Wayne Porter started a discussion today about a very interesting subject:

Is the web moving towards an organized, centralized network, where exchange of information will be under control?

In my previous post about ‘Torrentspy, ThinkSecret and the declaration of independence of cyberspace‘, I argumented that the recent development of the TorrentSpy, ThinkSecret and Yahoo cases show traits of such movement; Large corporations and governments silence popular blogs, torrent hubs and search engines. I quoted John Perry Barlow’s ‘Declaration of independence of the cyberspace‘ to advocate for the freedom of speech in the Web.
The role of decentralization in a scale-free network

I agree with Wayne, that decentralization (along with anonymity) is a very important key to guarantee freedom of speech and free exchange of data on the Net. Indeed the Web is vast decentralized network, a fact that makes it robust in any attacks. Bringing some nodes down, will not effect the network as a whole.

But the Web is a scale-free network, which is defined by a power law distribution. Indeed, this suggests the strength of the system. But it doesn’t mean it is invulnerable. The work of Albert-Làszlo Barabàsi on the subject, arguments that scale-free networks are vulnerable when a specific number of their hubs goes out of service. The system’s interlinkage suddenly breaks down. This happens because hubs collect the biggest number of inbound and outbound links (The 80/20 Rule).

So, yes indeed decentralization can provide online users an uncontrolled environment. But if the hubs of the network were ever down, the network wouldn’t be decentralized any more. Actually, there wouldn’t be a network at all.

My conclusion

I know this is a far fetched scenario. The hubs are numerous and the web is enormous and extremely interconnected. But when governmental and other institutions attack Yahoo (a search engine hub), TorrentSpy (a torrent hub) and ThinkSecret (a blog hub), it just makes you wonder. I’m not saying that we are at a gates of a new era of web control, but I see some steps towards this direction.

There was the past days also a discussion (are you willing to pay taxes on your blog?) about applying taxes on the internet. Maybe this is just a way for the government to put her hands on more money, but I also see it as a form of regulation. [When you don't have money to pay for your blog, you are not allowed to talk].

Update: By the way check this one out: Could Fake Steve Jobs be about to go away?

True communication had always language as a barrier. Any discourse above the fundamental, pantomimic level requires a common language. Although the worldwide web has brought us all much closer tearing down any sense of space, this basic obstacle in the exchange of information still remains.

Sure there is a multitude of ‘bots’, which can translate any web content, but lets face it: “Automated computer translation is decades away from producing acceptable content for most forms of communication.”

In the steps of Wikipedia, the Worldwide Lexicon calls on the collective knowledge to bring online communication in new realms. The translation of web content is in the hands of the users.

Now the project brings a new plugin, which makes translation much easier. It justs adds a small pencil in the page and by clicking on it you can start translating the site’s content.

Wisdom of crowds

The potential of abuse is quite obvious. By installing this plugin (either in your site or blog), you give everyone the opportunity to translate your content in any way he/she wishes. Still, the worldwidelexicon relies on the wisdom of crowds to aggregate information correctly. Anyone comfortable with two or more languages can choose any web page and translate its content. Meanwhile other users are also free to rate your translation and even redo it or edit it. An emergent microbehavior where many agents work to develop a macrobehavior develops.

Conclusion

Trusting the collective intelligence is, in a sense, an objective issue. It depends on the personal experiences, views and morals of each one of use. Some believe in collaborative projects like wikipedia, where no central control guides the development process. Others are looking forward to projects like the Google Knol, where they see a trustworthy source, capable of collecting high-quality data. But I’m asking you: do you believe in the wisdom of crowds?

Additional resources on worldwide lexicon;

VentureBeat

O’ReillyNet

The Open Design Community (TODC) is a group of Open Source Website Designers providing hundreds of XHTML and CSS based free web design templates available for download.

The main goal of TODC is helping to make the internet a prettier place.

Very high quality web design templates free for download. Depending on their license you are free to customize them.

And if you are a designer you can also contribute to the community.

As explained in the homepage, the community mission is:

Open Designs is a community owned and managed site, where users, designers and application developers can share their free website designs and templates, discuss web design and promote their services.

OpenDesigns.org is owned and operated by The Open Design Community, a nonprofit organization headed by a board of 3 administrators and 10 moderators.

Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather….

…Your legal concepts of property, expression, identity, movement, and context do not apply to us. They are all based on matter, and there is no matter here….

…In China, Germany, France, Russia, Singapore, Italy and the United States, you are trying to ward off the virus of liberty by erecting guard posts at the frontiers of Cyberspace. These may keep out the contagion for a small time, but they will not work in a world that will soon be blanketed in bit-bearing media…

…We will create a civilization of the Mind in Cyberspace. May it be more humane and fair than the world your governments have made before.

John Perry Barlow, A declaration of the independence of cyberspace February 8, 1996

Yesterday a barrage of news, shattered Barlow’s vision of cyberspace. Legal concepts of copyright, governments and collosal companies made clear their presence in cyberspace.

First, in peer-to-peer networks. TorrentSpy was found guilty for facilitating the online exchange of films, music and TV programs without permission.

Then in the blogosphere. Apple succeeded in shutting down the ThinkSecret blog, for exposing unreleased information.

And finally in search engines. China found Yahoo! guilty of copyright infringement.

Are we slowly witnessing a fate that was feared and expressed by Lawrence Lessig (for example in: The furure of ideas and in Free Culture), Andrew Shapiro (in The control revolution ) and others?

Peer-to-Peer Networks

TorrentSpy - according to the verdict of a California judge - has violated copyrights owned by the MPAA.

TorrentSpy was also found guilty of destroying evidence (for example deleting logs of user IP adresses). A very noble act - if i may add - protecting the privacy of its users. After this behavior, it seems TorrentSpy will have difficulties participating in the file sharing community.

As Matt Jensen noted, “…this case sets a precedent for future cases, potentially making user information more transparent”.

Prominent figures (Chris Anderson, author of the Long Trail) have argued that p2p networks and file sharing are an ideal way of low-cost marketing and that the reason of the decrease in blockbuster sales is not just unauthorized file sharing. But Hollywood prefers to be short-sighted and to disregard the fact that the public is now more demanding.

The Blogosphere

A debate of similar context but in a different community rose, when Apple succeeded in shutting down the ThinkSecret blog. It seems to me that this subject has received much more attention (not that it shouldn’t). Legal discussions have taken place in Wired, ethical ones in gizmodo and the role of context in similar cases has also been accounted. Even possible settlement scenarios and polls are publicized.

I understand that this was a David against Goliath fight, and logically it received more attention. But the wider context still remains; putting the web under control.

Search engines

And the final strike: Yahoo was found guilty of mass copyright infringement by a Chinese court, while Baidu (who were also sued) got away with it. Nat Torkington suspects Baidu got off the hook because “…it is viewed as a local (chinese) product” and China supports its local companies. I agree, that this is a potential scenario.

Conclusion

I believe it all comes down to this: The cyberspace is increasingly gaining in popularity and everybody wants a piece of the pie; and control is the way to get that piece.

Update: Meanwhile, the Japanese file-sharing population explodes

The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York has started a project called Steve Tagger. According to the museum:

“Steve” is a collaborative research project exploring the potential for user-generated descriptions of the subjects of works of art to improve access to museum collections and encourage engagement with cultural content. We are a group of volunteers, primarily from art museums, who share a common interest in improving access to our collections. We are concerned about barriers to public access to online museum information. Participation in steve is open to anyone with a contribution to make to developing our collective knowledge, whether they formally represent a museum or not.

Anyone can register for free and start tagging the museum’s collection (at least the works of art displayed online)

Judy Breck has also posted an article on the smart Mobs blog about ‘smart mobby activity at the Met Museum tagging site‘

While I’m wondering if we are facing a wise crowd, initiatives like the one of the Met Museum and the davos question show that some people have complete trust in the collective intelligence.

I just discovered a very interesting post through a blogoscope entry about Google Knol. It is located in Anil Dash’s blog and is called ‘Google and the theory of mind‘.

He gives some examples, why google is not aware of what others are aware. One of these examples is the google Knol announcement almost a week ago.

What really drew my attenion is, that allthough the Knol announcement clarifies that the content will also be available to other search engines, Anil Dash notes that Knol will be hosted and indexed by google.

“This presents inherent conflicts in the ranking of content, as well as disincentives for content creators to control the environment in which their content is published. This necessarily disadvantages competing search engines, but more importantly eliminates the ability for content creators to innovate in the area of content presentation or enhancement.”

A very well-argumented post, which surely puts the subject under a new perspective. Take a look at it.

Update [22.12.07]: Masternewnmedia posted today a great article on the subject. Google Knol and wikipedia: Risks, opportunities, challenges

I’m trying to implement a rating system (a wordpress plugin developed by Lester ‘GaMerZ’ Chan), so that you can rate my posts and help me improve the content. It might take me a couple of hours to make it work properly, but bare with me.

I like criticism especially when its constructive, so additional feedback/comments would be appreciated.