The debate over net neutrality, identity theft and exposure of classified information on the web could determine the way cyberspace functions.
There are a few forces that could reshape the way cyberspace functions. The tug of war 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: Transparency. It may sound a bit naive to hail the internet as one of the most powerful forces that can bring transparency in governments the world over. But, consider the way governments have reacted to Julian Assange, the face of Wikileaks, putting up “very sensitive” documents on the internet.
Critics said Assange was not being prudent and putting governments at risk by sharing state secrets that could compromise a country’s stand or lay bare a transgression that could embarrass it. They also argued that Wikileaks could prompt governments to add more layers of secrecy and classification.
Transparency advocate Steven Aftergood, a senior research analyst at the Federation of American Scientists, favours the exposure of corruption, including classified corruption. But he also believes that Wikileaks has invaded personal privacy, published libellous material, violated intellectual property rights and launched a sweeping attack not only on corruption but on secrecy itself. He has gone on record to state that it is “...both a strategic and a tactical error”.
There are others like Glenn Greenwald, constitutional law attorney and political/legal blogger at Salon.com, who argue that the amount of corruption and injustice that WikiLeaks is exposing, not only in the US but around the world, would not have otherwise been uncovered.
Also Read
Assange is due for another hearing at London’s City of Westminster court on January 11. The 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).
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 mission. 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 that the scene could change if Google and Verizon have their way. The two companies had put forward a proposal before the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), to allow broadband operators and network operators (read wireless) to offer new services that might be discriminated in terms of their price and speed.
The public internet (read wireline) will remain untouched, assured 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 where internet service providers (ISPs) and governments will not place restrictions on content, sites, platforms, on the kinds of equipment that may be attached and on the modes of communication.
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 FCC’s 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 to be 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
Netizens, for the last couple of years, have been 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 several protests to stem the threat. There were online calls to even abandon sites like Facebook. And now there is increased concern about sites that have started providing geo-location services. For instance, moments after Facebook introduced its new feature called Facebook Places (similar to Foursquare, Layar, etc.) recently – that allows its users to share their location and find their friends – advocates raised flags over online privacy.
Nevertheless, many netizens, suggests a Pew research done this May, said 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 their 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 to take steps to limit the amount of personal information available about them online than older adults. They are also generally less trusting of the sites that host their content.
(The author, on a sabbatical from Business Standard, is an MIT Knight Science Journalism Research Fellow 2010-11)