Believing we know what makes prosperity work, ignoring the nature of the actual prosperity all around, we change the rules within which the Internet revolution lives. These changes will end the revolution.
Interpretation
The quote warns against altering the foundational rules of the Internet, as it could lead to the downfall of the digital revolution.
Lawrence Lessig's quote highlights the danger of assuming we fully understand the dynamics that drive prosperity in the digital age, particularly within the context of the Internet. When we attempt to change the established rules without appreciating the existing prosperity and innovation that the Internet has fostered, we risk undermining the very revolution that has transformed society. This cautionary statement serves as a reminder that the complexities of the Internet and its impact require respect and careful consideration rather than reckless modification.
In practice
In a tech conference discussing the future of online commerce, this quote could be used to emphasize the importance of maintaining a stable regulatory environment.
And with a practice of writing comes a certain important integrity. A culture filled with bloggers thinks differently about politics or public affairs, if only because more have been forced through the discipline of showing in writing why A leads to B.
In these times, the hardest task for social or political activists is to find a way to get people to wonder again about what we all believe is true. The challenge is to sow doubt.
Overregulation stifles creativity. It smothers innovation. It gives dinosaurs a veto over the future. It wastes the extraordinary opportunity for a democratic creativity that digital technology enables.
So uncritically do we accept the idea of property in culture that we don't even question when the control of that property removes our ability, as a people, to develop our culture democratically.
The war against illegal file-sharing is like the church's age-old war against masturbation. It's a war you just can't win.
Of all the creative work produced by humans anywhere, a tiny fraction has continuing commercial value. For that tiny fraction, the copyright is a crucially important legal device.
As a writer of fiction who deals with technology, I necessarily deal with the history of technology and the history of technologically induced social change. I roam up and down it in a kind of special way because I roam down it into history, which is invariably itself a speculative affair.
What technology makes easy is not always what nurtures the human spirit.
I have seen women who are very interested in tech finish their graduate or undergraduate degrees, but then choose not to pursue a career in tech because they're not sure they want to spend the next 20-30 years in an industry that's very male dominated.
And every now and then people find the bugs, and they interpret those as cool failures in the Sims terms. For them it's like a treasure hunt, you know.
Holding back technology to reserve business models is like allowing blacksmiths to veto the internal combustion engine in order to protect their horseshoes.
Take Google Maps or Waze. On the one hand, they amplify human ability - you are able to reach your destination faster and more easily. But at the same time, you are shifting the authority to the algorithm and losing your ability to find your own way.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.