Cybersecession and EFF
From Cybersecession
| (6 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | ==A New Map | + | ==A New Map== |
| - | EFF's frontline is between the Internet (which they call "Cyberspace") and the | + | EFF's frontline is between the Internet (which they call "Cyberspace") and the "real world". Thus they promise to do their best to defend the whole Internet from political abuse. |
| - | The Cybersecession initiative goes further by theoretically enforcing a distinction between the Internet and the Cyberspace. Cybersecession | + | The Cybersecession initiative goes further by theoretically enforcing a distinction between the Internet and the Cyberspace. Cybersecession contends that the Internet alone needs to be protected by EFF, whereas the Cyberspace is by definition "as free as human imagination" and so it should stay forever. |
| - | Cybersecession concedes (perhaps more indulgently than EFF) that there may be valid legal concerns around the Internet, since it affects the material world, but contends (much more radically than EFF) that such issues have nothing to do with the Cyberspace, so they imply no obligation to tolerate any Cyberspace regulations. The better strategy is to thoroughly separate the Cyberspace from the Internet and fight on two different fronts and in two different ways. | + | Cybersecession concedes (perhaps more indulgently than EFF) that there may be valid legal concerns around the Internet, since it affects the material world, but contends (much more radically than EFF) that such issues have nothing to do with the Cyberspace, so they imply ''no'' obligation to tolerate ''any'' Cyberspace regulations ''whatsoever''. The better strategy is to thoroughly separate the Cyberspace from the Internet and fight on two different fronts and in two different ways. |
==Cybersecession and EFF== | ==Cybersecession and EFF== | ||
As implied on the [[Main Page]], EFF don't emphasize any strict distinction between administrative privacy and personal privacy. This confusion may be smart and aggressive enough to fight authoritarian governments intruding the Internet, but not sensitive enough to make us feel at home in our Cyberspace. On the other side, distinguishing between two types of privacy is essential to the Cybersecession initiative. So EFF's "electronic frontiers" to be defended are completely different from Cybersecession's. The two have different purposes and approaches. | As implied on the [[Main Page]], EFF don't emphasize any strict distinction between administrative privacy and personal privacy. This confusion may be smart and aggressive enough to fight authoritarian governments intruding the Internet, but not sensitive enough to make us feel at home in our Cyberspace. On the other side, distinguishing between two types of privacy is essential to the Cybersecession initiative. So EFF's "electronic frontiers" to be defended are completely different from Cybersecession's. The two have different purposes and approaches. | ||
| - | EFF fight in the frontline, protecting us all (including our "home") from the bad guys. Meanwhile, cybersecessionists are defining which part of the Internet is actually under attack and which part of it is (and will always be) | + | EFF fight in the frontline, protecting us all (including our "home") from the bad guys. Meanwhile, cybersecessionists are defining which part of the Internet is actually under attack and which part of it is (and will always be) intrinsically safe. The Cybersecession initiative is thus defining and validating a safe digital land where we could actually feel "at home". |
| - | + | ==EFF has to defend *Trojan horses== | |
| + | <nowiki>*</nowiki>''necessary evils, thus no bashing implied'' | ||
| - | + | Indeed, we have a home. Some ambiguously call it "the Internet" (the immaterial world supported by the computers). But do we actually care about zones run by banks or three-letter agencies? No, that's not the "Internet" we love or care about. That's not the Cyberspace, our home. | |
| - | '' '' | + | It's cool that the EFF's frontline is so far away from home. It's cool that EFF exists to defend the ''Internet'', and not just the Cyberspace. But it is wonderful that we can initiate a cybersecession, defining a space that nobody can intrude ethically and legally, a "Cyberland" that is safe by definition (so it doesn't even need defense), while leaving the Internet alone ethically vulnerable to political issues. |
| + | |||
| + | The Cybersecession initiative thus makes sure '''we''', not the governments, decide and define where the Electronic Frontier is, before it's too late. We can't allow the Cyberspace to disappear merely because of poor conceptualization. | ||
==The Current Status of the Cyberspace== | ==The Current Status of the Cyberspace== | ||
| - | + | No legal status. However, there are many software projects that are esentially cybersecessionist. You may visit the Cybersecession [http://editthis.info/cybersecession/cybersecession:Community_Portal Community Portal] to find out about such projects. | |
Current revision as of 23:53, 20 December 2010
Contents |
[edit] A New Map
EFF's frontline is between the Internet (which they call "Cyberspace") and the "real world". Thus they promise to do their best to defend the whole Internet from political abuse.
The Cybersecession initiative goes further by theoretically enforcing a distinction between the Internet and the Cyberspace. Cybersecession contends that the Internet alone needs to be protected by EFF, whereas the Cyberspace is by definition "as free as human imagination" and so it should stay forever.
Cybersecession concedes (perhaps more indulgently than EFF) that there may be valid legal concerns around the Internet, since it affects the material world, but contends (much more radically than EFF) that such issues have nothing to do with the Cyberspace, so they imply no obligation to tolerate any Cyberspace regulations whatsoever. The better strategy is to thoroughly separate the Cyberspace from the Internet and fight on two different fronts and in two different ways.
[edit] Cybersecession and EFF
As implied on the Main Page, EFF don't emphasize any strict distinction between administrative privacy and personal privacy. This confusion may be smart and aggressive enough to fight authoritarian governments intruding the Internet, but not sensitive enough to make us feel at home in our Cyberspace. On the other side, distinguishing between two types of privacy is essential to the Cybersecession initiative. So EFF's "electronic frontiers" to be defended are completely different from Cybersecession's. The two have different purposes and approaches.
EFF fight in the frontline, protecting us all (including our "home") from the bad guys. Meanwhile, cybersecessionists are defining which part of the Internet is actually under attack and which part of it is (and will always be) intrinsically safe. The Cybersecession initiative is thus defining and validating a safe digital land where we could actually feel "at home".
[edit] EFF has to defend *Trojan horses
*necessary evils, thus no bashing implied
Indeed, we have a home. Some ambiguously call it "the Internet" (the immaterial world supported by the computers). But do we actually care about zones run by banks or three-letter agencies? No, that's not the "Internet" we love or care about. That's not the Cyberspace, our home.
It's cool that the EFF's frontline is so far away from home. It's cool that EFF exists to defend the Internet, and not just the Cyberspace. But it is wonderful that we can initiate a cybersecession, defining a space that nobody can intrude ethically and legally, a "Cyberland" that is safe by definition (so it doesn't even need defense), while leaving the Internet alone ethically vulnerable to political issues.
The Cybersecession initiative thus makes sure we, not the governments, decide and define where the Electronic Frontier is, before it's too late. We can't allow the Cyberspace to disappear merely because of poor conceptualization.
[edit] The Current Status of the Cyberspace
No legal status. However, there are many software projects that are esentially cybersecessionist. You may visit the Cybersecession Community Portal to find out about such projects.
