Fixing the internet

Data breaches at Facebook and Google—and along with Amazon, those firms' online dominance—crest a growing wave of anxiety around the internet's evolving structure and its impact on humanity. Three keys to the decades-long global expansion of the internet and the World Wide Web are breaking down.

Will the Web break?

What is the Web? What makes it work? And is it dying? This paper is drawn from a talk delivered by Prof. Zittrain to the Royal Society Discussion Meeting 'Web science: a new frontier' in September 2010. It covers key questions about the way the Web works, and how an understanding of its past can help those theorizing about the future. The original Web allowed users to display and send information from their individual computers, and organized the resources of the Internet with uniform resource locators. In the 20 years since then, the Web has evolved. These new challenges require a return to the spirit of the early Web, exploiting the power of the Web's users and its distributed nature to overcome the commercial and geopolitical forces at play. The future of the Web rests in projects that preserve its spirit, and in the Web science that helps make them possible.

Ubiquitous human computing

Ubiquitous computing means network connectivity everywhere, linking devices and systems as small as a drawing pin and as large as a worldwide product distribution chain. What could happen when people are so readily networked? This paper explores issues arising from two possible emerging models of ubiquitous human computing: fungible networked brainpower and collective personal vital sign monitoring.

Saving the internet

The Internet goose has laid countless golden eggs, along with a growing number of rotten ones. But it's the rotten ones that now tempt commercial, governmental, and consumer interests to threaten the Internet's uniquely creative power. The expediently selected, almost accidentally generative properties of the Internet - its technical openness, ease of access and mastery, and adaptability - have combined, especially when coupled with those of the PC, to produce an unsurpassed environment for innovative experiment. Those same properties, however, also make the Internet hospitable to various forms of wickedness: hacking, porn, spam, fraud, theft, predation, and attacks on the network itself. As these undesirable phenomena proliferate, business, government, and many users find common cause for locking down Internet and PC architecture in the interests of security and order. PC and Internet security vulnerabilities are a legitimate menace. However, the most likely reactions - if they are not forestalled - will be at least as unfortunate as the security problems themselves. Consider the growing profusion of "tethered appliances" - devices whose functions cannot readily be altered by their owners (think TiVo). Such appliances take Internet innovations and wrap them up in a neat, easy-to-use package, which is good - but only if the Internet and PC can remain sufficiently in the center of the digital ecosystem to produce the next round of innovations and to generate competition. People buy these devices for their convenience or functionality and may appreciate the fact that they are safer to use (they limit the damage users can do through ignorance or carelessness). But the risk is that users, by migrating to such appliances, will unwittingly trade away the future benefits of generativity - a loss that will go unappreciated even as innovation tapers off.

What the publisher can teach the patient: intellectual property and privacy in an era of trusted privication

This article begins with a premise that intellectual property and privacy have something significant and yet understated in common: both are about balancing a creator's desire to control a particular set of data with consumers' desires to access and redistribute that data. Both law and technology influence such balancing, making it more or less palatable to use data for particular purposes--whether one is an individual making a copy of a popular song for a friend, or a hospital selling a list of maternity ward patients to a day care service. In the shadow of the Internet's rapid development and concomitant easing of barriers to data sharing, holders of intellectual property are pairing increased legal protection with the technologies of "trusted systems." I describe how these technologies might allow more thorough mass distribution of data, while allowing publishers to retain unprecedented control over their wares. For instance, an e-Book seller might charge one price for a read-only copy that could not be printed or forwarded and charge an additional fee for each copy or printout made. Taking up the case of medical privacy, I then suggest that those who worry about the confidentiality of medical records, particularly as they are digitized by recent congressional mandate, might seek to augment comparatively paltry legal protections with trusted systems technologies. For instance, a trusted system could allow a patient to specify how and by whom her records could be used; within limits, she could allow full access to her primary care physician, while allowing only time-limited access to emergency care providers, non-personally identifiable access to medical researchers, and no access at all for marketing purposes. These technologies could allow for new kinds of privacy protection, without sacrificing the legitimate interests of the consumers of medical records.