Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!ukc!etive!hwcs!nick From: nick@cs.hw.ac.uk (Nick Taylor) Newsgroups: comp.society.futures Subject: Re: Who Controls The Network? Message-ID: <2114@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk> Date: 10 Jan 89 10:34:30 GMT Reply-To: nick@cs.hw.ac.uk (Nick Taylor) Organization: Computer Science, Heriot-Watt U., Scotland Lines: 55 Does anybody still remember this subject? I know that I am as guilty as anyone for steering this discussion off course. My only excuse is that I liked the scenery and nobody complained about the detour! I should like to backtrack to a point made about six weeks ago by a poster whose name I don't recall. He asked about what form of control we should require of the network of the future. It seems to me that we should get our requirements spec. sorted out before we decide on who is most likely to come up with the goods. I suppose that the first question is : "Do we think that the current controls will suffice in the future?" My answer is "no". I hope we all agree that the current situation is pretty anarchic but still workable. The future network will find its way into a vast number of offices and homes and will probably become indispensible to a significant proportion of the population. I do not think that the current ad hoc manner in which we access the net will be acceptable under those circumstances. I think we need to be able to restrict access in order to prevent the mischievous and malicious from making the net unworkable. [Comments?] However, when we talk about restrictions we have to do our best to ensure that they are not used as a (very powerful) tool of repression. Now, I don't want to go running off down the Big Brother avenue again so how about this as an idea: Create a system whereby people can have their access suspended by popular demand. An automated voting system could be instituted which would accept nominations for suspension and votes for and against. If the votes for minus the votes against exceed some number (which should be some proportion of those who could have been adversely affected by the defendent's activities) then the defendent should be suspended. The defendent should be given one final opportunity to defend himself (in case his supporters had not realised how seriously others were treating the issue) and if the result still held the suspension would be implemented. [Comments?] I am sure there are many loop-holes in the above but if we thrash them out we may come up with a workable system based on popular choice and so circumvent the need for a special authority which, as has been pointed out at great length, might abuse its powers. I firmly believe that network technology can be used to either increase democratic participation in decision making (at all levels) or to thwart it. We have a chance here to demonstrate the former before we all get too used to the latter! Nick Taylor Department of Computer Science JANET : NICK@UK.AC.HW.CS Heriot-Watt University ARPANET : NICK@CS.HW.AC.UK 79 Grassmarket /\ / o __ /_ UUCP : ...!UKC!CS.HW.AC.UK!NICK Edinburgh EH1 2HJ / \ / / / /__) Tel : +44 31 225 6465 Ext. 532 United Kingdom / \/ (_ (___ / \ Fax : +44 31 449 5153