Re: "THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE" (Micosoft)

[Heiko Recktenwald]

They are activ with this topic since two years or so. First in questions
of law of armed conflict (LOAC), autonomous weapon systems, man in the
loop or not. And the general topic that you quoted. But be real, what a
blabla. People have no voice in such questions that are decided by
states. As in the Geneva conventions and the additional protocolls. You
cant expect more than LOAC. NATO has allready wrtitten that paper. The
usual stuff. Dont kill more civilians than necessary for your military
purpose.

But ok, lets paint peace.

Google does not want to participate in this run for better weapon
systems. They dont want to kill. And the friends of those weapons say:
Dont overlook the lifes of our soldiers that dont have to kill themselves.

Here is something from todays Wapo:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/darpa-head-on-ai-dangers-its-not-one-of-those-things-that-keeps-me-up-at-night/2018/12/06/6b6cb233-d840-46d1-931d-62153fda193d_story.html


Best, H.



Am 12/11/18 um 20:02 schrieb Geert Lovink:
>
> https://digitalpeace.microsoft.com/
>
> "We are digital citizens—members of a thriving online global society.
> We trust technology to help us do our jobs, create communities and
> connect us. As digital citizens, we also share responsibility to
> protect our interconnected space.
>
> We are more at risk than ever before from cyberwarfare. Governments
> are using technology as a weapon, which can devastate people,
> organizations, and entire countries. These attacks may start in the
> digital space but can quickly spread to the physical world. We must
> come together as digital citizens and call upon our world leaders to
> create rules of the road that protect our digital society.
>
> We must demand Digital Peace Now." 
>
> --
>
> Dear nettimers,
>
> any comments on this? I find this pretty stunning. OK, 100 years after
> World War I, that’s pretty significant. "Make love, not war." Today
> there's conference in Paris. I am an anti-militarist, I am not on the
> side of the corporate-governmental (cyber)warfare promotors. But in
> general I am not against non-violent conflict. Should we demand
> digital conflict? Or digital ‘struggle'?
>
> And what to make of the comments by US internet governance scholar
> Milton Mueller? 
>
> https://www.internetgovernance.org/2018/11/09/the-paris-igf-convergence-on-norms-or-grand-illusion/
>
> "The theory of international regimes identifies norm development as
> the second step in a process of institutionalization. The first step
> involves agreement on principles; that is, foundational facts about
> the sector or domain to be governed. It is unfortunate, but true, to
> say that all of the international calls for cyber norms have skipped
> agreement on principles and are trying to promulgate norms despite a
> huge, gaping chasm in the way states understand their role in
> cyberspace. There will be no effective operationalization
> of norms until there is agreement on the status of cyberspace as
> a global commons, a non-sovereign space."
>
> Your messenger of peace, Geert
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> #  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
> #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:


#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

nettime-l Digest, Vol 134, Issue 49 "THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE" (Micosoft)

[Jennifer]

Clearly the call for ethics of the internet is finally reaching out. Perhaps 
the single thing that Wannacry and Petya have brought us.  Should we demand for 
Digital Peace? Yes, of course. Is non-violent conflict not (a necessary) part 
of striving for a peaceful, safe habitat?

However, we should consider what costs we would allow for (Digital) Peace and 
what it should look like. The digital peace project of Microsoft (en co.) as 
well as Tim Berners-Lees global project prove that action is being taken. This 
mean we have to be alert and take action before we, again, are overrun by big 
techcompanies. I think it is safe to say that Microsoft, (if sincere) as a 
promotor is not necessarily a bad thing, but as a corporation it is not the one 
that should put a system in place single-handed, or even within a consortium. 
This clearly shows we need to think about what system could be in place, what 
values and commitments should be part of that, and how it can be sustainable. 
We have to broaden our view and bring ethical (local?) single-topic issues, 
like data sovereignity, environmental impact (of technology) and others 
(globally?) together and try to build a framework around that in which we can 
build. Should this be done globally? Locally? Both?

Interesting discussion between Brad Smith and Tony Blair took place last week 
at the Websummit. Microsoft was present with a (not particularly large) booth 
with the single topic of signing for Digital Peace.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZCFHKPd6-U

Jennifer

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, November 13, 2018 12:00 PM,  wrote:

> Send nettime-l mailing list submissions to
> nettime-l@mail.kein.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> nettime-l-requ...@mail.kein.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> nettime-l-ow...@mail.kein.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of nettime-l digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1.  "THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE" (Micosoft)
> (Geert Lovink)
>
> 2.  Re: Nein, danke [was Re: Inhabit: Instructions for Autonomy]
> (tbyfield)
>
> 3.  Re: "THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE" (Micosoft)
> (Morlock Elloi)
>
> 4.  Re: "THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE" (Micosoft)
> (newme...@aol.com)
>
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 20:02:38 +0100
> From: Geert Lovink ge...@xs4all.nl
> To: a moderated mailing list for net criticism
> nettime-l@mail.kein.org
> Subject:  "THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE"
>
> (Micosoft)
>
>
> Message-ID: 7141bde2-bc4d-4e7a-b518-a4ff2eb23...@xs4all.nl
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> https://digitalpeace.microsoft.com/
>
> "We are digital citizens?members of a thriving online global society. We 
> trust technology to help us do our jobs, create communities and connect us. 
> As digital citizens, we also share responsibility to protect our 
> interconnected space.
>
> We are more at risk than ever before from cyberwarfare. Governments are using 
> technology as a weapon, which can devastate people, organizations, and entire 
> countries. These attacks may start in the digital space but can quickly 
> spread to the physical world. We must come together as digital citizens and 
> call upon our world leaders to create rules of the road that protect our 
> digital society.
>
> We must demand Digital Peace Now."
>
> ---
>
> Dear nettimers,
>
> any comments on this? I find this pretty stunning. OK, 100 years after World 
> War I, that?s pretty significant. "Make love, not war." Today there's 
> conference in Paris. I am an anti-militarist, I am not on the side of the 
> corporate-governmental (cyber)warfare promotors. But in general I am not 
> against non-violent conflict. Should we demand digital conflict? O

Re: "THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE" (Micosoft)

[Jaromil]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2018, Geert Lovink wrote:

>[1]https://digitalpeace.microsoft.com/

>Dear nettimers, any comments on this? I find this pretty
>stunning. OK, 100 years after World War I, that’s pretty
>significant. "Make love, not war." Today there's conference in
>Paris. I am an anti-militarist, I am not on the side of the
>corporate-governmental (cyber)warfare promotors. But in general I
>am not against non-violent conflict. Should we demand digital
>conflict? Or digital ‘struggle'?

this reminds me of the "INFO PEACE" call by Way Holland, signed by CdC
and many others back end of nineties, at the time first SCADA targeted
cyber-attacks were emerging...

my advice, being my POV very close to yours naturally, is that we
demand that PEACE is not just the business of the military
industry. This is both a strategic and tactical call:

1. strategic because, srsly, boneheads cannot grasp the "Peace"
   concept even with their subsidized MAs and PhDs in political
   sciences.

2. tactical because there is an ENORMOUS amount of funding into the
   cyber-war buzzthing, more than all these blockchains and bitcoin
   stories annoying so many people here. and its all in the hands of
   the military-industrial complex, facing the issue in the same huge
   control rooms usied to make war.

ciao

-- 
  Denis "Jaromil" Roio  https://Dyne.org think  tank
  Ph.D, CTO & co-foundersoftware to empower communities
  ✉ Haparandadam 7-A1, 1013AK Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  ✩ Profile and publications: https://jaromil.dyne.org
  턞 crypto κρυπτο крипто गुप्त् 加密 האנוסים المشفره
  ⚷ 6113D89C A825C5CE DD02C872 73B35DA5 4ACB7D10

#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: "THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE" (Micosoft)

[newmedia]

Geert:


The 1998 Microsoft antitrust case effectively "wedded" the company to the 
Pentagon -- it was not run out of DoJ but rather the "intelligence community" 
(with me playing a minor role) -- so it is no surprise to find Microsoft 
speaking on behalf of that contingent today.


There is a widespread effort to develop "norms" by these folks -- driven by the 
recognition that China, Russia  have other plans -- most emphatically coming 
out of the recent "Five Eyes" (i.e. the actual "Deep State") meeting in 
Australia.  Alas the communique, which initially appeared at 
www.homeaffairs.gov.au has now been taken down, but can be found by Googling 
"countering illicit use of online spaces" and then reading Google's cache for 
the page.


Mark


-Original Message-
From: Geert Lovink 
To: a moderated mailing list for net criticism 
Sent: Mon, Nov 12, 2018 2:03 pm
Subject:  "THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE" (Micosoft)



https://digitalpeace.microsoft.com/
"We are digital citizens—members of a thriving online global society. We trust 
technology to help us do our jobs, create communities and connect us. As 
digital citizens, we also share responsibility to protect our interconnected 
space.
We are more at risk than ever before from cyberwarfare. Governments are using 
technology as a weapon, which can devastate people, organizations, and entire 
countries. These attacks may start in the digital space but can quickly spread 
to the physical world. We must come together as digital citizens and call upon 
our world leaders to create rules of the road that protect our digital society.
We must demand Digital Peace Now." 
--



Dear nettimers,


any comments on this? I find this pretty stunning. OK, 100 years after World 
War I, that’s pretty significant. "Make love, not war." Today there's 
conference in Paris. I am an anti-militarist, I am not on the side of the 
corporate-governmental (cyber)warfare promotors. But in general I am not 
against non-violent conflict. Should we demand digital conflict? Or digital 
‘struggle'?


And what to make of the comments by US internet governance scholar Milton 
Mueller? 


https://www.internetgovernance.org/2018/11/09/the-paris-igf-convergence-on-norms-or-grand-illusion/


"The theory of international regimes identifies norm development as the second 
step in a process of institutionalization. The first step involves agreement on 
principles; that is, foundational facts about the sector or domain to be 
governed. It is unfortunate, but true, to say that all of the international 
calls for cyber norms have skipped agreement on principles and are trying to 
promulgate norms despite a huge, gaping chasm in the way states understand 
their role in cyberspace. There will be no effective operationalization of 
norms until there is agreement on the status of cyberspace as a global commons, 
a non-sovereign space."


Your messenger of peace, Geert













#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#   is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: "THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE" (Micosoft)

[Morlock Elloi]

to create rules of the road that protect our digital society


A comprehensive compiler control legislation is in order, including 
total ban on assault compilers (C and Rust), and registration and 
background check for all javascript VMs.


This is the only way to make us feel safe, sheltered and protected.


#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

"THERE IS NO PEACE WITHOUT DIGITAL PEACE" (Micosoft)

[Geert Lovink]

https://digitalpeace.microsoft.com/

"We are digital citizens—members of a thriving online global society. We trust 
technology to help us do our jobs, create communities and connect us. As 
digital citizens, we also share responsibility to protect our interconnected 
space.

We are more at risk than ever before from cyberwarfare. Governments are using 
technology as a weapon, which can devastate people, organizations, and entire 
countries. These attacks may start in the digital space but can quickly spread 
to the physical world. We must come together as digital citizens and call upon 
our world leaders to create rules of the road that protect our digital society.

We must demand Digital Peace Now." 

--

Dear nettimers,

any comments on this? I find this pretty stunning. OK, 100 years after World 
War I, that’s pretty significant. "Make love, not war." Today there's 
conference in Paris. I am an anti-militarist, I am not on the side of the 
corporate-governmental (cyber)warfare promotors. But in general I am not 
against non-violent conflict. Should we demand digital conflict? Or digital 
‘struggle'?

And what to make of the comments by US internet governance scholar Milton 
Mueller? 

https://www.internetgovernance.org/2018/11/09/the-paris-igf-convergence-on-norms-or-grand-illusion/
 


"The theory of international regimes identifies norm development as the second 
step in a process of institutionalization. The first step involves agreement on 
principles; that is, foundational facts about the sector or domain to be 
governed. It is unfortunate, but true, to say that all of the international 
calls for cyber norms have skipped agreement on principles and are trying to 
promulgate norms despite a huge, gaping chasm in the way states understand 
their role in cyberspace. There will be no effective operationalization of 
norms until there is agreement on the status of cyberspace as a global commons, 
a non-sovereign space."

Your messenger of peace, Geert






#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: