The Internet: Today’s Wild Wild West - Part 2

Ideas for developing a more stable and forward-thinking internet landscape

For many of the more conservative people out there, the ones who favor a smaller government versus a bigger regulatory body, you may not enjoy my propositions in this article as my idea relies upon more government oversight. However, I do feel that you will still find value in it as I continue my discussion of today’s version of the wild wild west: the internet (see my previous article for background).

Additionally, many of the articles that I have already shared have content that focuses on beefing up the government (and I hope you’ve enjoyed them so far!). Adding another department to the government creates more control, more expenses, and, of course, many of the negative consequences resulting from more authority. However, in keeping with the flavor of examining issues in their entirety, I am going to focus on how to contrast the suggestion of government infusion with governmental withdraw.

The federal government could certainly stand to be trimmed back from its current size and spending (hello, government deficit). Determining when and where to cut back, however, is the tricky part. There are specific government functions that are so large that it is going to take time, dedication, bi-partisan agreement, and money to wind them down. Furthermore, politicians often have their own agenda and are somewhat at the whims of popularity.

For the moment, though, I am going to argue why more oversight is important for the issue of continuing to try to stabilize the internet.

One of my favorite movies is The Matrix. At the moment, I am going to focus on an overarching principle that exists within the movie, rather than all of the shoot-em-up bad guy stuff that I have come to love about this particular action flick.

In The Matrix’s digital world, there are rules. In the digital world, you have an understanding. In the digital world, you can see the space as if it physically existed, and therefore, the digital world has order.

Society is based on order. Society is based on the idea that people come together for a common cause and agree to do things in a specific manner.

While organizations exist on the internet, especially in video games, there is no order to the internet itself. It is still much like the hunter/gatherer phase of human existence. Video game communities form guilds or clans, terms we so willingly prescribed to in times past. Guilds were formed historically for trade craft people, such as smiths, masons, carpenters, etc. I myself am part of a trade craft of Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD). We have apprentice, journeyman, and masters (but with different titles). Clans is another historical term for small groups that existed in more hunter/gatherer type communities.

It wasn’t until many clans came together that they formed states and countries. In Ancient Greece, the individual city-states would eventually unify and form the country of Greece.

In present day we are at the stage in existence where physically countries exist. But we haven’t hit that point in cyberspace yet.

This actually begs the question, could a country exist within the digital world but not in the physical world? Could someone who lives in the physical world become a part of this digital country and no longer be an asset to a physical world country? It is kind of a crazy concept but let’s explore it a bit.

Let’s say I am currently a citizen of the United States and I start an online country called Knick Knack. I create a database to keep track of all of my citizens, a means of proof or identification (passports, identification, birth certificates, social security cards), and a constitution. I also issue my own currency, rules, governance, laws, etc. Could I then choose to abandon my United States citizenship in favor of being a citizen of Knick Knack?

This really identifies a hole that exists within the entire system. Everything that happens on a global country scale vastly depends on the ability of other countries to accept it.

Even if I take over a physical country, if the rest of the world chooses not to recognize my right to rule the country, I am likely not going to exist for very long and might even be conquered.  

In order for a citizen of the UK to be able to walk around in the United States, the two countries have to have an agreement and understanding, an agreement to follow the rules. Could I create such agreements with the United States to allow citizens of my digital country to physically be present in the United States?

Ultimately, while my country may exist digitally, I exist physically. I cannot live in a virtual house, eating virtual food, breathing virtual air. Additionally, I need a physical space to put my servers to host this digital world as well as energy to run it. Getting the parts and materials would be easy since it already exists. I would just have to be able to convince the physical countries to accept my legitimacy and currency (or have a large stash of theirs to begin with).

All of this sounds like science fiction. But it really isn’t. All of these concepts already exist. Digital currency, server space, identifying information, agreements with other countries, etc. That is why it is imperative for the United States to move in this direction of establishing themselves digitally.

I often wonder if this is how humanity becomes a human race. The current world is divided by physical space, marked by different countries. How could we ever hope to create a Starfleet command as seen in Star Trek, or a one-world government that globalists have dreamed of? The reality is that no one cares about an imaginary border line; people care about the monetary value of the resources that fall within those imaginary lines.

However, if there was a system or a government that simply just kept track of every human born, their affiliation (citizenship), and the various agreements that existed between the affiliations, certain issues experienced by human across different nations would be solved. This is most relevant for when we, as a species, decide to start inhabiting space. When someone lives in space, they are not physically present on Earth anymore or within its borders. The only thing they do have is a digital version of themselves that the rest of humanity will choose or choose not to recognize.

Drawing upon my recent binge of the tv show, The Expanse, when a human lives on Mars, and Mars becomes self sufficient and no longer needs resources from Earth, does anyone from Earth really get a say in how they conduct themselves? I think not. That is why, more than ever, the groundwork needs to be done to establish how the future of humanity will interact, and the digital world is the first step in that process. We can practice what is to come right now.

That is how vitally important the internet is, and what it can facilitate. The internet is boundless right now and it could go in any direction. If we don’t want it to spin out of control, it must be tamed because the internet also represents permanence. If we choose to set the boundaries now, it will shape what is to come long into the future. Permanence is probably the best worst thing that has ever existed. That boogie that you ate when you were three that your sibling took a video of? As long as the data doesn’t become corrupted or hard drive gets lost, that moment will exist forever.

It is possible to create holographic images in forms of people that we love, which Hollywood has experimented with (think Star Wars when they brought back Princess Leia). Five generations from now, grandchildren could be interacting with grandparents.

The moment someone figures out how to create a computer program that mimics a person and has the ability to evolve its thought process, will be the moment that the digital world has achieved a version of immortality in a sense.

These concepts, whether we like to admit it or not, are within reach. Whether or not they should be or not be implemented is a question for the people and their moral and ethical codes. Humanity will be tested in the years to come as people create programs so intricate that they are an actor unto their own. Who then becomes responsible for them if they do something bad or good? What happens when the creator no longer has control over its creation, as in Earth can no longer tell Martians what to do because Mars does not rely on Earth to survive and thrive?

We are certainly a long way off from this happening. We haven’t even made it to being able to live in space long term, let alone building a sustainable house on Mars for the masses. But it would benefit us to realize that this is the beginning; this is the moment in which we have the chance to act and shape it how we want it and to be proactive.

Otherwise, we will have to deal with simply reacting. I don’t think it will take too long for people to realize they can create their own country online. In some regards, it has already happened. Think about the size of the Facebook community. It has over two billion participants. What if it started to create agreements with countries and start issuing credentials and passports? It’s are already on the cusp of issuing its own currency. What does digital Facebook lack at this point that an already established country has?

Are physical resources necessary to possess or just the ability to buy and acquire them? Are physical borders that require physical security worth the headache? In terms of servers, if Facebook decided to launch its own station into space and setup its services there, a place where it can get solar power, the “country” wouldn’t even need a physical place to exist.

I think these are just some of the things that we need to start considering. And the United States should want to be ahead of the curve.