Syllabus: Difference between revisions

From The Internet: Issues at the Frontier (course wiki)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 2: Line 2:
[[The Future of Copyright and Entertainment]]
[[The Future of Copyright and Entertainment]]


Topic owners: Joe, Miriam
''Topic owners:'' ''[[User:Jfishman|Joe]], [[User:Miriam|Miriam]]''


== Old Laws/New Media ==
== Old Laws/New Media ==

Revision as of 10:21, 8 December 2008

The Future of Copyright and Entertainment

The Future of Copyright and Entertainment

Topic owners: Joe, Miriam

Old Laws/New Media

Old Laws/New Media

The Internet and Publication

The Internet and Publication

Topic Owners: Gwen, Lee, Jon

Free and Open Source Software

Presenters: dulles,Ayelet

  • How can a dispersed, multilingual collection of coders working for free assemble something as complicated as a web browser, let alone an entire operating system? Open-source projects are famously free-wheeling, but different organizational models and tools have sprung up to solve these obstacles.

What are the forces that drive hackers to contribute to open source projects? What, if anything, can we learn from applying theories of gift economies to open source projects? Should we read Lewis Hyde's The Gift? (n.b. i may be motivated by my own desire to read the book -- dulles)

  • Eric Raymond/OSI ?
  • PJ/Groklaw
  • Strategies and indemnities (e.g. SCO v. IBM)
  • Questioning the foundations of the free software movement (i.e. the "four freedoms")[1] -- how much does access to the source code really matter anymore? Are there alternative theories (e.g. "generativity") that better capture the values at stake? Affero License? (Eben Moglen?)
  • The organization/groups/cooperation questions: how do free software projects organize and govern themselves, and what broader lessons might be learned from it? (e.g. debian, IETF)

(This marks my initial claim to the topic, though I would be overjoyed to work with others - dulles)

All Together Now For Great Justice Dot Org

Presenters: Rainer + Elana + Mchua

Precis

How to effectively design an online drive/event/project to get participation in your cause

Examples:

Guest wish list

  • Prof. Yochai Benkler
  • Tom Steinberg
  • Sean Parker and Joe Green, founders of Project Agape, the start-up that created Facebook Causes
  • Joe Rospars, New Media Director, Obama for America (Elana)
  • Ken Banks, FrontlineSMS (Elana)
  • Sebastian Benthall, TOPP
  • Joshua Gay, FSF
  • Kathy Paur, ActBlue

Readings

We have three types of readings for this session:

Historical resources that come directly from our guests and their experiences.

  • Guests will be asked to email the class beforehand with a short version of the kinds of things they'd say in a speech to the class, so people know who they'd want to ask for advice during the workshop portion. (Rationale: The time we're together should be spent interacting, there's always plenty of time outside of class for reading.)
  • Guests will also be asked to send the class a link to their favorite resource/article on their project, or something that has informed their own work on their project.

Techniques and tools resources, mainly business books that focus on corporate use of the social web, online communities and marketing, etc. This will be pages and chapters from books like this (used as examples, not a final list):

Theory on activism, focusing on cyberactivism. This will consist mainly of scholarly books and papers like the following (used as examples, not a final list):

Concrete question(s) of the week

  • What makes online campaigning successful? What makes online fundraising successful? What makes online activism/mobilization successful? What makes online collaboration for good causes successful?
  • What actually spurs people up the ladder of engagement or into offline activism and waht does not? Which online structures, tools, networks get people how high up the ladder? Which one's should you use for which "height"? What are their individual costs?
  • Is there a generalizable model here? If yes, has this model different success factors from the business world?
  • What are cutting-edge examples of successful campaigning/fundraising/mobilization/collaboration? How do they harness different channels and media (www, email, SMS, etc.)?

Anything else material towards planning your topic

Session design

Our current idea for session design is structured as a workshop (and discussion afterwards). Each participant will spend the week working on a cause that they are personally interested in, applying the techniques from readings and class to their own project. Key components of this week:

  • 2-3 readings will be sent out beforehand, selected from the above.
  • A questionnaire will be sent out beforehand to all class participants so they can frame the most important aspects of their cause. (For instance: What are the aims of your cause? What technologies do you prefer to use while working on activism for your cause, and why? How many people do you want to mobilize? How deep should their involvement be?) Participants will use the questionnaire to write a very rough draft of a non-profit online participation project for their cause.
  • The role of our guest experts will be to come in as workshop aides; it will be interesting to hear from them what they thinks the most important rules for success are. They'll get to give a short (<10min) intro speech.
  • The session will kick off with a workshop where the students will work on their project. It should be an online project designed to raise and deepen involvement and/or awareness for their cause. For instance, they might contribute to the planning of a conference, create an email-blast marketing campaign, host a party that is heavily advertised online, create or spread viral media, compile statistics on online membership for their cause, etc.
  • We will follow that with a debriefing to discuss how things went and the theories and best practices that apply.

Old discussion

Of course there are a lot of custom-built tools for mobilizing people online to get things done in the real world. On the other hand, what about more general tools? We've all been invited, via Facebook, to join groups and attend events (the Obama campaign certainly made good use of this); is there a generalizable model here?

Facebook groups dedicated to particular causes remind me of the online petitions that began circulating widely via email about ten years ago: their effectiveness in accomplishing real world change--and even their visibility to individuals capable of affecting the desired changes--are dubious. Is the real purpose of these movements simply to make participants feel like they are being active and involved? What percentage of those who signed email petitions in the 1990s were aware that their signatures were unverifiable and that the widely-distributed emails were unlikely to be collated and submitted to an official authority? What expectations do participants in facebook group causes have for their involvement and its consequences? The facebook group causes are certainly more centralized and visible than the old email petitions, and they provide a better tool for identifying and communicating with supporters in order to mobilize them in an organized fashion. How often is such mobilization attempted, and with what degree of success? As a tool of online activism, is facebook a step forward from chain emails, is it a step in a different direction, or does it just serve the same old functions but in newer packaging? --Gwen 08:26, 29 November 2008 (EST)

Maybe we can invite some of the leaders of the various social networking sites or Jascha Franklin-Hodge, who was an architect of the Obama campaign's use of social technology.

Might also be worth considering SMS applications that interface with the internet in this context especially since cell phones will presumably be the nexus of tech activism in the developing world. See FrontlineSMS or Ushahidi, a web crisis mapping project that let any user with a cell phone text in reports of violence in post-election Kenya as a way to geographically report real-time citizen reporting. (ELANA)

The Internet and Societal Inequity

Presenters: Mark, Graham

Socio-technical Gap

Problems encountered in the act of discoursing itself are sometimes addressed via social means, technological means, or both. It has been suggested that technological tools should support social processes, but there is an adaptation of each realm to the other - how does this back-and-forth take place in the design of a successful technology-enabled discussion?

Which inequalities are created or strengthened due the increasing reliance on technology and the differences in the ability to access the Internet(e.g. global and socio-economic differences)? Does the net actually re-distribute and decentralize power and influence, or does it also reinforce the existing political and economic hierarchies? In short - is the Internet really a good thing for everybody?

  • A solutions-focused question here might be: what tools might encourage a more egalitarian internet, both nationally and internationally? How can online applications be designed to encourage social equality? (Berkman Fellow Eszter Hargittai has worked on some related questions, focusing on research about how people actually use the internet.) --G 12:12, 28 November 2008 (EST)

One Laptop Per Child

Happy to help this group with info as I can. Mchua

Environmental Concerns

To what extent is the hardware upon which the Internet exists damaging the environment? Where does old tech go when it dies? What distributive impact does the "recycling" of old tech have. Was the Internet build with principles of physical sustainbility in mind? Is it too late to change? How do individual companies, like Google, view their own practices? Does the cost of a server internalize the cost of disposal? Why has it been cheaper to just keep throwing on new machines? What of the electricity necessary to run these machines? What does it say about society that we are so willing to pollute our own communities to create a second life? Has technological innovation and advancement dislocated the true impact of non-zero cost transactions? --Megerman 19:36, 29 November 2008 (EST)

Prediction Markets

Presenters: Matthew, Elisabeth

Some more helpful material:

  • A primer on the legal status of prediction markets.
  • The CTFC wants to know if it should regulate them.
  • If they can be regulated, could they be taxed as well?
  • Our very own Prof. Sunstein gives his comments on prediction markets and group deliberation.


Intrade, etc.

Tradesports announced last week that it will cease operations at the end of this month. Does fallout from the current economic crisis include regulatory changes that spell doom for online prediction markets? Or is something else going on here? --Gwen 11:05, 26 November 2008 (EST)

Could prediction markets transform how we govern ourselves? Robin Hanson proposes Futarchy. The idea in brief:

"Democracies often fail to aggregate information, while speculative markets excel at this task. We consider a new form of governance, wherein voters would say what we want, but speculators would say how to get it. Elected representatives would oversee the after-the-fact measurement of national welfare, while market speculators would say which policies they expect to raise national welfare. Those who recommend policies that regressions suggest will raise GDP should be willing to endorse similar market advice."

Some general and tentative questions

  • To what extent should the government be engaged in the regulation of prediction markets; should it and how might it change current structures to be more accommodating?
  • To what extent should government be involved in administering or using prediction markets (e.g., a la Hanson's suggestions)?
  • For ethical or other reasons, should we be skeptical about using prediction markets for purposes such as predicting terrorist attacks and the like? What about for predicting regular crime (see this proposal)?
  • More generally, if we think prediction markets are a useful tool, and yet it seems clear that they generate a considerable amount of unease, can we think about why and how policymakers might respond? Can design of the markets (reducing inaccuracy, or reducing concerns about rewarding misbehavior that might crop up if we have terrorism or crime futures) solve these problems or are some more fundamental?

Some tentative guest ideas

  • Michael Abramowicz
  • Justin Wolfers
  • Bo Cowgill, Hal Varian: Google prediction markets
  • Robin Hanson

Possible Readings

  • relevant chapters from Professor Sunstein's Infotopia

Other ideas

One obvious thought is to see whether the class can play around with using prediction markets, though more thought needed on what we'd want to predict. Incentives for accurate predictions like t-shirts?

Will Harvard give us some small amount of money to invest for the semester? We could have an auction to determine whose investment ideas we use. The incentives would work so that you would only bid more to control the investment if you actually thought your investment idea would generate more net return to you (minus what you spent on the auction), despite it being divided up among the class.

Anonymity and privacy

Dan Ray, Conor, Joshua

Title

OpenId and Internet Governance

Precis

  • Internet Regulation (as it relates specifically to online safety and security)
  • Privacy and anonymity as they relate to structures of control on the Internet

Guest wish list (if any)

  • As an academic, you couldn't do better than Daniel Solove. If we do hone in on a very specific topic, though, we could go for someone with more specialized experience. Dan Ray 22:39, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Although government is subject to all sorts of special legal provisos that the private sector doesn't have to manage, the privacy counsel at DHS, Hugo Teufel, is pretty on top of his game. If we're looking for practitioners, Ron Lee of Arnold & Porter does work with private industry.
  • If we do OpenID, options for guests might include Bill Washburn of the OpenID Foundation and DeWitt Clinton of Google.
  • Also, since Passport has foundered, Facebook Connect looks like the hot new thing on the proprietary side. Whoever runs that for Facebook would be a natural invite as well. (see Dan's links below (?))
  • And I still think the potential for the mobile phone to become the heretofore mythical convergence device and thus to become a necessary adjunct to personal identity is worth talking over.

Perhaps a bloggingheads.tv-style video conference call between someone from an electronic privacy nonprofit and a representative from Microsoft or Facebook?

Readings

James Grimmelmann, Facebook and The Social Dyanmics of Privacy

Solove, Daniel J. "'I've Got Nothing to Hide' and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy"

Links

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/125/how-to-fix-the-web.html

http://developers.facebook.com/connect.php

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebook_connect_vs_open_id.php

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebook_connect_readies.php

http://chrissaad.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/facebook-connect-aka-hailstorm-20/

http://wiki.openid.net/Lobbying

http://planet.openid.net/


Concrete question(s) of the week

Anything else material towards planning your topic

  • Facebook + google people?
  • another way to look at it is as a matter of cybercrime and such - new surveillence methods (also relevant in regards to child pornography, for example). i wander if these are too different topics or not. Ayelet
  • I'd like to see a segment on what "privacy" actually means in law and in culture. This would probably attach well to any other, more applied segment. Dan Ray 16:38, 3 December 2008 (EST)
  • Creating a series of Privacy Certification Marks

The Future of News

Presenters: Dharmishta Rood, Jon Fildes

The traditional media industry is in turmoil. Circulation of newspapers is falling. Staff are being laid off, costs are being cut and foreign bureaus are being shut. Audiences are fragmenting, advertising spending is plummeting and the valuations of companies is dropping. TV and radio are experiencing similar problems. Some papers are even outsourcing local news reporting to India!

Most of these changes have been blamed on the arrival of the web, which has changed how information is produced and consumed. Now, anyone can be a news gatherer, publisher and distributor. The balance of power has changed.

Yet at the same time, the web offers these organisations a huge opportunity. Already, groups such as spot.us and Pro Publica are experimenting with new business models. Others, such as the Christian Science Monitor, have ditched the old way of doing things and have gone entirely online. Many are using the web to reach out to audiences and connect with them in new ways.

But, are they doing enough? Will experiments like this be enough to save news organisations? Does it matter if they disappear? Should governments intervene to save them in the same way as they have decided to prop up the ailing car manufacturing industry? Is this an appropriate intervention? Should it be left to market forces? What values are at stake beyond what the markets appear to be able to sustain? Ultimately, what is the future for “old media”?

Possible contributors:

Possible readings:

  • Columbia Journalism Review article: Overload!- Journalism’s battle for relevance in an age of too much information
  • The AP report (PDF) mentioned in Overload!

The Communication Initiative is an organization in this domain with a compelling problem that they'd like advice on solving, and they're very enthusiastic and willing to work with the class. They're focused on the use and support of communication for economic and social development (http://www.comminit.com) with a large and varied network (over 70,000 total) of members all over the world. Their question: given the challenges the face (enumerated more in the details section), how do we guide and engage our network more through our interactive online processes instead of through email?" More information available at The Communication Initiative (they wrote up a problem statement for us!) - is this something people would be interested in taking on? I would be... Mchua 21:21, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Internet/network Security

Jgruensp (fun topics, all: we could invite the CSIS commission which has been grappling with all these issues and is desperate for legal guidance)

Internet Dependency (What if someone somehow takes down the net?)

Dan Ray (maybe)

We have come to rely on the Internet for almost every aspect of our lives. If the Internet somehow suddenly went "down" (through either a cyberattack or physical attack on key backbone pieces of infrastructure), the result would likely be calamity, as well as hordes of people who wouldn't know what to do with themselves. Can we even imagine what the world would look like the morning after such an attack if it was successful? Are we wrong to rely so heavily on a single tool whose detailed technical inner workings so few people truly understand? Are we setting ourselves up to be ruined when someone compromises this tool? What about the tradeoffs between keeping the Net free+open vs. regulation to ensure that it retains its functional integrity in the face of attack?

We can invite Dan Kaminsky, who recently discovered a flaw in the inner-workings of the Net that could have caused some serious damage. See, e.g., http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/09/technology/09flaw.html?hp (or we could invite will smith, who defeated the aliens in independence day with the help of cyber-attack).

  • I vote Will Smith. Unless everyone wants to get into the desirability of a DNS nonce of sufficient bitlength, in which case... no, still Will Smith. That guy's an elliptic curve cryptography fiend. However, if we do want to talk about design issues in the internet, and the failure of the marketplace to handle externalities created by poor software design, leading to the perpetual crisis of bugginess, we could do worse than to invite Daniel Bernstein. Plus, as an added bonus, he saw the issues that gave rise to the Kaminsky bug coming down the pike a long time ago. --Jgruensp

Internet as International Conflict Zone

Dan Ray (maybe)

In light of the recent events in Estonia, have we finally reached the long-predicted era of cyberwarfare? Is cyber-espionage a counterintelligence problem or something more? (This article from the National Journal talks bluntly about perceived threats, although is perhaps a little too willing to attribute causation of certain events to Chinese actors on dubious evidence)

Internet as an Extension of National Infrastructure

Dan Ray (maybe)

It is easy to define the borders of the nation in realspace (ports, airports, land crossings), and the tradeoffs between private propertyholders' rights and national security interests (making those tradeoffs? Not always so easy). But what are the national borders in cyberspace? Given the dangers described in the two topics above, what kind of role, if any, should national government play in monitoring and regulating major backbone communications links? What about the networks of semi-public industries such as utilities? Private corporations that store government secrets? Financial systems? Other types of privately owned networks?

--Jgruensp 23:54, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Internet Governance & Regulation

Internet Governance & Regulation

Internet + Environment + Venture Capital

Internet + Environment + Venture Capital

Retrieved from "http://cyber.harvard.edu/iif/?title=Syllabus&oldid=713"