Response to the Second Half of "Code" Book
The cyberspace has become an extension of our physical space. Almost every aspect of life in the real world has a counterpart in the virtual one now including crimes. One major news story today is about attorney general's lobby for a federal law that requires Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to keep a log of customers' online activities so that the government can use it to fight crimes such as terrorism or child pornography. Concerned about potential abuse of the data, critics of the data retention legislation said that "civil rights could be put on endangered species list."
Lessig's book outlined the structure of regulation constraints in the cyberspace. But he also points out that how we choose the structure depends on what kind of cyberspace we want to build, and what values we want to promote there. That point gives his book a "heart," making it much more than a technical discussion. "We should relate to cyberspace as members rather than as customers. In an odd but wholly familiar sense, we need to take responsibility for what cyberspace is; we must become citizens of cyberspace just as we are simultaneously citizens of, say, the United States and Massachusetts." (p203)
Back to the story about the data retention legislation, I can understand why the government wants it, but agree with critics' concern given this administration's past track record of its use of data. In order to erect an effective and fair law, the government and citizens must have an honest dialogue about what is the real intention and purpose of that law and what values we want it to protect. Then we can discuss technical details: what to put in that law in order to achieve that purpose and protect those values. The two sides may not come to complete agreement. Compromise may be necessary. But it's essential to have that dialogue. I have serious doubt that such an honest dialogue will happen. But as members of a democratic society, we should always try, don't we?
Lessig's book outlined the structure of regulation constraints in the cyberspace. But he also points out that how we choose the structure depends on what kind of cyberspace we want to build, and what values we want to promote there. That point gives his book a "heart," making it much more than a technical discussion. "We should relate to cyberspace as members rather than as customers. In an odd but wholly familiar sense, we need to take responsibility for what cyberspace is; we must become citizens of cyberspace just as we are simultaneously citizens of, say, the United States and Massachusetts." (p203)
Back to the story about the data retention legislation, I can understand why the government wants it, but agree with critics' concern given this administration's past track record of its use of data. In order to erect an effective and fair law, the government and citizens must have an honest dialogue about what is the real intention and purpose of that law and what values we want it to protect. Then we can discuss technical details: what to put in that law in order to achieve that purpose and protect those values. The two sides may not come to complete agreement. Compromise may be necessary. But it's essential to have that dialogue. I have serious doubt that such an honest dialogue will happen. But as members of a democratic society, we should always try, don't we?
posted by Lisa Bu, Ph.D. at
12:33 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home