no one knowing who you are? Absolutely. Are you allowed to walk into a bank
vault and still not give your name? Hardly.

It's easy to envision the same sort of differentiated structure for the
Internet, Mundie said. He didn't get into examples, so here's one of mine.
If you want to go to Time.com and read all about what's going on in the
world, that's fine. No one needs to know who you are. But if you want to set
up a site to accept credit-card donations for earthquake victims in Haiti?
Well, you're going to have to show your ID for that.

The truth of the matter is, the Internet is still in its Wild West phase. To
a large extent, the law hasn't yet shown up. Yet as more and more people
move to town, that lawlessness is becoming a bigger and bigger problem. As
human societies grow over time they develop more rigid standards for
themselves in order to handle their increased size. There is no reason to
think the Internet shouldn't follow the same pattern.

Though that's not to say it'll happen anytime soon. Governments certainly
have been talking to each other about this (almost by definition, any
effective efforts will have to be international in nature), but even in
Europe, where there is a cyber security convention in effect, only half of
the Continent's nations have signed up.

One stumbling block that was mentioned at today's panel discussion:
governments' own intelligence agencies are huge beneficiaries of the
Internet's anonymity. We managed to spy on each other before the Web, but
how much easier it is now that we can cruise around cyberspace without
anyone even knowing we're there.

So don't expect any changes in the short term. But do know that the people
in charge-as much as anyone can be in charge when it comes to the
Internet-are thinking about it.


Read more:
http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2010/01/30/drivers-licenses-for-the-
internet/#ixzz0eIRAzVNl

 

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of michael gurstein
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 8:55 AM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'
Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa FeInstitute economist:one
in four Americansis employed to guard the...

 

I'm not sure that a practical distinction can be drawn here...

 

M

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 9:43 AM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION'
Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa FeInstitute economist:one
in four Americansis employed to guard the...

Not about safe for children, but safe to do traverse, transact and explore.
See abstract below to a forthcoming paper.

 

-----------------------------

 

 

Every economy requires a physical, institutional and legal infrastructure,
as well as understandable and enforceable marketplace rules, in order to
function smoothly.  The building of such an infrastructure, which provides
trust and confidence for all those who operate in or are affected by it, is
a necessary condition for the development and efficient functioning of a
global, digital economy. While the Internet is often said to be different;
in one important respect  it is like all previous infrastructures: a system
of governance, oversight and sanctions are needed if the Internet is to live
up to its full potential. The presentation also indicates one possible
enormous cost which could result if the global Internet economy has to deal
with growing distrust: A move away from open online networks to closed
networks or back to some amalgam of the bricks and mortar world. 

 

The Internet is an open network where there is no outside body that can
administer sanctions.  It appears to be unique in commercial history. One
characteristic of the public Internet is that, since it consists of many
thousands of autonomous networks spanning a large number of jurisdictions,
it has no well defined "they". There is no global oversight body (a "they")
that can intervene when wrongdoing occurs. Drawing upon the lessons of
history and historical analogies, the presentation outlines the uniqueness
and fragility of our current situation and emphasizes the need for
international action to provide remedies. For the Internet to achieve its
maximum social and political potential, there will have to be agreed upon
and effective rules of the road. There is a need for effective governance,
both nationally and globally.

 

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of michael gurstein
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 2:24 PM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'
Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute
economist:one in four Americansis employed to guard the...

 

As well of course, there are those who rather dislike the somewhat
anarchistic nature of online discourse and who (in the currently fashionable
jargon) look to create a "moral panic" sufficient to justify making the net
safe for "the children" or to control "piracy on the electronic high
seas"... through various kinds of over-reaching draconian moves (think
airport security... 

 

MBG

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 12:02 AM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION'
Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute
economist:one in four Americansis employed to guard the...

With increasing distrust on the net (arising from concern with identity
theft, cybercrime, etc.etc.) we will see increasing amounts of energy and
labour devoted trying to make the net a safe place to do business.  This is
one of the costs of distrust.

 

arthur

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of michael gurstein
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 4:17 AM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'
Subject: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist: one
in four Americansis employed to guard the...

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kevin Carson
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 3:57 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist: one in four
Americansis employed to guard the...

 

 


Sent to you by Kevin Carson via Google Reader:


 

 


Santa
<http://feeds.boingboing.net/~r/boingboing/iBag/~3/UTD9Jx3Y874/santa-fe-inst
itute-e.html>  Fe Institute economist: one in four Americans is employed to
guard the wealth of the rich


via Boing Boing <http://www.boingboing.net/>  by Cory Doctorow on 2/5/10


Here's a fascinating profile on radical Santa Fe Institute economist Samuel
Bowles, an empiricist who says his research doesn't support the Chicago
School efficient marketplace hypothesis. Instead, Bowles argues that the
wealth inequality created by strict market economics creates inefficiencies
because society has to devote so much effort to stopping the poor from
expropriating the rich. He calls this "guard labor" and says that one in
four Americans is employed to in the sector -- labor that could otherwise be
used to increase the nation's wealth and progress. 

  <http://craphound.com/images/Newchartguardlabor.jpg> 
The greater the inequalities in a society, the more guard labor it requires,
Bowles finds. This holds true among US states, with relatively unequal
states like New Mexico employing a greater share of guard labor than
relatively egalitarian states like Wisconsin. 

The problem, Bowles argues, is that too much guard labor sustains
"illegitimate inequalities," creating a drag on the economy. All of the
people in guard labor jobs could be doing something more productive with
their time--perhaps starting their own businesses or helping to reduce the
US trade deficit with China. 

Guard labor supports what one might call the beat-down economy. Community
Action's Porter sees it all the time. 

"We have based almost everything we have done on the idea that we always
need a part of our workforce that is marginalized--that we can call this
group into action at any time, pay them nothing and they will do anything
that needs to be done," she says. 

More discouraging, perhaps, is the statistical fact that a person born into
this workforce has little chance of rising beyond it. 

Born Poor? <http://sfreporter.com/stories/born_poor/5339/all/>  (via MeFi
<http://metafilter.com> ) 

Previously: 

*       China's
<http://www.boingboing.net/2009/02/02/chinas-labor-unrest.html#previouspost>
labor unrest worse than suspected - Boing Boing 
*       Which
<http://www.boingboing.net/2009/03/13/which-side-are-you-o.html#previouspost
>  Side Are You On? Explaining what happened to labor in ... 
*       Questions
<http://www.boingboing.net/2009/12/07/questions-from-econo.html#previouspost
>  from economics honors exam at Oberlin College Boing Boing 
*       EVE
<http://www.boingboing.net/2008/10/02/eve-onlines-economis.html#previouspost
>  Online's economist speaks -- economics as an experimental ... 
*       Max
<http://www.boingboing.net/2009/01/09/max-keisers-curmudge.html#previouspost
>  Keiser's curmudgeonly TV economics show: the Oracle - Boing Boing 
*       Mackerel
<http://www.boingboing.net/2008/10/03/mackerel-economics-i.html#previouspost
>  economics in prison - Boing Boing 
*       Economics
<http://www.boingboing.net/2007/09/07/economics-of-malware.html#previouspost
>  of Malware - Boing Boing 
*       MP3s
<http://www.boingboing.net/2006/03/31/mp3s-from-economics-.html#previouspost
>  from "Economics of Open Content" conference - Boing Boing 
*       Boing
<http://www.boingboing.net/2007/07/20/psychology_design_an.html#previouspost
>  Boing: Psychology, design and economics of slot-machines 



 <http://ads.pheedo.com/click.phdo?s=2bbbfb2f471bdfa1382c7f0a2b2770fc&p=1>
<http://a.rfihub.com/eus.gif?eui=2226>
<http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/boingboing/iBag/~4/UTD9Jx3Y874> 

 

 

 


Things you can do from here:


*       Subscribe
<http://www.google.com/reader/view/feed%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.boingboing.net%
2Fboingboing%2FiBag?source=email>  to Boing Boing using Google Reader 
*       Get started using Google
<http://www.google.com/reader/?source=email>  Reader to easily keep up with
all your favorite sites 

 

 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to