📅 January 13 - January 19 | All your Internets are belong to us

A picture tells a thousand words.

I didn’t set out to write this. I had planned on writing about the recent paper (Analog Privilege) that I read on a recent trip and came back with many notes in the margin of the printout. But events sometimes take over what you had thought about doing. What is it they say?

Best-laid plans are laid to waste.

Yeah.

This started life in the ‘of note’ column, and as I started writing it, I figured it would be better in the main section. Like always. I have thoughts.

I wanted to discuss my feelings about some of the major issues affecting the tech world and the Internet today. Yesterday (as when this gets emailed) was inauguration day in the United States of America. The American people have chosen, democratically, a candidate that, for want of a better description, acts like a Mafia boss. This will have, and has already had, significant consequences on how the Internet will change over the coming years.

More than ever, the Internet is central to the lives of billions of people, for better or worse. The incoming regime will test the institutions of the Internet more than at any time in history, from areas concerning Section 230 that protect online platforms such as social media from sanction for any publication on or via its system (wrongly in some cases, in my view).

It will challenge the underlying governance structure of the Internet, which is currently open to all (although many nations in the Global South would, rightly, dispute that), exacerbating the so-called Splinternet as decisions on “un-American” products like routers, firewalls, switches and services linked to regimes this administration considers “anti-american” —which by definition is anything not American— will be targeted for sanctions, punitive tax structures, and even outright bans.

This will inevitably lead to retaliation from those targeted. And despite the bluster and political propaganda from (generally) right-wing journals, the EU has not stopped its program on reigning in abuses of the Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) and Very Large Online Search Engines (VLOSEs), as the ongoing saga of its investigation into Google’s refusal to fact-check its search results, or in recent step up its investigation of Twitter’s abuses of the DSA, or even Meta’s wholesale abandonment of fact-checking and moderation.

Note: I’ll use the term VLOPs from hereon. Not because I agree 100% with the DSA, but it is a convenient term rather than Big Tech (not specific enough), Social Media (Networks or Media? Active or Performative?) or other loose definitions.

Side note here: You may have knee-jerk reactions to the DSA and the DMA. You should take the time to read what the acts are; here is a good start. You may not entirely agree with them, but you cannot argue that they are anti-consumer. In fact, this is the most significant difference in legislation and governance of the Internet seen between the three largest groups in the world that have enormous sway in how the Internet is run. America is pro-business, to the point that it willingly throws its consumers under the bus; the EU is pro-consumer, to the point that it throws businesses under the bus; and China is pro-CCP, meaning that everyone gets thrown under the bus if they are out of line. This is a poor abbreviation of the much more detailed and nuanced arguments in Anu Bradford’s book, Digital Empires (available in bookshops and most online retailers).

If the recent events of TikTok are any indication, they show us what many of the large platforms will do. No later than a few hours after TikTok went dark this weekend, Meta announced that it was developing and soon releasing a blatant rip-off of a much-used TikTok service, CapCut.

What we see is an entirely political manoeuvre by Mark Zuckerberg to exploit a situation for his own gain. Proving that he has virtually no morals, not that he had strong ones in the first place.¹ His machinations will prop up a more nationalistic and corrupt government in his home country, thus legitimising the same in many other nations worldwide. I’ve said as much before the Brexit referendum, that the nationalistic overtones of that consultation (that incidentally, the outcome of which was not legally binding and was advisory only) would entrain a slow march to nationalism in Europe as it would empower and legitimise the would-be despots and autocrats to push harder than before. We’re seeing it in France, where the RN (Front National) made significant gains by laundering their image (it’s a lie, and France will regret it if they’re elected), in Italy with a populist right-winger that will shortly show her true colours, and again in Germany, where, clearly, much of the population has entirely lost any connection to their past. Plenty of ink will be spilt on this topic and those related to it. I’ll let you form your own opinions.

The Internet is central to all of this, and it is the Internet that could help pull us out of this downward spiral, but it is not going to be done on the VLOPs as they will (and are doing so already in the US) controlling what you can and cannot see. It is going to be done from the ground up. Not by actively using the big platforms and staying passive while rights are being squashed. Under US law, the VLOPs private businesses and thus can allow/disallow whomever they like. Just remember, they don’t have your interests at heart.

A better way for the future of the Internet is more federation. Federation means that you don’t need to accept the bullshit of VLOPs, and you can easily move to a new instance without losing the connection to your friends, family and other professional connections. Currently, if you get banned on LinkedIn for an unfair or unreasonable reason, you can do nothing (see above about private business). You might even suffer professionally. With a federated alternative, you would be able to move all that data to a new instance without losing access.

Even better, and I’d recommend this: you should set up your own website with a domain you control and publish your CV (minus personal data), pointing people to it when needed, similar to a LinkedIn link, but on a platform where you are in charge, and without the privacy-invading surveillance. You are then only subject to your country’s laws regarding what you cannot publish.

The simple fact is, and the one thing I would like you to take away from this, is that the Internet is changing and will not be the same as it was just a few years ago. It is changing for the worse, despite the efforts of the EU and others (however poorly you may think they are done). And its current centralisation in the hands of overt extremists will be used against you at the earliest opportunity.

Reading

A few articles and things I’ve been reading.

Lessons From Red Teaming 100 Generative AI Products

Microsoft Red Teamed one hundred generative AI products. Their conclusion? “LLMs amplify existing security risks and introduce new ones”. To boot, they note that securing AI is an impossible task in that it will never be complete.

New data set reveals 40,000 apps behind location tracking

“380 million location data from 137 countries: a previously unknown data set from a US data broker shows the dangers of global data trading. 40,000 apps are affected …”

How is this not 1984?

Five things privacy experts know about AI

1. AI models memorise their training data
2. AI models then leak their training data
3. Ad hoc protections don’t work
4. Robust protections exist, though their mileage may vary
5. The larger the model, the worse it gets

That fifth point is directly related to last week’s article.

CEO of AI Music Company Says People Don’t Like Making Music

Filed under: What the fuck is wrong with these people?

UK government plans to splurge billions on AI

Rather than funding things that they can fix today. What could possibly go wrong?

Of note

See above.

Thoroughly depressed and hoping for a better future. Have a great week.