Cybersecession and EFF
From Cybersecession
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 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.
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.
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).
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).
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.
