The network can be seen as a massive battlefield. Today there are a few fortified castles (to which everyone is called until they play by the rules and relinquish some freedom), thousands of skirmishes spread over the impassable plains, and millions of bodies are scattered throughout the wasteland.
Market and policy-driven efforts are underway to expand the fortress in both Silicon Valley and the dubious government offices so that one wall against another and the Internet and the underlying infrastructure completely under the control of the elite.
Speaking up against this conspiracy doesn’t matter – they don’t think about what people want, but rather what they think is for their own self-interest.
It would really take more risk technical writers to explain whether a separate network could potentially be insured by the fort alliance between the companies and the government.
My take is limited to the idea that this is only possible because of the risk of financial and political rewards. Visit here today for more technologically sophisticated details, and here for an early copy of the doll after the internet is shut down.
For example, what I can offer to think about is how the network will evolve, if the worst situation is to emerge in the next decade.
I would expect the wall gardens to suppress the open internet within an inch of its age, but I do feel that there is enough momentum in the open space for breathing.
This mobility will increase as more people wake up to the ruthless expansion of the fort and the increasing removal of their independence.
Once you come up with the idea that castles will become increasingly hostile to your existence, assuming you want to do anything other than accept certified “safe” content, it can be fun to imagine how things will unfold when you look from abroad.
You can probably laugh at the suggestion that the situation could get so bad that you – the more sophisticated web user – would not be interested in spending time inside closed castles, so I’m here to argue.
Imagine a typical web user just like this person today. Most of these users access the web through some applications and now they have all forgotten “www”.
Hyperlinks open in browser windows within apps, meaning their online experience runs almost exclusively within these apps.
These transfer forts make it one step closer to having complete control over what this user sees.
The next step in the forts is to restrict the licensed sites (other forts, “credible” news sources and conventional commercial / civil service) in the name of protecting hyperlinks.
If someone clicks on a link posted by their friend on an unauthorized site, the app will receive an error message. Of course, the average user still wants to search the web to look for specific information, services or entertainment, and this will be implemented through a “search application” that provides consistent results.
The vast majority of users, not just concerned with the ability to visit and link to specific websites, will simply adapt to the new reality and continue without hassle. At the same time, traditional interactive browsers will be silently excluded from the device.
Most of them will actually welcome this centralization and integration, as the closed network will be simple, secure, efficient and easy to operate.
However, castles still face a major problem, which is controlling what users say, do, and think about their systems. This is where machine learning / artificial intelligence comes in.
You can be sure that the castles target everything to achieve self-censorship and social / psychological engineering properly.
Money and endless political power cannot be distributed by creating unmanned, ad-friendly sand breakers to promote purely homeless consumerism, Huxleyan flights and Orwell’s civic loyalty.
Think about how they talk about things like “illegal information” and “mathematical justice.” The European Union has issued an order declaring “[Facebook]” … removal of comments “illegal,” and Google included the sentence in a leaked document “I suggest we arbitrarily interfere with machine learning for human-centered and justice.” ”
With the improvement of the machine learning system, there will be improvement in discovering what government and big technology classify as “hate speech” and “illegal content”, as well as “subconscious bias” and “underlying stereotypes.”
You will see phrases like “higher social inconsistency” and “disrupting honest details” serrated in the dictionary as justified in removing politically inappropriate controversies and anti-advertising opposition.
These terms will be invented and published by content health professionals, head of fair innovation and the like.
Of course, the annoying “trolls” out there will try to degrade the system in search of a jerk, and the castles will employ tens of thousands of sweatshops that nothing can clear.