Digital Age Government?

[DurakkenX]

I've been thinking for the last few years that establishing a government type organization on the net might be a good idea... A government that speaks for the people of the internet and the digital age.

the Current form of government is really bad for the net and almost all things regarding the digital age, including video games, music, video, art, etc. It really just doesn't work because there is no one solidified voice in the matter which leaves it up to current government leaders that all grew up in a different age. The true Digital Age only just started about 10-20 years ago and noone from the generation will be able to make any of it's decision for another 10-20 years. This is far too long as look at what kind of horrible crap they are doing already...think about what they'll do in the next 10.

Something like this would greatly help our generation and the world set up laws and such that can better handle what to do instead of relying on the individual cultures that they came from. The net IS a culture of it's own and as such should be represented as one in the world.

If I could get something going I'd definitely want to include things that are now being stolen away from us by the governments in their efforts to stop certain material from being on the net. Such as privacy and freedom of speech which are being massively violated on the net ^.^

So what do you all think?

[Sord]

there are to many people on the net with to many diffrences to create a stable enough organization to carry out such massive diplomatic decisions and enforce them. Furthermore, the Internet is not it's own entity, it is merely a large network of smaller networks linked together. Each of those smaller networks are liable to their own countries restriction. So to create such laws would be enforcing laws on other countries and their use of their hardware/software on the net. This would raise serious ethical questions.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Sord on 2007-06-17 10:51 ]</font>

[DurakkenX]

indeed it would, but at the same time I believe that we as humans all have similar rights and beliefs over all. We not may all agree on the exacting details but as far as I see we all agree on general level.

And while I see that point I also believe that the digital age culture is just a bit more ready to control what we do than people give us credit for. We create many many organizations every day in games and in just simple forums people form groups and organize. The only thing that is really left to do is to provide a framework for those organizations to combine and agree to.

I'm pretty sure none of us want to deal with many of the issues that are coming up unnecesarily and this would be a way to block them before they come up. I mean really, do you want someone who thinks the internet is a series of tubes controlling it or do you want the people who use it controlling it. This also would give a way for governments to enforce certain rules and laws much more simpler if there was a body of some sort that represented the entirety of the net.

Either way, there are a few outcomes that will come from the current situation; the businesses will take control of the net, governments will close off the net to other countries and isolate themselves, the governments will unify to make something like what i am talking about, but worse since most of the leaders don't understand it, or something like i am suggesting will come about.

I prefer the last option as the other 3 options have major ramifications to the Digital Age culture that will really hurt it, while the last isn't trying to destroy what is there but rather help improve and stabalize it.

[Sord]

On 2007-06-17 11:11, DurakkenX wrote:
indeed it would, but at the same time I believe that we as humans all have similar rights and beliefs over all. We not may all agree on the exacting details but as far as I see we all agree on general level.

many cultures disagree with you right off the bat, not just the country, but the people themselves. Because yes, heaven forbid, some people do like certain things governments do for them that we might not like.



And while I see that point I also believe that the digital age culture is just a bit more ready to control what we do than people give us credit for. We create many many organizations every day in games and in just simple forums people form groups and organize. The only thing that is really left to do is to provide a framework for those organizations to combine and agree to.

people generally organize on forums to communicate over other purposes, not just to talk about the net (granted, I'm sure there are other forums like that.) As soon as you remove their central focus, it's likely they would cease to work together well.



I'm pretty sure none of us want to deal with many of the issues that are coming up unnecesarily and this would be a way to block them before they come up. I mean really, do you want someone who thinks the internet is a series of tubes controlling it or do you want the people who use it controlling it. This also would give a way for governments to enforce certain rules and laws much more simpler if there was a body of some sort that represented the entirety of the net.

actually, I would not want the common person ruling the nets. I believe there would be even more viruses and chaos then there are now. Nor do I believe the average person knows enough about networks to completely comprehend what they are making laws on in the physical world. There is a reason why companies pay big bucks for people who know how to work the intricacies of a copmuter.



Either way, there are a few outcomes that will come from the current situation; the businesses will take control of the net, governments will close off the net to other countries and isolate themselves, the governments will unify to make something like what i am talking about, but worse since most of the leaders don't understand it, or something like i am suggesting will come about.

It wouldn't suprise me if some businesses took some control, but the government will always counter this, not because it's the right thing to do, but because they would rather have more power over the bussinesses.



I prefer the last option as the other 3 options have major ramifications to the Digital Age culture that will really hurt it, while the last isn't trying to destroy what is there but rather help improve and stabalize it.

remember that just because something was intended to do one thing, doesn't mean it can't do the other. I can compliment someone or try to help them, but I could also offend them or make things worse for the person.

If you really, I mean really want to do something, I suggest you take some IT classes of networking, then move move into politics. Start up your own group, and take more action than just posting on a forum. Start rallies and raise hell over what could possablt be percieved as the "civil rights of the net." You won't do anything posting here. And if you succeed, congrats, you will have proved my pessimistic ass wrong and possably give me faith in a united humanity, but I doubt it will come to that.

[DurakkenX]

I'm not saying anything will come from this, but revolution and change are always simple ideas that came from things that may spark someone or something to do something. this post is really meant just to see what people here think...

Also I agree with all your points, and yet i also don't see how something like what i am proposing would fall apart or be a bad thing. Even a voice issued on any level would be more than what our digital age culture is showing. Almost everyone that i have seen, heard, spoken to has the same views on what should be done with the net, but we are not coming unified so it has less impact.

If I take a bunch of small little grains of sand that together has the mass and volume of a baseball ad throw it at you, you'll get a little dirty and annoyed, but if i throw a rock of the same mass and volume at you will prolly be injured. Unifying under an opinion is has the same effect. I and everyone else separately may not matter when we tell bush to go to hell, but when 300million people tell bush to go to hell at the same time it makes a large difference.

We, the digital age culture, need a voice, maybe completely disjointed from the governments of the world and without repercussions, but we need a voice much stronger than what we have now.

[Sord]

On 2007-06-17 11:50, DurakkenX wrote:
I'm not saying anything will come from this, but revolution and change are always simple ideas that came from things that may spark someone or something to do something. this post is really meant just to see what people here think...

Also I agree with all your points, and yet i also don't see how something like what i am proposing would fall apart or be a bad thing. Even a voice issued on any level would be more than what our digital age culture is showing. Almost everyone that i have seen, heard, spoken to has the same views on what should be done with the net, but we are not coming unified so it has less impact.

If I take a bunch of small little grains of sand that together has the mass and volume of a baseball ad throw it at you, you'll get a little dirty and annoyed, but if i throw a rock of the same mass and volume at you will prolly be injured. Unifying under an opinion is has the same effect. I and everyone else separately may not matter when we tell bush to go to hell, but when 300million people tell bush to go to hell at the same time it makes a large difference.

We, the digital age culture, need a voice, maybe completely disjointed from the governments of the world and without repercussions, but we need a voice much stronger than what we have now.


the reason me and you seems to diagree is more in our beliefs in humanity in general. I don't believe a people of such mass amounts as the internet can gather and work together well. I think it would fall apart, leaving more chaos then what was there before. You on the other hand seem to have more faith in humanity and the idea that whole peoples and cultures can unite for something. It's not something that can really be debated, it's just a belief brought about by the cumination of what we've been taught and experianced. I certainly would like what you want, I just don't believe humanity can obtain it. That's all, there's really not much else for me to delve in to.

[DurakkenX]

That's true and I don't believe in humanity as much as I project, but if we're gonna die anyways what's the harm in trying to do whats best ^.^ or presenting ideas for that matter.

[Solstis]

The net isn't there yet. We're not quite at Ghost in the Shell.

[Sinue_v2]

I don't think it's possilble to form a digital government, because we are not digital beings. We are people who live, work, and pay taxes to real-life physical countries. There is no way to subjegate law in a digital world without reprecussions in the physical world - and this means the involvement of national governments. I think the UN is a shining example of how ineffective real-world governemnts are at working together.

The only chance a digital government would have, would be as a digital extension of a real-world government - which would mean that we'd need a single unified world government first. That's not going to happen anytime soon.

[Sekani]

The internet is not a separate country. The people who use the internet are already governed by the laws of the locales they reside in.