Cybersecession and EFF
From Cybersecession
(Many changes) |
(original) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | ==A | + | ==A Map of the Cyberspace== |
| - | + | There's a "material world", then there's the Internet. This is a distinction EFF basically promotes, although they use the word "Cyberspace" instead of "Internet", which creates confusion. | |
| - | + | Cybersecession goes further, by emphasizing that "the Internet" itself may in turn refer either to the Internet or to the Cyberspace. Cybersecession means it is only the Internet that needs to be protected by EFF, while the Cyberspace is naturally "as free as human imagination" and so it should always be. | |
| - | Cybersecession | + | Cybersecession means there may be indeed some philosophical issues around the Internet, since it affects the material world, but such issues have nothing to do with Cyberspace. So we can't tolerate any Cyberspace regulation just because there are some issues around the Internet. We should separate the two and "fight" on two different "fronts" and in two different ways. This would be much more efficient. |
==Cybersecession and EFF== | ==Cybersecession and EFF== | ||
| - | As | + | As stated on the [[Main Page]], EFF don't support any difference between private thoughts and private phone numbers. This confusion is smart and aggressive enough for fighting governments intruding the Internet, but not deep and sensitive enough to make us feel at home in our Cyberspace. Instead, the Cybersecession concept very much emphasizes this distinction. So, EFF's "electronic frontiers" to be defended are completely different from Cybersecession's. The two not only have different purposes and approaches, but also refer to different objects. |
| - | EFF fight in the frontline, protecting us all (including our "home") from the | + | EFF fight in the frontline, protecting us all (including our "home") from corporations and the government. Meanwhile, cybersecessionists are defining which part of the Internet is actually under attack and which part of it is (and will always be) naturally safe. The Cybersecession Project is thus defining and validating a safe digital land where we could really feel "at home".'' '' |
| - | + | We do have a home, after all, don't we? Some vaguely call it "the Internet" (the immaterial world sustained by the computers). But do we actually care about computers run by banks or by the FBI or the Internet they use? No, that's not the Internet we love or care about. That's not the Cyberspace. That's not our home. | |
| - | It's cool that the EFF's frontline is | + | It's cool that the EFF's frontline is far away from our home. It's cool that EFF exists to defend the Internet, and not Cyberspace. But it is also good there's a Cybersecession defining a place where nobody has any ethical right to intrude anyway. It's good that Cybersecession defines a "Cyberland" which doesn't even need to be defended (because it is safe).'' ''This is what makes it possible for the Electronic ''Frontier'' Foundation's war to happen at the ''frontier'', not at our home. We want a peaceful home, otherwise it wouldn't feel "at home". Cybersecession make sure it has the right to be so. And they make sure it is only the Internet that is ethically vulnerable to political intrusion and so might need legal war (EFF). |
| - | + | So let '''us''' decide where the frontline is, not the government. And let us do it now, before it's too late and before Cyberspace ("the global mind") too gets compromized because of poor conceptualization. | |
==The Current Status of the Cyberspace== | ==The Current Status of the Cyberspace== | ||
| - | Although Cyberspace is not | + | Although Cyberspace is still not legally defined, there are already cybersecessionist projects which create a free Internet zone similar to Cyberspace but only technologically enforced. They are collectively labelled "Cypherspace", as they are based on cryptography for hiding the identity of their users. You may visit the Cybersecession [http://editthis.info/cybersecession/cybersecession:Community_Portal Community Portal] to find out about such cybersecessionist projects. |
Revision as of 12:52, 13 November 2010
A Map of the Cyberspace
There's a "material world", then there's the Internet. This is a distinction EFF basically promotes, although they use the word "Cyberspace" instead of "Internet", which creates confusion.
Cybersecession goes further, by emphasizing that "the Internet" itself may in turn refer either to the Internet or to the Cyberspace. Cybersecession means it is only the Internet that needs to be protected by EFF, while the Cyberspace is naturally "as free as human imagination" and so it should always be.
Cybersecession means there may be indeed some philosophical issues around the Internet, since it affects the material world, but such issues have nothing to do with Cyberspace. So we can't tolerate any Cyberspace regulation just because there are some issues around the Internet. We should separate the two and "fight" on two different "fronts" and in two different ways. This would be much more efficient.
Cybersecession and EFF
As stated on the Main Page, EFF don't support any difference between private thoughts and private phone numbers. This confusion is smart and aggressive enough for fighting governments intruding the Internet, but not deep and sensitive enough to make us feel at home in our Cyberspace. Instead, the Cybersecession concept very much emphasizes this distinction. So, EFF's "electronic frontiers" to be defended are completely different from Cybersecession's. The two not only have different purposes and approaches, but also refer to different objects.
EFF fight in the frontline, protecting us all (including our "home") from corporations and the government. Meanwhile, cybersecessionists are defining which part of the Internet is actually under attack and which part of it is (and will always be) naturally safe. The Cybersecession Project is thus defining and validating a safe digital land where we could really feel "at home".
We do have a home, after all, don't we? Some vaguely call it "the Internet" (the immaterial world sustained by the computers). But do we actually care about computers run by banks or by the FBI or the Internet they use? No, that's not the Internet we love or care about. That's not the Cyberspace. That's not our home.
It's cool that the EFF's frontline is far away from our home. It's cool that EFF exists to defend the Internet, and not Cyberspace. But it is also good there's a Cybersecession defining a place where nobody has any ethical right to intrude anyway. It's good that Cybersecession defines a "Cyberland" which doesn't even need to be defended (because it is safe). This is what makes it possible for the Electronic Frontier Foundation's war to happen at the frontier, not at our home. We want a peaceful home, otherwise it wouldn't feel "at home". Cybersecession make sure it has the right to be so. And they make sure it is only the Internet that is ethically vulnerable to political intrusion and so might need legal war (EFF).
So let us decide where the frontline is, not the government. And let us do it now, before it's too late and before Cyberspace ("the global mind") too gets compromized because of poor conceptualization.
The Current Status of the Cyberspace
Although Cyberspace is still not legally defined, there are already cybersecessionist projects which create a free Internet zone similar to Cyberspace but only technologically enforced. They are collectively labelled "Cypherspace", as they are based on cryptography for hiding the identity of their users. You may visit the Cybersecession Community Portal to find out about such cybersecessionist projects.
