Comments on: A beautiful anarchy /2011/09/28/a-beautiful-anarchy/ Identity, society and work in the age of perpetual connectivity Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:21:04 +0000 hourly 1 By: Sophy Bot /2011/09/28/a-beautiful-anarchy/#comment-5 Sophy Bot Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:47:25 +0000 /?p=108#comment-5 Very true, and yet an article was published today asking "Should Facebook, Google or Amazon Own All of Your Data?" (http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2011/09/should-facebook-google-or-amaz.php). That, combined with cloud-powered facial recognition (http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/09/cloud-powered-facial-recognition-is-terrifying/245867/) makes for some rather frightening possibilities. Very true, and yet an article was published today asking “Should Facebook, Google or Amazon Own All of Your Data?” (http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2011/09/should-facebook-google-or-amaz.php). That, combined with cloud-powered facial recognition (http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/09/cloud-powered-facial-recognition-is-terrifying/245867/) makes for some rather frightening possibilities.

]]>
By: Oz /2011/09/28/a-beautiful-anarchy/#comment-4 Oz Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:13:53 +0000 /?p=108#comment-4 One of many interesting issues to contemplate in regard to these internet-enabled-uprisings: The distributed, quasi-anonymous nature of the internet makes it ideal for subversive usage, and yet the hardware that constitutes this entity is owned by large corporations - which, along with their surveillance-happy bedfellows in government, represent the antithesis of subversion. So....how would (will?) this all play out if that subversive aspect truly exploded into reality in the leading industrialized nations? Remember, we saw craven corporations from PayPal to Amazon folding under pressure from the State during the Wikileaks 'scandals' (and if you ask me, it was PayPal and Amazon which acted scandalously). And all Wikileaks was doing, primarily, was embarrassing a few politicians by exposing them for the sleazebags and liars they are. It would seem to argue for a Internet (3.0?) which did not exist completely at the mercy of corporate executives and political hacks. Viva La RevoluciĆ³n! One of many interesting issues to contemplate in regard to these internet-enabled-uprisings:

The distributed, quasi-anonymous nature of the internet makes it ideal for subversive usage, and yet the hardware that constitutes this entity is owned by large corporations – which, along with their surveillance-happy bedfellows in government, represent the antithesis of subversion.

So….how would (will?) this all play out if that subversive aspect truly exploded into reality in the leading industrialized nations? Remember, we saw craven corporations from PayPal to Amazon folding under pressure from the State during the Wikileaks ‘scandals’ (and if you ask me, it was PayPal and Amazon which acted scandalously). And all Wikileaks was doing, primarily, was embarrassing a few politicians by exposing them for the sleazebags and liars they are.

It would seem to argue for a Internet (3.0?) which did not exist completely at the mercy of corporate executives and political hacks.

Viva La RevoluciĆ³n!

]]>