Who owns the infrastucture will always have the ultimate control. No matter how revolutionary your communication service is the guys with the cables can shut you off in a snap if needed. The Egyptian case is emblematic. When a country is in chaos and internet and everything are still online it means that the government have control on much more than the infrastucture. And that is far more scaring than a shut down.
Turning the Internet Off
11–20 of 31 posts
Re: Turning the Internet Off
#12Seems appropriate here to bring back Malcolm Gladwell's New Yorker piece from October 2010, "Small Change: why the revolution will not be tweeted": http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_...
The revolution has been tweeted, as shown in Egypt. But that whole statement is wrong. It's not whether the revolution will be tweeted. It's will it be tweeted, facebooked, shown on YouTube, blogs, TV news, radio, newspapers, recorded for Wikipedia, etc.... Twitter is just one part of the new global information system.
Bear in mind that the piece was published before the Arab Spring bubbled up. Media reports exaggerated the roles that Twitter played in earlier demonstrations in Iran and Moldova. Gladwell: "Where activists were once defined by their causes, they are now defined by their tools."
I thought it was appropriate because it chimed with Dave Winer's idea that at some point, physical action has to replace virtual. Gladwell compares social media activism with the carefully planned civil rights protests in the 1960s: sit-ins, marches etc. Any sustained, significant physical action, he says, requires organisation.
I'm not saying Gladwell's argument has not suffered from the events of the Arab Spring. I still think, however, that his piece makes interesting accompanying reading, which is why I linked to it.
Re: Turning the Internet Off
#13"But also don't delude yourself into thinking that tweeting and facebooking are revolutionary acts. They're about as revolutionary as watching CNN. " I totally disagree. Spreading knowledge is always better than simply receiving it. Actually doing something is better yet, but let's face it: Most of us can't do more than stand in traffic and get noticed. Getting other people to notice is the point, and spreading the m…
Re: Turning the Internet Off
#14"But also don't delude yourself into thinking that tweeting and facebooking are revolutionary acts. They're about as revolutionary as watching CNN. " I totally disagree. Spreading knowledge is always better than simply receiving it. Actually doing something is better yet, but let's face it: Most of us can't do more than stand in traffic and get noticed. Getting other people to notice is the point, and spreading the m…
And what did your parents hear, from numerous sources other than you? The problem is that it is not enough to hear the truth. One must also fail to hear the falsehoods. When those falsehoods are cheap to create, and cheap to distribute, and the people pushing them have more resources, it's pretty difficult to consistently tune them out.
Re: Turning the Internet Off
#15"But also don't delude yourself into thinking that tweeting and facebooking are revolutionary acts. They're about as revolutionary as watching CNN. " I totally disagree. Spreading knowledge is always better than simply receiving it. Actually doing something is better yet, but let's face it: Most of us can't do more than stand in traffic and get noticed. Getting other people to notice is the point, and spreading the m…
> I can't count the number of things in the past year that I've told my parents about (avid news watchers) and they had never heard a peep of it. And what were the results?
Re: Turning the Internet Off
#16And then the blog post ends with "So if you want to create change, in 2011 and beyond, at least some of your time is going to have to be spent off the grid.", which is obviously true, but not the same as saying we have to turn the Internet off if we want to take to the streets.
Re: Turning the Internet Off
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what did your parents hear, from numerous sources other than you? The problem is that it is not enough to hear the truth. One must also fail to hear the falsehoods. When those falsehoods are cheap to create, and cheap to distribute, and the people pushing them have more resources, it's pretty difficult to consistently tune them out.
And that somehow makes it better for me to shut up about the truth? No. Being 1 more voice speaking the truth is always worthwhile.
Re: Turning the Internet Off
#18That's not to say that doing things on the Internet are never useful activism, but often times they are used in place of actual action. Think "change your Facebook picture for the cause!" vs spreading information about a relatively unknown story.
Re: Turning the Internet Off
#19Who owns the infrastucture will always have the ultimate control. No matter how revolutionary your communication service is the guys with the cables can shut you off in a snap if needed. The Egyptian case is emblematic. When a country is in chaos and internet and everything are still online it means that the government have control on much more than the infrastucture. And that is far more scaring than a shut down.
Modern economies cannot function without the internet. Too much commerce happens through it. Shutting off the internet is suicide.
Obviously there would be a significant impact, but I think the Internet is still a long way away from being something that simply can't be turned off.
[1] http://www.mckinsey.com/features/sizing_the_internet_economy...
Re: Turning the Internet Off
#20Frankly, it's something that would take such a large cultural leap to change, that I'm not expecting it anytime soon.