Lead: Jonathan Zittrain
The Internet of tomorrow will not much resemble the Internet of today. What are the changes sweeping over the Net, and who stands to gain and lose by them?
The big change the personal computer brought in — compared to big mainframes — was that one solution — the PC — fitted many problems/questions. It was a multipurpose machine that let the customer use it for whatever he could imagine (or almost). And software was the tool to be used to accomplish any purpose.
The “Hourglass” architecture follows a similar purpose: let’s get anyone connected, but let anyone get connected the way the want and exchange whatever they want. Just some standards are of consensus to make thinks work. Reference: The Internet’s Coming of Age (2001).
With the “hourglass” architecture, one layer can develop and
know anything about any other layer (provided you respect the standards that make layers communicate one to each other). Same happens with Internet Science… or not. It depends on what you’re planning to accomplish. Nevertheless, it is clear that you have to have a general awareness on how the other layers work to get deep into your personal research field/layer.
Generativity: third parties can contribute and second parties can benefit from the improvements. i.e. one plugin for WordPress
You get generativity on the four layers:
- social: i.e. CouchSurfing
- content: i.e. Wikipedia
- Captcha: a generative solution to a generative problem… which can be tricked by means of generativity.
- Web code is highly generative, thus easy to hack to do whatever evil
Is this (these threats) the end of the generative computer? of the actual systems design? are tethered appliances/devices the future/present (and the death of generativity)?
While most of these threats to generativity might be true, isn’t the pendulum of “threats” getting overridden by:
- Free software and the way it’s changed politics?
- Open access and the way it’s changing science and knowledge building?
- The changes that Law (Intellectual Property, Privacy, etc.) is suffering (and will be) in the most recent years?
Jonathan’s just answered Rachel Cobcroft‘s question and, indirectly, commented my reflections: it is not an apocalypse he’s depicting — the end of generativity — but a warning: if we focus too much in our layer, we could have the freest Internet ever but the end point can be caught under control for lack of our “surveillance”, because we just forgot. And most important (as an answer to Chintan Vaishnav), the question is if generativity will become a thing for geeks, or it is supposed to remain for everyone.
- 3rd IDP Congress on Internet, Law and Politics. Briefings, part I: Jonathan Zittrain keynote speech, post in this blog around the same issues.
- A Generative Presentation, by Daithí Mac Síthigh
- Generativity, by Aaron S. Veenstra
- OII Day 1, by Alla Zollers
- J.H. Saltzer, D.P. Reed & D.D. Clark. End-to-end arguments in system Design (PDF)
- Committee on the Internet in the Evolving Information Infrastructure, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board. Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications, National Research Council. The Internet’s Coming of Age
SDP 2007 related posts (2007)
If you need to cite this article in a formal way (i.e. for bibliographical purposes) I dare suggest:
Peña-López, I. (2007) “OII SDP 2007 (II): The View From 50,000 Feet: The Future of the Net” In ICTlogy,
#46, July 2007. Barcelona: ICTlogy.
Retrieved month dd, yyyy from http://ictlogy.net/review/?p=567
Previous post: OII SDP 2007 (I): Digital Natives
Next post: OII SDP 2007 (III): Internet Filtering