Cybersecession and EFF

From Cybersecession

(Difference between revisions)
(created page)
 
(13 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
-
==A Map of the Cyberspace==
+
==A New Map==
-
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.
+
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.
-
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.
+
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 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 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 stated on the [[Main Page]], EFF don't evidentiate any difference between privacy of people's thoughts and privacy of people's phone numbers. This confusion is wise and tough 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 object(ive)s.
+
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 "them" (corporations? politicians?). 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.
+
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".
-
It's cool that the EFF's frontline is far away from our home. It's cool that EFF exists to defend the Internet, in general, and not only 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).
+
==EFF has to defend *Trojan horses==
 +
<nowiki>*</nowiki>''necessary evils, thus no bashing implied''
-
This is what makes it possible for EFF's war to happen at the "frontier", not in our home. If the war took place in our home, then how would we feel "at home"? We want a peaceful home. Cybersecession make sure it is so. And they make sure it has all rights to be so. And they make sure it is only the Internet that is in the danger of being broken into and so might need legal war (EFF).
+
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.
-
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.
+
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==
-
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.
+
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.

Retrieved from "http://editthis.info/cybersecession/Cybersecession_and_EFF"
Personal tools