User:Lieven Van Speybroeck/Reading/Thematic Project/Medosh Not Just Another Wireless Utopia
< User:Lieven Van Speybroeck
Revision as of 00:41, 5 November 2010 by Lieven Van Speybroeck (talk | contribs) (→Network (communication) models:)
notes on Armin Medosh's Not Just Another Wireless Utopia
Base
- Compare 2 'waves' (referred to as "bubbles") of wireless revolutions (and utopian thinking originating from them) in history:
- - look for patterns: how new technologies shape society and vice versa
- - move on from speculative media theory to an analysis and description through concrete media (because speculative media theory tends to ignore the technical basis of physical network structures/functions, it's sensitive to becoming irrelevant due to no understanding of the matter it relates to)
- -> look at network topologies as a layered protocol stack: both physical and social organisation
FIRST WAVE ("bubble"): 1910 - Radio waves
- engineering (free wireless electricity/energy)
- artistic (psychotropic properties to influence the mind)
- political (liberal (finances), social democratic (communication freedom), socialist (democracy))
- => naive visions: broadcasting 'wars' by using (and thereby canceling out) frequencies of rival stations.
- => state regulation of radio spectrum
- => complete totalitarian medium during WWII: propaganda
- => postwar (until liberalization/deregulation ~ free market): state regulates the medium of electromagnetic waves in the public interest: allocation to state organs and privileged license holders
- -> falls apart in the 70's (neo-liberalisation): partial privatization of airwaves to recover the economy (oil crash) -> attacked by the left free media movements
- -> 90's: internet becomes public -> mecca for non-commercial/activist/artistic purposes AND free market ideology
- -> resurgence of this utopianism with the coming of mobile phones/networks
- => complete totalitarian medium during WWII: propaganda
- => state regulation of radio spectrum
- => naive visions: broadcasting 'wars' by using (and thereby canceling out) frequencies of rival stations.
SECOND WAVE: late 90's - 2001: shift GSM through GPRS to 3G networks
- -> mobile networking paradigm: proprietary control of a centralized network topology (vs internet ideology: egalitarian, participatory)
- <-> internet (hacker type of) 'freedom': power to the users
- => respectively expanding private corporate model vs declining state ownership model
Network (communication) models:
- elitist one-to-many (Proprietary) <-> open many-to-many (Free Networks) ( ~ network topologies: physical & social organisation)
- Free Networks: DIY, "hacker-ethics", self-sustaining network, user-driven. -> 802.11(open) wifi standards (optimized compatibility)!
- -> ad-hoc networking: p2p as the material layer for network communication (Consume): 'meshed', decentralized network of nodes (large free data cloud)
- -> users as active contributors to the network (bandwidth- and content-wise)
- -> envisioned as a worldwide free network that, ultimately, makes telecom providers superfluous
- -> ad-hoc networking: p2p as the material layer for network communication (Consume): 'meshed', decentralized network of nodes (large free data cloud)
- Monopoly Telco Networks: complete opposite
- -> (hierarchal) star network topology
- -> ultimate control
- -> users as consumers
- Spectrum (de)regulation in Free Networks:
- -> license exempt: no (total) regulation through government but software controlled micro-regulation on local scale (~ avoid 'frequency wars' due to 'non-regulation' (1920's))
- Mobile business:
- creation/consumption of lifestyle gadgets (capitalist society).
- social control: panopticon (~ future mappings: society in a constant state of self-sustaining surveillance)
- information sphere gets geographical (permanent localization) <-> internet: non-space
- -> possibilities for 'direct personal' marketing/surveillance/...
Interaction between communication technologies and social systems
- how are communication technologies embedded into society and how is society embedded into communication technologies?
- Proprietary approach: shaping the user more and more into a controllable consumer
- Open approach: users as active contributors to new technologies in a non-hierarchal model
- => constrain or protect freedom of speech or other communication rights
- network commons: comprise the physical network, the protocols that run it and the content that it carries.
- -> to make this work, there's a need for social organization: a growing heterogenous community of contributors that breaks the current state of isolation (a small community of 'nerds' trying to put the free network movement into higher gear)
some thoughts
- […] do a bit more of installation and maintenance work than the average Windows or Apple user […] to configure their machines the way they want.
- => isn't this a bit euphemistic? Really customizing a linux OS the way you want (that is, going beyond the ubuntu GUI) involves a lot more than just doing a bit more of installation and maintenance work. It's about knowing what you're doing, knowing the technology, and most importantly: having a significant interest in this matter. Of course, the evolution of certain platforms towards pure lifestyle/entertainment systems (reading a book, listening to music, making slideshows,…) is the other extreme. But there's a huge grey zone in between those 2.
- Shaping future technologies becomes a job where everybody can and SHOULD be involve
- => won't his 'superdemocratic' system eventually result in the complete opposite of ultimate accessibility/versatility/flexibility, being "total chaos"?
- => 'should' implies forcing people into contribution here: is everyone suited to do so? Is everyone even interested?
- The mobile network urgently needs to get open sourced
- => starting points? Idealistic? Utopian? Corporate structures in an open-source wrapping paper?
- […] That there is an intrinsic connection between free networks, free software and free hardware.
- => can hardware ever be open source?
- -> as stated in the text, the success of 802.11 development has been powered by the mass-production (and pricedropping) of wireless technologies by companies like Apple, Intel, … would certain development (and efficiency/speed in development) be possible in an open-source, non-hierarchal community?
- The free network movement has been carried forward by nerd enthusiasm
- => because it's elitist?