How the Internet Ruined Your Life - Part Two
We’ll Create the Future and we’ll Force you to Consume it. All we ask of you in Return is all of you, Forever
As usual, this is my opinion and I'll be playing fast and loose with facts and quotes sources, mostly mined just to back up my points. This isn't science, I'm not allowed to science anymore.
In this chapter, where I'll mainly be lamenting how collectively disappointing we are, I’m going to discuss how we’re being controlled through a corporate vision and manipulation of "the future" and what we had taken from us as part of this deal we made with The Digital Devil ?.
I’m going to briefly discuss misinformation and cyber-capitalism and although I’ll cover cyber-crime in a later part (as it's an entire topic all of its own), I'm going to also cover how a subtle theft is happening under your nose anyway, while staying inside of the law. Recommended three tinfoil hat minimum.
The “Controlled Generation” – We’ll create the future and we’ll force you to consume it
The Tragedy of the Global Commons
The internet is not doing what it was supposed to or at least what its creaters supposed it should do. It was supposed to (in the original cyber-communist fantasy) be neutral, for everybody, for you and not for "them". It was supposed to assist and bring knowledge closer to you, but that ideal that couldn’t last because humans were involved. Now, as time has wound on several decades, net neutrality is constantly under threat, our infrastructure is hosted on a giant bookseller’s virtual tin, we don’t collectively own it anymore as a people rather than a corporation. Also, where’s the unified view on healthcare data and research, the improved way of life, the predictive technology and robot butlers that were supposed to make our lives longer/better/easier? Yes, we fell into the trap of the shiny things and this behaviour is sadly following a theory known as “The Tragedy of the Commons”. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons).
The internet has become the global commons. This has happened with lightning speed. In this case, the commons is not just one place. It is a collection of places where people meet, discuss the latest news and gossip, play games and perhaps do a little business ... It is a place with two problems, both masked. Some use it to steal private information and correspondence and some use it to spew venom through the promise of anonymity.
https://geopoliticalfutures.com/the-internet-and-the-tragedy-of-the-commons/
While the above shows some insight, I’d argue that there’s a third, equally important problem, and that is that capitalism has its claws sunk deep into the internet and taken it for its own.
Capitalism's most dangerous flaw is that it has no inherent method for dealing with the tragedy of the commons.
https://www.spectacle.org/497/commons.html
What’s worse, is for those who haven’t come along for the internet ride, they’re becoming more isolated by the day, creating a two-tier way of living where their sources of information and access to services is an entirely different way of life.
So, the fantasy was great, up until people realised that somebody had to pay for it, and the consumers decided it wasn’t going to be them… Only the result is that it is you, the consumer who pays and a much higher price than a subscription ever would have been. The Digital Devil accepts your need for the "free internet", but it asks for your digital soul in return.
This is why we can’t have nice things!
Cyber-Capitalism
The world is now a good two decades into the "internet revolution", or what was once called the "information age" (that alone should tip you off as to what's happening) and although capitalism was rife even before the Internet, we've succeeded in creating a nigh-on instant global capitalism accelerator, and by doing so we have allowed it to consume most aspects of our waking lives.
We do not argue that the initial sense of the Internet’s promise was pure fantasy, although some of it can be attributed to the utopian enthusiasm that major new technologies can engender when they first emerge. This context points to the paradox of the Internet as it has developed in a capitalist society. The Internet has been subjected, to a significant extent, to the capital accumulation process, which has a clear logic of its own, inimical to much of the democratic potential of digital communication, and that will be ever more so, going forward.
https://monthlyreview.org/2011/03/01/the-internets-unholy-marriage-to-capitalism/
I realise that this all sounds very cynical on my part, but you don’t need to go very far to find genuine quotes from actual capitalist-droids:
“Let’s grab all this new technology in our teeth once again and turn it into a bonanza for advertising.”
-- Procter & Gamble CEO Edwin Artzt
Aside from the sometimes terrifying media agenda, marketing is adding a “folding of reality” that I'll discuss later, with some “viral marketing” companies engaging in tricks like posting false reviews, badmouthing competitors or other deceptive “indirect marketing” techniques. [https://ebusiness.mit.edu/research/papers/206_Dellarocas_ManipulationOfInternetOpinionForums.pdf]. Sometimes it's difficult to figure out if a person, product or event actually happened, despite digital evidence to suggest it may have.
Through globalisation, we’ve also folded any idea of national boundaries, meaning that there are almost no limits to how far the leathery wings of monetisation can spread. Is something illegal to market in one country? No problem, we can still peddle it elsewhere with minimal cost, especially if it’s an online service (c.f. online gambling) or quickly start pre-warming a market while logistics catch up.
The Creation of a "Two-Tier Living Experience"
The problem with an all pervasive global-hyper-mega-consumerism-feed is that now our existence is pretty much reliant on it to operate, those who aren't on it, are left adrift. Take the phrase “I don’t do computers” – I heard this a lot years ago and I expected it to have died out by now, yet when I speak to people on the street, I still hear it a lot. Surely this creates a two-tier experience of living? One may argue that the “have-nots” who spend their entire life in the physical realm have it better, but they’re denied access to so many services nowadays that their life is immeasurably different from ours.
The push now is inexorably towards “having” technology in your life, it’s getting harder to avoid it by the day, but there is a huge cost for the “haves”, and that’s the surrendering of the you, which I’ll discuss later in this post.
Is anybody protecting this segment of society and do they even want protection?
I’m Looking Forward to a Past that I’ve yet to Create
The western outlook on “the future” is to “look forward to” it, which is odd as we rarely see it coming (and almost never with accuracy). More fittingly, in parts of South America, they liken it to being sat on the back of a cart, where you can’t see what’s in front and the past slowly gets further away and indistinct. [https://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/archive/newsrel/soc/backsfuture06.asp]
So far, so good, but how does our perception of reality and capitalism relate to “futurism” or our perception of the future itself? I think it’s fairly simple, we’re having the future created for us, we just don’t acknowledge that it’s happening!
There’s a nigh on 100% failure rate for people predicting technological advancements, you only need to look at a 1980’s film with flying cars but CRT monitors to know that we almost always pitch our ideas in the wrong sectors. However, at the street level, the future is more complex than pure prediction. The actual “future” for the consumer, be it an organisation or individual, is further away than from innovators who have already started work on artefacts that will be unveiled and released a year or so down the line. As some of this innovation is in the present, the aspects of prediction are more around sales and marketing concerns than “the art of the possible”.
Perversely, this leads to the leaders and visionaries having a view of what is now the past (in their perspective) as the seething masses look dewy eyed to the near future (in their perspective).
As a technology company, I’d imagine there’s a great advantage to be near the lead of the pack, by not only keeping in with the innovators, but attempting to do so ourselves. The next MongoDB is within one of us, I know it.
The Logistics of Perception
In order to understand some of the “slight of hand” being played on us, it’s useful to first introduce “The Logistics of Perception”, which is a term coined by Paul Virilio. It is a new way of looking at what we perceive, as unlike regular military logistics – which is the movement of troops or war-machines – the “Logistics of Perception” is the movement of imagery to and from the theatre of war. Entire conflicts can be artificially created and resolved through the movement of images and sound, but this concept doesn’t stop at war or indeed genuine information as what’s worse by far, is that not all of these images are genuine or are not placed in a genuine context. Computing inherently encourages “Simulation”, which is the manipulation of post-reality and in certain causes the “disappearance of the real”.
By the late twentieth century, media technologies in their roles as technologies of reproduction and representation, had become so advanced that images or copies have become "simulacra," reproductions sufficiently powerful that they first obscure, then displace, and ultimately replace and function as "the real."
https://science.jrank.org/pages/10806/Postmodernism-Cultural-Political-Postmodernism.html
By way of example, a couple of years ago, the Iranian state television channel accidentally claimed that Medal of Honour footage was that of an ISIS raid, and even more embarrassing was a Reuters photographer intentionally doctoring his images to make them seem more dramatic.
The internet has evolved into a machine to spread deceit with anonymity at lightning speed. When even the large news agencies can’t really tell up from down, you know you have a problem. But worse still is how even genuine news is being taken from feeds and filtered through the minds of the “red-tops” within minutes. One only needs to read an article in The Mirror or The Daily Mail to spot the various mistakes as pieces are rushed out of the door in minutes to be “first to press”.
The bottom line is that this “Simulation” IS REAL, as if you can’t tell reality from simulation, and you never encounter the actual reality, then it becomes “the real” as perception is arguably the single most important part of human existence.
So, in summary, taking the above into consideration, I've shown that "they" not only create the future, but through marketing practices, they create the demand and those not on board, are not even a consideration.
The “Duped Generation” – How they took what’s yours and made it theirs
But we need Data!
Big Data is now a $33 billion-a-year industry (big-data revenue only), with the wider "Data" industry (sales and marketing) being $300-500 billion and employing more than three million people in the United States alone. These companies, created solely with the purpose of collecting and processing this data know your name, phone number, where you live, your buying habits and, in many cases, what you are interested in buying. With the advent of artificial intelligence and machine learning, often they know your desires before you do.
"I don't think there is a person in the world who wouldn't agree that data generates tremendous value for both people and for businesses," he said. Howe said he believes his company's marketing platform has a dramatic impact on the economy, both for consumers and for businesses. "I get access to free content, relevant offers. Advertising is more like education, all useful and relevant," Howe said. He said this detailed marketing information is critical in breathing success into business.
https://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/23/tech/web/big-data-acxiom/index.html
I find the quote above is curious, the mindset that purchasing opportunities and "ad-ucation" is in someway desirable. But, horses for courses, maybe I'm just not very progressive when it comes to that kind of lifestyle. What is clear, is that the "need" for this kind of data is definitely a pull model from those who want to sell you something. Sadly, there's less evidence of this being used for the power of good than the power of the mighty dollar.
Look in the Mirror, you’re not an Apparition, you’re a Living Being
One thing you may (or may not) have heard of is the concept of a “Digital Twin”. IoT telemetry or other sensor information is used to create a model of a given "Thing" which can then be used in simulations, which is great for warehouses, fridges, cars etc. but what about for you? With "Twinning" and other data capture, companies are effectively creating a "Digital Doppelganger" of you. It's not a twin as you're not just your data or your telemetry, it's something that's like you, but isn't. These are being created by collecting data on your online (and sometimes offline) movements, and anything else that’s not your core demographic information and pulling some storage slight-of-hand (i.e. storing it on your own device, whether you want it or not), they effectively side-step GDPR or just collecting it in a country that doesn't adhere to it, which given a lot of sites are run and hosted from outside of the control of this new legislation is very likely to happen on a daily basis.
Like a handprint in plaster of Paris, an image of you is being created, and technically they haven’t really taken anything physically significant, but the net outcome is that if they want to recreate that hand, they just create a copy from the mould that you helped them create.
Critics of data-brokering companies say that the average consumer has no idea that their intimate personal details are up for sale on these sites. They argue that having this information one click away could be a privacy risk.
Companies are already asking for social media access, putting tracking devices on your property (such as cars), Amazon adding cameras to your front-door, all this adds to the picture and the accuracy of the "Digital Doppelganger". How soon will it be before it's nigh-on unrecognisable. If you've ever seen the "Be Right Back" episode of Black Mirror, you'll understand how conceptually creepy this could all end up being.
The rub when it comes to online presence is that people aren't entirely honest about their lifestyles as social media often ends up being an aspirational mask over a very different (and often duller) life.
Important decisions are being made about you, the real you, based on the virtual 'you' that's made up of all this data. Decisions like your credit score, your insurance rates, or even if you get a job. And these things are serious, they have serious import in people's lives and sometimes they are wrong.
https://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/23/tech/web/big-data-acxiom/index.html
Don't get me wrong, for modelling and research purposes (healthcare etc.), I’m ok with all of this, but I wonder if companies will put too much stock in this "Digital Doppelganger"? By entering into simulation, based on a crude facsimile of you, companies try to second guess what you’ll do and one day, they’ll outthink you in all cases. But what happens when they get it wrong? The lack of visibility of this digital imprint could seriously impact your life.
Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" is sounding less outlandish now, aside from the existence of ethical plumbers.
The Theft of the “you” and what you Create
Identity theft, the crudest use of your details for financial gain, it’s continuously evolving and becoming ever-more sophisticated. The technology have-nots are sitting ducks for these acts of techno-illusion as everything seems so credible. In fact, the technology haves are almost as likely to fall for it. However, as I said before, I’m going to cover criminogenic behaviour in a later part. This is the subtle “theft” that happens every day under your nose, your very intellectual property, the theft of your image – Facebook using your photographs in adverts with sly “opted in” permissioning, or Amazon and TripAdvisor taking your reviews as their IP and effectively generating revenue on that basis (some are almost being used as advertisements themselves). The default Google Cloud/iCloud moving of your devices' data into the cloud is also very suspect.
The bottom line on this one is, if you publish something you've created to an online service, you have almost certainly signed it away to the service provider, so don't do it unless you're very sure you don't mind losing control of it, permanently!
The Ceaseless Tracking of you
“There are eyes everywhere. No blind spot left. What shall we dream of when everything becomes visible? We'll dream of being blind.”
― Paul Virilio
CCTV, facial recognition, WiFi ping sniffers, NFC, all of these tools are available to companies now in order to track you. https://www.behavioranalyticsretail.com/7-technologies-to-track-people/ provides an interesting insight into how this is happening, almost certainly without your permission or indeed awareness. If you've ever looked at how Google calculates its traffic conditions and then seen their tracking of exactly where you've been for the last week, then either you live a saintly existence, or you'll feel unnerved.
The upshot of this, is that the IoT has effectively created a projection of the physical world into cyberspace, and over time as more devices become "smart", the better this simulacra will become.
It's clear that there are valid reasons for this kind of technology to exist beyond "big brother"; the article https://iot.telefonica.com/blog/the-internet-of-people-a-primer-on-people-tracking-iot-technology provides some compelling and ethical use-cases for this kind of tracking such as the location of doctors, vulnerable people, workers in hazardous environments to name but a few.
Another upside to the unblinking eye of the IoT, smart rooms and monitoring is that it may make future criminal behaviour in the physical world quite challenging unless criminals can rid themselves of all technology and somehow ensure that any sound and video capture at the scene of the crime is also deactivated. Physical burglary may become increasingly rare as the chance of catching the burgler moves steadily towards 100%... So, it's not all bad.
The Reckless Consumer is to Blame
We, as the consumers are to blame for most of this appropriation of our data into the land of sales and marketing but thankfully governments around the world are trying to help save us from ourselves. Removal of the automatic opt-in and strict controls around movement and usage of data (c.f. GDPR) should redress the balance. In the meantime, I'll be taking extra care to read terms and conditions the next time they're popped up on screen for whatever it is I'm signing myself up for... And that's the crux of it "signing up/in" you really are doing that, just with a different signature to the one you'd put on the back of your bank card.
End Transmission – Until the Next Time
I hope you've enjoyed reading this, it was a tough one to write without going too overboard with the anti-consumerism message as I enjoy "stuff" and "things" as much as the next person. I’ve found researching this chapter interesting and terrifying in equal measures. To think that our reality is manipulated on a daily basis and that more of us is being absorbed every day for purposes that are almost always not in our best interests is depressing.
In closing, how do we take back our future and our data? I'd love to hear your experiences/ideas/comments and maybe I'll provide some ideas in the final chapter of this series, if I don't disappear under mysterious circumstances.