Politics and Technology of Control: Introduction

The Net has great potential for “good” (e.g. innovation, economic growth, education, and access to information), and is likewise is a great platform for the bawdy, tawdry and illegal. Is this platform about fundamental social, political and economic change, or about easier access to pornography, cheap pharmaceuticals, free music and poker at home? This question leads us to a host of interesting issues that weave their way through the course related to openness, access, regulatory control, free speech, anonymity, intellectual property rights, democracy, transparency, norms and values, economic and cultural change and cyber-terrorism, as well as scamsters and thieves.

Preparation (Assignment "Zero")

To get this discussion started, take some time to read through the three blog posts below, published by Google in their relationship with China. Come to class (or e-mail us: thwang@cyber.law.harvard.edu) with some brief thoughts (1 page, double space), responding to:

• What do you think was the right approach on Google's part?
• What kind of arguments or ideological stands would you make to support your position one way or the other?
• What do you feel these articles show about the nature of the internet?

Readings

• Google In China (2006)
• Google in China (2010)
• TechCrunch, More About Business Than Thwarting Evil (2010)

Class Discussion

I originally posted this on the "In The News" page of our class Wiki after the China/Google discussion. There was no comment. Given yesterday's e-mail clarifying where-to-post-what, I have moved the article to here. Maybe a comment this time?

Here is an interesting article that appeared in the New York Times last week. [1] Google has chosen to partner with the N.S.A. (rather than the DoHS) to investigate recent attacks that "breached the company's cybersecurity defenses."

Is this "cooperative research and development agreement" between Google and the N.S.A. really going to "impact the privacy of millions of users of Google's products and services around the world" as Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy Information Center suggests?

I think not. If the technical assistance provided by the N.S.A. focuses on technology, and not content, the relationship should not impact the privacy of Google users. My concern would be, how much does Google know about the attacks they are not sharing. What "goods and services" were compromised? What information was actually accessed?

--Charlesscott 19:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)