by David Brin
135 ... archetype is copied in such endless profusion ... What protects the “sullen loner” image from becoming clichéd? Perhaps just the simple fact that we were all teenagers once, a stage of life when sometimes the only thing enabling a kid to get through yet another dreary day of adult domination can be the serene emotional sanctuary of disdain. Often it doesn’t matter what you are for, so long as it serves to offend, or at least somewhat unnerve, those in authority around you. This refuge will remain attractive, even if the drumbeat of resentful propaganda eases.
136 ... whys and wherefores of this exceptional phenomenon ... Such consistency can hardly be an accident. And yet, this is one propaganda campaign that cannot be blamed on “the powers that be,” since it would hardly interest conspiratorial oppressors to suckle generations of youths on the milk of defiance! Could the relentless propaganda campaign to spread suspicion of authority be evidence of some intentional profreedom design? If the “societal Tcell” exists, it is more likely that we will someday recognize it as an “emergent property” of a new type of civilization, rather than an intentional innovation we can feel proud of. Grateful for, yes; aware of, certainly. But a deliberate policy? I’m not quite paranoid enough to credit a scenario so convoluted or bizarre.
139 ... self-righteousness addicts ... Regarding the habit-forming properties of indignation, I am reminded of a hilarious yet wise skit that appeared on television’s Saturday Night Live. The scene was set in a hospital, where a harried female nurse had to deal with a series of outraged males, each of them storming in to make demands.
IRATE YOUNG COP: “How DARE you keep me from the patient! She was a witness to a crime! I have a sacred duty to protect the public!”
IRATE YOUNG REPORTER: “How DARE you keep me from the patient! She was a witness to a crime! I have a sacred duty to in form the public!”
IRATE YOUNG PHYSICIAN: “How DARE you people come storming in here! I’m a doctor! I have a sacred duty to heal!”
All the actors then freeze their poses, and the announcer’s voice comes on—“Welcome to another episode of The Young and the Self-Righteous!”
Again, this skit may offer a peek at our future—one filled with incensed people on outrage-doped endorphin highs. Or else it may signify that we already have within us the one truly effective antidote to fevers of excess indignation, a sense of humor.
139 ... fortifying some lonesome dissenter ... shouting, “Wake up!” ... University of California at Berkeley’s Robin Hanson ponders, “I find it hard to understand the evolutionary advantage of this behavior for the individual.” This raises fascinating questions about why a fraction of humans seem driven to behave in extravagant ways, even though it exposes them to danger. One might presume that, in our long past, such behaviors had occasional big payoffs that compensated for the risks. In this chapter, however, I seem to be arguing that “social T-cells” arise to benefit civilization. This, in turn, appears to suggest some sort of group selection, which is anathema to many modern biologists. But such a purist rejection would be unfortunate, for societies clearly do evolve, developing new traits through trial and error—and sometimes through actual forethought. The process is not purely Darwinian. We do not understand it, except in crude outlines. But it happens, and we are the beneficiaries.
140 ... mask their egomania behind a shield of indignant “professionalism”... Elsewhere we mention the phenomenon of “microtyrants,” people who talk themselves into believing that any action can be justified in the name of their craft, e.g., the paparazzi “news” photographers who hounded Princess Diana both before and after her fatal car crash, proclaiming dedicated craftsmanship as an excuse. Overdosing on self-righteousness can push a vigorous and abrasive “T-cell” over the edge, transforming individualism into solipsism.
141 Even retractions do little good ... Since Goddard’s confession in November 1997, some conspiracy fans refuse to credit the retraction, claiming that the government “got to him.” The notion that truth will always chase down and slay a lie may prove unsupportable unless accountability plays a large role in tomorrow’s rumor-drenched society.
141 ... other surveys reveal substantial overall confidence ... In a Los Angeles Times poll (August 1996) citizens were asked, “Would you be willing to give up some civil liberties, if that were necessary to curb terrorism in this country?” 58 percent answered that they were willing, 23 percent were not willing, and 13 percent said it would depend on which liberties. Yet when the question was posed differently, “How concerned are you that fighting terrorism may wind up restricting some civil liberties?,” 68 percent expressed strong concern.
141 ... After raising several generations ... How long has this been going on? For how many decades have media czars been preaching nonconformiy as the conformist message (while selling us their goods) and telling us from on high that we should resent authority? It is an interesting question. A cursory appraisal of national myths suggests that it’s been going on for quite some time. Whether the American War of Independence was a true revolution or (as some contend) a minor coup by a portion of the preexisting white male ruling class, the myths and hagiography—from George Washington’s cherry tree, to the legend of Cincinnatus, to the log cabin birthplaces of William Henry Harrison and Abe Lincoln—all testify that the theme is an old one, in North America, at least. Indeed, suspicion of authority may be the one ingredient that was missing in nations that freed themselves from Spanish domination in the early nineteenth century. From Mexico to Chile, they all copied the U.S. Constitution, with its vaunted checks and balances, and yet few remained free of domination by oligarchies. It could be that those constitutional provisions are only effective in thwarting tyranny if they are backed up by an attitude of cantankerous resentment of constraint that has to be taught from an early age.
If suspicion of authority does have such long-standing provenance, it nevertheless was never like today. Movies from the 1930s and 1940s definitely show the same basic ingredients, namely, protagonists who prove their mettle by standing up to some officious or domineering figure. Yet, films such as Mr. Smith Goes to Washington or From Here to Eternity are moderated by underlying connective themes, such as patriotism, that are largely missing from those made today. The centrifugal influences had a centripetal counterpart, so that we flew like moons—only loosely bound, and yet joined in orbit around a common, uniting theme.
141 ... protecting the privilege of millions to be wrong ... It should be noted that the analogy with a human immune system is inherently limited. For instance, in our own bodies, T-cells are ruthlessly winnowed by the thymus gland (hence the T) in order to ensure that these vigorous antagonist agents do not attack the self. Should we emulate such a culling mechanism, in order to prevent the harm done by “cancerous” cells, like Timothy McVeigh? Of course not! That would undermine the whole notion of error correction through criticism. And yet, might the same function of a social “thymus” be accomplished somehow through education and mental health? By instilling a loose sense of participation, community, and humor, while at the same time leaving undampened the eagerly individualistic drives that make for vigorous social critics? In that case, what would be winnowed would not be the individual, but the toxic notion of violent rage.
142 Jack Stack, The Great Game of Business (New York: Bantam, 1992).
143 Jean François Revel, Democracy Against Itsel The Future of the Democratic Impulse (NewYork: Macmillan, 1993).
144 ... pouncing on errors that seemed too “minor” to notice in the past ... For example, making political fund-raising calls from an office telephone, a practice that was universal in the past but is now no longer acceptable (although using another telephone, just down the hall, would be).
144 ... As if aware of this synergy... The analogy between free speech criticism and the immune systems of living beings can be taken even farther. For instance, just as the brain is mostly unaware of the body’s immune system, which functions quite well without conscious direct
ion, so society’s leaders are largely unaware of this “T Cell” synergy—except when the perceived errors being targeted happen to be their own. Individually, leaders nearly always squirm and try to evade this scrutiny. Nevertheless, in a democracy the system forces most of them to accept accountability.
But what of those societies and corporations where leaders have successfully insulated themselves from criticism? University of Texas Professor Joseph D. Miller points out that our bodies’ T cells normally do not cross the “blood brain barrier.” The central nervous system—the “head of government”—is immunologically privileged, though there is a type of brain cell, called microglia, that performs certain immune-like functions. Does this mean that our new democratic social systems may surpass natural immune systems, since the heads of government in a democracy cannot escape immunological surveillance? Or does it suggest that Singapore-style governance, in which the topmost social layers insulate themselves against criticism, is more inherently “natural” somehow?
These ideas are new. We must explore some more, before leaping to premature conclusions.
CHAPTER 6
151 ... fewer new words in English, and a lot fewer new ideas ... Bruce Sterling, Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, February 1993. Note that some languages are “owned,” in a sense. Take, for example, certain copyrighted computer codes and compilers. Then there is the alleged authority over the French language that is repeatedly asserted by the Academie française.
152 “ ... goofy, Jolt cola—swilling UNIX freaks...” this genuinely affectionate characterization was first coined by author Bruce Sterling.
152 ... Internet, to be even more wild and free ... Administrators faced a critical decision. On the surface, they suffered a continuing drain on resources in the direction of “frivolous” pursuits. They might have clamped down, as Germany, China, and several other countries have done in recentyears: reining in the disorderly mob; establishing firm rules and oversight procedures; and enclosing the fields and pastures of cyberspace into tidy, fenced-off, accountable territories. Instead, many of those big shots of the 1970s and 1980s willingly let their institutions “tithe” a steady subsidy for irrelevant, extracurricular, impractical, unprofitable, flippant, and even trivial uses, defying the prosaic image of mean-minded bureaucrats by watering a crop whose emerging properties they could but dimly perceive. (See chapter 2 references to the prescience of Vannevar Bush.)
153 Steven E. Miller, Civilizing Cyberspace: Policy, Power and the Information Superhighway (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1996).
153 ... individuals will tend to gravitate towards a safe average, suppressing their individuality and creativity in favor of ... the demands of an omniscient observer ... From Philip E. Agre (University of California, San Diego) and Christine A. Harbs (University of San Diego), “Social Choice About Privacy: Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems in the United States,” Information, Technology & People, vol.7, no.4 (1994).
157 Esther Dyson, Release 2.0: A Design for Living in the Digital Age (New York: Broadway Books, 1997), p. 216.
159 ... such abuses are not confined solely to despotic societies ... See Gary T. Marx, Undercover: Police Surveillance in America (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1988).
163 “There is no strength in security through obscurity ...” British journalist Oliver Morton points out one implication—that encryption algorithms and procedures should be subject to rigorous peer review, like any other important scientific or technical innovation that nations and economies rely on. According to Morton, “A lot of the hatred of Clipper [chip] came from the fact that the government would not release the algorithm, so that people could assure themselves of its strength.”
In fact, peer review may be one way of looking at benign hacker attacks. When Georgetown University Professor Dorothy Denning defended the “Hacker A” types who seek entry to forbidden computers without deriving gain or wreaking harm, she praised their role in testing system failure modes, helping operators improve after receiving the benefit of helpful “criticism.” Denning’s later role in defending the government’s position in the Clipper controversy is therefore not as ironic or inconsistent as some maintain. In both cases, she took a position favoring accountability, whether pursued on an ad hoc basis by benign hackers, or formally, by duly assigned officers of the law.
164 ... uncovering flawed security systems ... In a recent irony, the National Security Agency (NSA), a secretive government bureaucracy that many hackers see as satanic (due in part to its mandate for code breaking and data surveillance), has announced a technology transfer program with a stated goal to help companies spin off commercial products and processes from the NSA’s extraordinary technical expertise. One impetus for this program is apparently the agency’s growing concern about the potential vulnerability of government and private industry computer networks to acts of terrorism or sabotage. By opening systems up to criticism, they purportedly hope to expose errors and trapdoors, resulting in more secure systems, even if it means releasing some treasured technologies the NSA had previously been keeping to itself. Some libertarian-leaning netizens, characteristically suspicious of this overture, call it an “obvious farce.”
167 ... truth will ... slay any calumny or lie ... According to this argument, the Internet may render libel law obsolete and irrelevant because (1) it turns many more people into public figures, and (2) it increases our ability to rebut charges, correct the record, or flame our defamers. “If someone writes one hundred lines of false statements about you, you can file one thousand lines of point-by-point refutation. A cheap day in court,” says EFF lawyer Michael Godwin. Mike Godwin, “Libel Law: Let It Die,” Wired, March 1996.
167 ... anyone can construct a “shadow identity,” a slanderous characterization, that sticks to your cyberidentify like glue.... See Wright, “The Cybersmear.”
I am resigned to a high likelihood that somebody will try doing this to me, probably after taking offense at this book, or at an impulsive misinterpretation of its message. If that happens, 1 may have to count on the technical skills of friends throughout the computer industry, including some mentioned in this chapter, to help act as my “T-cell” protectors. Alas, many other people don’t have such resources to call on when they voice opinions different from Net dogma. We shall see if reciprocal transparency solves such problems in the long run. In the short term, however, it can be worrisome to stick your head up and speak.
167 ... net culture ... will change more toward the mainstream as the mainstream joins the net.... Esther Dyson, Release 1.0, 23 December 1993.
168 ... list of other breaches of Net civility ... Roger Clarke’s paper, “Net-Ethiquette: Mini Case Studies of Dysfunctional Human Behavior on the Net,” can be accessed at http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/II/Netethiqttettecases.html.
168 ... pine for the good old days ... Andrei Simic, professor of social anthropology at the University of Southern California, theorizes that America’s incivility is due to the fact that we are “in a period where we have the illusion of the greatest individualism we have ever had.” A U.S. News & World Report poll of 1,005 adults found that 89 percent of Americans consider incivility to be a serious national problem, fostering violence, dividing community, and eroding values.
170 ... the cult followings of talk show hosts ... As a “joke,” Rush Limbaugh offered his listeners special radios with their tuners soldered exclusively to the nearest station that carried his broadcasts. Although he regularly teased his “ditto-heads” for their devoted and dutiful agreement with his opinions, Limbaugh seldom brought challengers onto his shows, or let articulate dissenters poke and test his notions before the public eye.
176 ... Net can also provide many of the implements of science ... An early example of this kind of extended discussion on the Internet was the Sustainability Hyperforum experiment performed jointly by Caltech and the Rand Corporation, under the leadership of Professor Bruce Murray in 1996. Participants made us
e of a range of analytical and graphical tools, provided as common resources by the organizers. Some initial endeavors along this line might be viewed at http://www.hf.caltech.edu/hf and at http://crit.org.
176 ... moral force that men used to invest in duels ... For one vivid fictional depiction of the disputation arena concept, see Marc Stiegler’s 1988 novel David’s Sling (New York: Baen Books).
178 Numbers can be a better form of cash ... To begin leaning more about electronic cash and related technologies, see Web pages by Prof. Michael Froomkin at: http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/cfP97.htm
180 Many cryptographic protocols... A. Michael Froomkin, “It Came from Planet Clipper: The Battle over Key Escrow,” from the “Law in Cyberspace” issue of the University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1996, U.Chi.L.Forum, p.15.
CHAPTER 7
185 ... the Computers, Freedom and Privacy (CFP) conference ... For further information see http://www.cfp.org.
190 ... Cold War technology transfer laws to restrict the export ... As of this writing, the United States still maintained an official policy that exporting advanced encryption technology beyond its borders constituted a crime. This was justified by ruling that encryption software was equivalent, under the law, to munitions, an interpretation that caused even the government’s harshest critics more whimsy than outrage—especially since national boundaries in cyberspace are as porous as a mesh window screen. Some companies have simply moved their encryption-related operations overseas, for example, to mathematically sophisticated Russia. Moreover, printed versions of RSA programs and other software are protected as free speech, and thus safeguarded from interference. At this time, it remains unclear what officials hope to accomplish by the munitions interpretation, except perhaps to make encryption aficionados pause for a few seconds of sober thought before sharing their techniques with foreign dictators.