In China, the problem is that with the system of censorship that's now in place, the user doesn't know to what extent, why, and under what authority there's been censorship. There's no way of appealing. There's no due process.
Rebecca MackinnonRead
The critical question is: How do we ensure that the Internet develops in a way that is compatible with democracy?
Interpretation
The quote emphasizes the importance of aligning internet development with democratic values.
Rebecca Mackinnon's quote raises a crucial question about the relationship between the Internet and democracy. It highlights the need for deliberate consideration of how online environments can support democratic principles, ensuring that technology serves to enhance rather than undermine democratic processes and freedoms. This inquiry is increasingly relevant as the Internet becomes a central platform for communication, information exchange, and civic engagement.
In practice
This quote can be used in discussions about regulating social media to protect democratic values.
In China, the problem is that with the system of censorship that's now in place, the user doesn't know to what extent, why, and under what authority there's been censorship. There's no way of appealing. There's no due process.
The potential for the abuse of power through digital networks - upon which we the people now depend for nearly everything, including our politics - is one of the most insidious threats to democracy in the Internet age.
Citizens' rights cannot be protected if their digital activities are governed and policed by opaque and publicly unaccountable corporate mechanisms.
The invisibility of work and workers in the digital age is as consequential as the rise of the assembly line and, later, the service economy.
With us air people, the future of our nation is indissolubly bound up in the development of air power.
The fear isn't that big data discriminates. We already know that it does. It's that you don't know if you've been discriminated against.
In engineering, as in other creative arts, we must learn to do analysis to support our efforts in synthesis. One cannot build a beautiful and functional bridge without a knowledge of steel and dirt, and a considerable mathematical technique for using this knowledge to compute the properties of structures. Similarly, one cannot build a beautiful computer system without a deep understanding of how to "previsualize" the process generated by the code one writes.
Ironically, the main task of chess software companies today is to find ways to make the program weaker, not stronger, and to provide enough options that any user can pick from different levels and the machine will try to make enough mistakes to give him a chance.
I have no problem with technological solutions to social problems. The key question for me is, 'Who gets to implement them?' and, 'What kinds of politics of reform do technological solutions smuggle through the back door?'
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.