Live data from Hacker News

Declaration of Internet Freedom

internetdeclaration.org

11–20 of 42 posts

Re: Declaration of Internet Freedom

#11
If you look at a lot of old-fashioned documents like this - statements of principle, resolutions and declarations of one sort or another - you're likely to see a list of individual points, often making demands or other calls to action. But this will invariably be preceded by a preamble that indicates (a) who the specific people making the declaration are, and what their motivations are for doing so, (b) who the intended audience is, and what action, if any, is expected from them.

This declaration lacks both of these important bits of information. We have a list of imperative bullet points - do this, don't do that - but no elaboration as to why these are desirable, to whom they're desirable, and who is expected to act on the imperative instructions.

At best, it's a set of vague, aspirational intentions; at worst, it distracts us away from developing practical strategies for actually protecting internet freedom.

Re: Declaration of Internet Freedom

#13

Did not sign. This is technological challenge, not political. Statements will get you nowhere. We need cold hard code (software) and balls (hardware).

Although the points are a bit vague and overlapping, I don't see how questions of censorship, openness, and privacy are inherently and exclusively technological. Yes, there are technological methods that can enhance our ability to rout around obstructions in each of these areas, but addressing social problems via technology is a lot more reliable and effective than attempting to address technical problems via politics.

We do need code and infrastructure to support freedom even (and especially) when it is threatened, but the preservation of freedom in a social context isn't a merely technological endeavor.

Re: Declaration of Internet Freedom

#14

Did not sign. This is technological challenge, not political. Statements will get you nowhere. We need cold hard code (software) and balls (hardware).

We can't keep ignoring politics or we'll end up with laws so invasive that not even hardware and software can overcome them. And more importantly we can't let them gain any legislative precedence. It's much easier to fight now than in five years.

And further more I don't see how we have any advantages in the realms of hardware were we would afford to fight.

Re: Declaration of Internet Freedom

#15

Did not sign. This is technological challenge, not political. Statements will get you nowhere. We need cold hard code (software) and balls (hardware).

We can't keep ignoring politics or we'll end up with laws so invasive that not even hardware and software can overcome them. And more importantly we can't let them gain any legislative precedence. It's much easier to fight now than in five years. And further more I don't see how we have any advantages in the realms of hardware were we would afford to fight.

Normally I would agree with you, but the pace at which computers and the internet improves is now so high, and congress is so gridlocked that I do believe that we have left them behind, permantly.

Re: Declaration of Internet Freedom

#16
post #12

Did not sign. This is technological challenge, not political. Statements will get you nowhere. We need cold hard code (software) and balls (hardware).

I totally agree the challenge can only be won by technology, but a manifesto is no bad thing.

I truly doubt this challenge can only be won by technology. There will always be physical parts on the technology that can be controlled by those in power, by force if needed.

Just look at China.

Re: Declaration of Internet Freedom

#18

Did not sign. This is technological challenge, not political. Statements will get you nowhere. We need cold hard code (software) and balls (hardware).

Saying that this isn't a political challenge would be like ignoring the language that a framework is built in. Technology is a framework built on top of our society, made possible by the rules and laws (or lack thereof) of our society. It is a political challenge, because we're discussing the foundation on which the rules of our society operate.

The realm of politics is engaging in technology, so it's up to us whether or not this is a one way street or a two way street.

However, I caution anyone who advocates a one way street (the government regulating technology and technology ignoring government) -- they're going to get it wrong (either intentionally due to lobbying from competition or just incompetence), and it's going to materially affect your business.

Re: Declaration of Internet Freedom

#19
post #11

If you look at a lot of old-fashioned documents like this - statements of principle, resolutions and declarations of one sort or another - you're likely to see a list of individual points, often making demands or other calls to action. But this will invariably be preceded by a preamble that indicates (a) who the specific people making the declaration are, and what their motivations are for doing so, (b) who the inten…

Vague indeed.

For example, what does "universal access" mean? How about "free to connect"? Is this declaration demanding that access to the internet be free to all? As in no cost?

The language "access" to this or that has been subverted in recent years to mean that the accessed resource should be free of charge. E.G. universal access to (free) healthcare. That is decidedly not what accessible means.

So I won't be supporting this declaration. I can't tell if it is demanding Free Internet, which is not a universal right.

Post reply on HN