The contemporary example using which I would like to discuss the hacker ethic and counterculture would be that of facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. In his college days at Havard Zuckerberg was the quintessential definition of a hacker. The qualities in him were very typical of all the people belonging to this category, he was exceedingly smart and was very good at programming and he was immersed in programming to such an extent that early accounts of his life describe him as being one with the machine. But at the same time the relationship with human beings was the complete opposite of that seen with the machine. He failed miserably to in attempts to get a girlfriend, and generally had very bad and bitter relationship with other human beings. The main reason foe this can be attributed to the face that the he spent so much time with his work that he expected that feedback mechanisms with human beings to be similar to that with the machines he worked with, there was no specific boundary which separated the virtual and real worlds his world views were completely intertwined and interlaced with one another that his dominant world which was the virtual world was slowly taking over his real world and pouring into his real world.
Not only did he fail miserably in establishing intimate relationship with other people but he had absolutely no regard for human sentiment and other people’s feelings. This is clearly illustrated by his first website facemash where he hacked into the Havard registry and downloaded profile pictures of girls and put up profile pictures of any two random girls on his website and asked people who visited his site to rate who was better looking. This clearly shows that he had no respect for sentiments of other people. Following this he attained notoriety in his college and in a sense this made him feel empowered in a certain way because until now the no one knew him and he lead a low profile life but now he was infamous and people were actually scared of him, this gave him a sense of superiority, another instance which shows similarities to other hackers. Even when he had his disciplinary hearing for hacking into the Havard database his response was that he would like to be credited for pointing out the lapses in the security of the system, that he hacked into it for the pure joy of hacking and finding loopholes in the system.
In conclusion what is said here is that hackers like him are always in the middle of an inner conflict that of two worlds the virtual and the real and its not that they are anti social elements its just that they derive an immense amount of joy in beating the system and would go to any lengths to beat it again and again and at the end of the day beating the system is not a means ot an end it is an end I itself.
By
Vivek Subramaniam
AE09B031
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Information panopticon and ICT
To understand the information pan-opticon it is first important to understand the general ideas behind the concept of the pan-opticon and then apply it to the information domain. The idea of panopticon originally introduced by philosophers like Foucault was developed as a tool for constant surveillance, the ideology behind this was that in institutions like schools and prisons where it was required that the higher authority should be in constant vigilance. To achieve this the higher authority in both these cases should be on top of any situation literally and figuratively. So these places have to be designed and constructed in such a manner that there exists a location from which the higher authority can oversee the whole institution. These were the ideas of architecture proposed by architects like Bentham who designed many schools, prisons and hospitals. The same idea is carried over even in the factory and the manufacturing line process where the manager has the complete view of the shop floor so that he can maintain certain amount of discipline in his factory and penalize his workers as and when they do not follow the rules.
While talking about the information panopticon it is important to understand that this is essentially the idea of the panopticon applied to the information domain which is complete visibility of information and information surveillance. This leads to a creation of a system where information is so well organized, stored and kept under surveillance that absolutely nothing goes missing. The only difference in this case is that as the information system is vaster than a system of people it is way more difficult to regulate, so much so that the definition of the ‘higher authority’ becomes more ambiguous as the information becomes more and more accessible. This is exactly what has been happening from the 80’s and is continued even today. The easy accessibility of information which can be mainly attributed to the advances and developments in ICT has led to large scale delocalization of information. In today’s scenario any person can get information to the length that it gives a superiority feeling much the same obtained by jailers and principals. Developments in areas like social networking giving rise to sites like facebook and data mining which lead to the creation of google , have made information so easy flowing that entire lives of people can be accessed by the click of the mouse. Any layman can become the ‘higher Authority’ and can obtain control and survey information about people. The advances in ICT have made this flow very smooth and easy. The main question to be posed here is weather this decentralization is really required and where to draw the line as far as personal information goes, sites like google display the most personal of information about people and their lives to any random person who wants to know about them. This is clearly the violation of personal space because if compared with schools and prisons the inmates there deserved that the level of scrutiny that they were placed under because in the case of prisons they had done something unlawful which had gotten them there and in the case of schools the pupils themselves enrolled in the school, so they themselves made a choice to undergo that level of scrutiny, but in the case of the information panopticon this whole argument is torn apart because any random person can be subjected to intense scrutiny and that too for no apparent reason.
THE HACKER ETHIC:-
What is a hacker:-
A hacker refers to a member of a certain sub-culture/movement/counterculture, originally from MIT, that explores the world of technology and ICT. They aim to override the structural paradigm of the information panopticon that exists in networks today so as to access all the information within the network, just for the thrill of the hunt.
All internet users feel the need for privacy and anonymity, so as to express themselves more freely; but hackers possess the ability to take over the panopticon and expose these users. Thus, hackers are often referred to as being a part of a counter-cultural movement and is often feared.
The Hacker ethic:-
The Hacker Ethic describes the values and philosophy that are standard in the hacking community. The general principles of hacker ethic include sharing, openness, Decentralization, free access to computers and world improvement. Hackers feel the need to explore and understand the way the world works. They often compare the thrill of the hack on similar lines as of the old text-based game of 'Adventure'. Hackers also believe that all information should be free for them to fix, improve and reinvent systems. A free exchange of information allows for greater overall creativity. In the hacker viewpoint, any system could benefit from an easy flow of information.
A Hacker is also an advocate of decentralization, and believe that the best way to promote the free exchange of information is to have an open system that presents no boundaries between a hacker and a piece of information. They also believe that Hackers must be judged by their hacking, not criteria such as age, race etc. They also have a very different outlook on beauty, and appreciate art for their intellectuality, and not their sensuality. They believe that art can be created on a computer.
A classic example of a hacker would be Richard Stallaman. The co-founder of the GNU project, this man was a huge advocate of freeing software to the masses. GNU (expanded being GNU is Not Unix) is a unix-emulator and is still used widely across the world and is a free software. Stallman also inspires Linus Torwalds (another hacker) to introduce the open OS of Linux. In fact, Stallman was such strong anti-copyright views that he coined the term 'Copyleft', which declares an item/software open for people to modify for their own satisfaction. Though there is no open record that confirms that Stallman adhered to the other rules of the hacker ethic, one can safely say that unlike most other hackers, he was not a loner; considering the fact that he was one of the founders of the hacking culture in MIT and created the society that is now shrouded in mystery.
-Amit M Warrier
EE09B004
References:-
1) Wikipedia
2) Sherry Turkle
INFORMATION PANOPTICON AND IT'S IMPACT ON ICT:-
A Panopticon refers to a circular building with a observation tower in the center of an open space surrounded by an outer wall made up of cells for inmates. The purpose of a panopticon is to increase the security through the effectiveness of surveillance. The inmates cannot observe the actions of the other fellow inmates, but everyone's actions can be surveyed from the panopticon. Although this style of architecture could be used for various institutions such as schools, factories and the like, Bentham specifically uses a prison as an example. The inside of the tower, though, cannot be seen. It individualizes and leaves them constantly visible; never knowing when they are being observed. The occupant is always “the object of information, never a subject in communication.” This type of design can be used for any population that needs to be kept under observation, such as: prisoners, schoolchildren, medical patients or workers. A classic example of a present day panopticon would be the audience of the reality show 'BIG BROTHER'.
An information panopticon refers to the same, except that the architecture now refers to an information network; wherein each member's actions are hidden from the other members, but there exists an overseer of all that happens on this network. This concept is used even in the workplace; a classic example being our IITM moodle website wherein the administrator can summon any information with regard to any aspect within the network. Information and Communication Technology is impacted greatly by the information Panopticon. With regard to the internet (the most classic example of ICT), users can remain anonymous (or use an alias) while viewing a large amount of information. The Internet redefines the Panopticon, as the vast information is open for all to see. Thus, present day ICT is focused not in creating new networks, but in encrypting existing ones and modeling the internet to be more and more of the 'Panopticon' that Bentham and Foucault had in mind. Privacy of the internet users has become the prime mission of present day ICT.
A good example for an information Panopticon is the Chinese internet. Ever since the inception of Commercial internet in China, the government realised that this could lead to contact with the western world and western ideas of democracy and anti-communism. Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China is conducted under a wide variety of laws and administrative regulations. There are no specific laws or regulations which the censorship follows. In accordance with these laws, more than sixty Internet regulations have been made by the People's Republic of China (PRC) government, and censorship systems are vigorously implemented by provincial branches of state-owned Internet Service providers, business companies, and organizations.
-Amit M Warrier
EE09B004
References:-
- Wikipedia
- Discipline and Punish by Foucault.
Risks and Responsibilities
During the second world war computers were more of a means to an end kind of devices, they had specific tasks ad executed them, they were a social product rather than a social change. Technology after the second world war did not get closure there were infinite possibilities foe technology and the number of applications were infinite. The present situation is similar in many ways except that today the possibilities are at a much higher levels and the potential for technology is also much higher. It is such a situation that the responsibilities of the designers and inventors comes into question because the flip-side of any technology should be well thought of and counter measures against it should be taken. This is because in todays scenario the sciences are so well connected and interlinked that developments in one field can mean a world of new possibilities for the other and in such situations the application of any technology should be forseen and all possible side effects considered.
The contemporary example chosen here to evaluate the risk and responsibility here is the electoral voting machines or the EVM's. Now just like any other piece of technology this was a product of the necessity counting votes by placing ballots was getting extremely strenuous and though this process was error free but the shear magnitude of the votes to be counted resulted in the introduction of these machines. The procss of implementation fo this technology was also not clean and corruption free, it was promoted by lobbyists who had their own intrinsic gains and benefits and who exerted a respectable amount of influence over the government. This is where the ethics of the technology comes into play, a machine which decides the fate of billions of people in a country is promoted and controlled by a group of individuals this is making a complete mockery of the whole democratic process as such. Another important facet is that in this process citizens who vote place their entire trust in a machine which is essentially a third party entity and due to this their entire trust in the democratic system is compromised, this is because these machines can be rigged and manipulated using very basic knowledge and the fact that this tremendous risk of jeopardizing an entire democracy was not forseen by the designers is mind boggling. The designers of such systems which are so crucial to the functioning of entire nations should act in a much more responsible way and should realize that their technology can affect lives of a larrrge number of people and should see through all possibe loopholes before giving the go ahead in the implementation of such technologies.
So in conclusion, when compared with the technologies of the cold war like the sage defense system, the EVM is similar in the sense that it is of national importance and ends up affectin each and every individual of the country and these should be designed by level headed scientists who take into account all possible effects and take responsibility of their product.
By
Vivek Subramaniam
AE09B031
The contemporary example chosen here to evaluate the risk and responsibility here is the electoral voting machines or the EVM's. Now just like any other piece of technology this was a product of the necessity counting votes by placing ballots was getting extremely strenuous and though this process was error free but the shear magnitude of the votes to be counted resulted in the introduction of these machines. The procss of implementation fo this technology was also not clean and corruption free, it was promoted by lobbyists who had their own intrinsic gains and benefits and who exerted a respectable amount of influence over the government. This is where the ethics of the technology comes into play, a machine which decides the fate of billions of people in a country is promoted and controlled by a group of individuals this is making a complete mockery of the whole democratic process as such. Another important facet is that in this process citizens who vote place their entire trust in a machine which is essentially a third party entity and due to this their entire trust in the democratic system is compromised, this is because these machines can be rigged and manipulated using very basic knowledge and the fact that this tremendous risk of jeopardizing an entire democracy was not forseen by the designers is mind boggling. The designers of such systems which are so crucial to the functioning of entire nations should act in a much more responsible way and should realize that their technology can affect lives of a larrrge number of people and should see through all possibe loopholes before giving the go ahead in the implementation of such technologies.
So in conclusion, when compared with the technologies of the cold war like the sage defense system, the EVM is similar in the sense that it is of national importance and ends up affectin each and every individual of the country and these should be designed by level headed scientists who take into account all possible effects and take responsibility of their product.
By
Vivek Subramaniam
AE09B031
The Hacker Ethic – with reference to Adrian Lamo
Hackers. We’ve heard a lot of things about them – some say they are a danger to the computing society and others see them as potentially useful citizens with bright minds. Hackers do what they do either for personal gain or to find and repair flaws in a system. Hackers, themselves, follow what they call the Hacker Ethic. Based on whether the hack is considered legal or illegal, hackers are dubbed “White Hat Hackers” and “Black Hat Hackers” respectively. Adrian Lamo, a present-day hacker, helps us understand better the terms Hacker and Hacker Ethic.
Adrian Lamo – an introduction
The name Adrian Lamo came first to light when he broke into the systems of major organisations like New York Times, Microsoft, Yahoo!, Bank of America, Citigroup and Cingular. Lamo's intrusions consisted mainly of penetration testing, in which he found flaws in security, exploited them and then informed companies of their shortcomings. He did the same thing what White Hat hackers would do when hired by a company to do penetration testing, but was called an illegal hacker since he did so without the companies’ permission.
When he broke into The New York Times' intranet, things got serious. He added himself to a list of experts and viewed personal information on contributors, including Social Security numbers. Lamo also hacked into The Times' LexisNexis account to research high-profile subject matter.
For his intrusion at The New York Times, Lamo was ordered to pay approximately $65,000 in restitution. He was also sentenced to six months of home confinement and two years of probation, which expired January 16, 2007.
In 2010, Lamo got involved in a WikiLeaks scandal, this time not as a hacker. He reported to the US authorities that Bradley Manning leaked tens of thousands of pages of classified US government data, including the infamous video footage of the July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike incident in Iraq. Although a supporter of the WikiLeaks website, Lamo believed that Manning was endangering national security, which is why he reported Manning.
The Hacker and the Hacker Ethic
From Lamo’s example, we see that hackers do not always hack for personal gain. Some feel a religious ecstasy from their technological adventures. The fact that Lamo reported security flaws back to the companies he hacked into reveals that Lamo was indeed just trying to find flaws in the system and trying to help the companies. Of course he must have felt a deep sense of satisfaction by successfully breaking into the world’s largest computer systems, but his intentions were genuine.
Hackers are defined by their recklessness and deep obsession with technology. They don’t care about what will happen if they get caught as long as they accomplish in what they do.
One of the most important features of the Hacker Ethic is the belief that all information should be free and available to all. This was why Lamo supported WikiLeaks. In spite of that, he reported Manning – which shows in him a sense of responsibility, too.
Hackers also believe that computers are an extraordinary tool and will change our lives for the better, as they can be used in countless different ways. The Hacker Ethic is against decentralization of technology. Hackers feel that technology should not be encapsulated within the shell of a small organization, but should rather be shared with the people. Only then is technology at its most useful. Just think of it – had it not been for hackers like Steve Wozniak, the personal computer couldn’t have seen the light of day.
By Pranav R Kamat
References:
1. Wikipedia – Adrian Lamo
2. The Social Meaning of the Personal Computer: Or, Why the Personal Computer Revolution Was No Revolution by Bryan Pfaffenberger
Who is a hacker? Explain what is meant by “the hacker ethic” with the help of a contemporary example.
A hacker is a person who breaks into computers and computer networks, either for profit or motivated by the challenge. The term "hacker" originally meant someone messing about with something in a positive sense, that is, using playful cleverness to achieve a goal. But the meaning of the term shifted over the decades since it first came into use in a computer context and became to refer to computer criminals.
In early 1970s hacker culture can be traced towards more beneficial forms of hacking, including MIT labs or the Home-brew Computer Club, which later resulted in such things as early personal computers or the open source movement. With the emergence personal computer and networking, formed a new subculture in computer underground called computer hackers. The computer hackers no longer did beneficial developments to the technology, but they instead started cracking into unauthorised systems, accessing unauthorised data and creating computer virus. They gave rise to so called the 'black hat hackers' who is like the bad person, and was no way beneficial in making computers better. While the 'white hat hackers' are those who stick to so called the hackers ethic and use hacking techniques to make computers better and useful.
A good example of a hacker can be Adrian Lamo. He is a 'Gray hat' hacker as in a mixture white and black hat hackers. He broke into several high-profile computer networks, including those of The New York Times, Yahoo!, and Microsoft, after which he was arrested. His family constantly kept shifting so he did not make many close friends in his childhood. He was tested out of high school an year early. Like any other hacker he had a poor social life in high school. He is also called 'homeless hacker', as he spends all the time couch surfing, travelling to internet cafés, squatting in abandoned buildings, one can say he felt his home in the machine he is using. For hackers, their relationship with computers can be described in on of their phrase
“I control you You're inside me.”
This attitude of hackers are reflected in their real life relationships also, Lamo was no exception. An ex-girlfriend of Lamo's described him as "very controlling," stating, "He carried a stun gun, which he used on me.".
Hacker ethic is the generic phrase which describes the values and philosophy that are standard in the hacker community. Steven Levy as describes hacker ethic in his book titled Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution, written in 1984. According to which a hacker people should have total access to the computers and all information is free. It also asks to mistrust authority and promote decentralization. It considers a hack an art and speaks about how a computer can change your life to make it better. Adrine Lamo was no exception to following these ethics, Lamo hacked into The New York Times to research on high profile subjects. He has been constantly funding and supporting Wikileakes. This expresses his lack of trust in authority and how he wants to access information for free. When he was questioned about his actions, he glamorizing crime by stating,
“Anything I could say about my person or my actions would only cheapen what they have to say for themselves.”
It is also interesting to note that he Lamo informed US Army authorities that Bradley Manning confessed to leaking the video footage of the July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike incident in Iraq to Wikileaks.
Regarding this he said:
"I wouldn’t have done this if lives weren’t in danger... [Manning] was in a war zone and basically trying to vacuum up as much classified information as he could, and just throwing it up into the air."
Eventually he broke the hackers ethic by reporting to authorities. Hence there was an upper limit for him beyond which the Hackers ethics were void.
- G Sujan Kumar
References:
Wikipedia: Hacker ethics
The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit by Sherry Turkle
Information Panopticon
Jermey Bentham an English philosopher in 1791, proposed an architecture designed for a safe, humane prison called the panopticon. The design consists of a centralized tower surrounded by a circular building divided into prison cells. The idea was to provide complete observational power to the observer in the tower over the prisoners and at the same time not being watched at by the prisoners. Hence establishing a control through isolation and constant surveillance.
The new information and communication technology (ICT) promote interconnectivity that require a centralized control centre. From the very beginning of communication technology like the telephone, it was always through a centralized control the information is passed. Increased centralization used in these communication technologies gives a power of unprecedented monitoring and observation creating a so called an 'Information Panopticon' . Like a prisoner on Bentham's Panopticon the user of the 'space' is observed , held in darkness and prevented from observing their observers, establishing a hierarchy with respect to position and access. An information Panopticon is everywhere and as anything , it can be traffic monitoring systems, or data monitoring of credit card and insurance agencies.
With the introduction of these ICTs into workplaces, managers and employees are discovering the hierarchical risks within information technologies. Certain information about the worker is accessible to manager but not the vice versa . The access to information in a workplace enables managers to establish new methods of monitoring work and workers. These technologies are used as a power that displays itself automatically and continuously.
In Foucault's words, panopticon is "a machine for creating and sustaining a power relation independent of the person who exercises it; in short, that the inmates should be caught up in a power situation of which they are themselves the bearers" . The difference in right to access information made the very design of ICTs 'panoptic'.
Though of ICTs being very similar to the original Bentham's panopticon the mode of control is different from that of the original panopticon. The technology used in monitoring is not as apparent as in Bentham's prison. The employees do not even know how the panoptic superiority is being enforced. Generally the administrative action in a workplace tend to be pragmatic and paranoid. Every node is observable by the person hierarchically above him. It created a systematic oppression rooted to the highest authority of the organization. Charles Babbage thought that by introducing machine into the factory system would help in keeping the factory workers in check. Similarly introducing an information control in modern day workplace they are able to keeps the workers in check.
ICTs in workspace are just the small section of a panoptic design of the modern day technology. With mobile technologies, GPS technologies and various other monitoring technologies one can monitor and observe every single movement and action of a person. This panoptic design has given the developers and owners an ability to penetrate into the society's behaviour enforcing social discipline. Panoptic design is everywhere now and we are already prisoners of these panopticon.
-G Sujan Kumar
Risk and Responsibility
The Cold War was a period after the second world war during which the USA and USSR competed to dominate international affairs. This time in history marked unprecedented race for military domination. Both the participating countries stocked up nuclear warheads in the name of national security. Military research was heavily funded during this time, which resulted in computers. ENIAC and Mark I are the examples of early computers built for military calculations. This was justified as better national security, that leads to passivity , deterrence between the competing countries. The risk involved with such justification was never calculated. Information technology also flourished during this period. Today, its benefits are well understood. What are not as well understood are some of the risks associated with this new technology.
A more contemporary example in such risks can be seen with electronic voting systems in India. Electronic voting system was introduced to make toe voting fast and more accurate. But they did not look the risk involved in the introduction of this electronic voting system. The introduction of electronic voting system introduced an unverifiable machine between the voter and the authorities responsible for counting. The machine once made is virtually impossible to verify all the possible basis. The machines are found easy to be tampered with to change the results in favour of someone. It is also important to note that there is no monitoring of the input and a process verification possible , hence there is no possible way in which one can verify the validity of the result. In USA, 2000 presidential elections a punched card systems was adapted in Florida which allegedly affected the outcome of US presidential elections. These machines used have been found to have innumerable errors.
Though there is risk associated with the electronic voting machines, there is a question of responsibility of the engineers and manufacturers in making the machines through which one can 'hack democracy'. It is no different to the lack of responsibility among engineers during the cold war. There was lack of transparency in the design of this machine , as one can not verify the program that has been written into the machine. The manufacturers must be guilty of violating their personal ethics by hiding the program to the public.
The race in research during the cold war lead to several advancements in information and computing technology. But there was a lack of ethics among the engineers who made machine that leads to mass destruction in their cybernetic world, creating a sense of global threat. The Electronic voting machines are no different as elections are the key in the functioning of a healthy democracy.
A more contemporary example in such risks can be seen with electronic voting systems in India. Electronic voting system was introduced to make toe voting fast and more accurate. But they did not look the risk involved in the introduction of this electronic voting system. The introduction of electronic voting system introduced an unverifiable machine between the voter and the authorities responsible for counting. The machine once made is virtually impossible to verify all the possible basis. The machines are found easy to be tampered with to change the results in favour of someone. It is also important to note that there is no monitoring of the input and a process verification possible , hence there is no possible way in which one can verify the validity of the result. In USA, 2000 presidential elections a punched card systems was adapted in Florida which allegedly affected the outcome of US presidential elections. These machines used have been found to have innumerable errors.
Though there is risk associated with the electronic voting machines, there is a question of responsibility of the engineers and manufacturers in making the machines through which one can 'hack democracy'. It is no different to the lack of responsibility among engineers during the cold war. There was lack of transparency in the design of this machine , as one can not verify the program that has been written into the machine. The manufacturers must be guilty of violating their personal ethics by hiding the program to the public.
The race in research during the cold war lead to several advancements in information and computing technology. But there was a lack of ethics among the engineers who made machine that leads to mass destruction in their cybernetic world, creating a sense of global threat. The Electronic voting machines are no different as elections are the key in the functioning of a healthy democracy.
References:
1. The Risks Digest
2. Wikipedia: Electronic voting
-Sujan
Hackers and their Way of Life
Introduction:
Before engaging on a discussion on the social construction of a hacker, the first question we must ask ourselves is, what exactly is a hacker? The Jargon file, a collection of hacker slang derived from technical cultures such as the MIT AI Lab, defines a hacker as 'A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and stretching their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary.' We shall see that a hacker as several other distinguishing qualities in addition to these. We explore the hacker ethic through a view of the life of Adrian Lamo, listed second in the top 10 hackers of all time by the CIA.
The Homeless Hacker:
Born in Boston, Massachusetts, Lamo gained widespread notoriety after breaking into the internal computer network of The New York Times, adding his name to the internal database of known sources and conducting research on its high profile subjects. Two years and a lawsuit later, he was convicted and sentenced to two years of probation along with a large amount of money in damages. Within this time, he had already gained popularity in hacker circles for gaining access to restricted areas in the Microsoft, Yahoo and WorldCom servers. Dubbed the 'homeless hacker', he used Internet connections at hotels, coffee shops and libraries to perform his intrusions. Lamo is a typical example of a hacker, someone who tries to stretch the limits and explore the capabilites of a computer system. He would fall into the black hat category - someone who uses his knowledge for nefarious and destrucive purposes. Nowadays, hackers tend to disassociate themselves from these people, instead referring to them as 'crackers'. So what do hackers gain from their exploitation and breaking in to computer systems?
Social Construction of the hacker:
Accorinding to Bryan Pfaffenberger in his article on the 'Social Meaning of the Personal Computer' tries to explain the strange motives in the new subculture emergent in the 60s. He says that hackers experience a feeling of technically induced ecstasy. Such a feeling can only be experienced an expert programmer and someone who has complete mastery of the system they are working on, as Sherry Turkle maintains after her experiences with the game of 'Adventure'. Hackers try to improve the system in order to gain its acknowledgement and approval.
Another aspect of hackers is their desire to be in control. Lamo's ex-girlfriend has descibed him as 'very-controlling', saying he had once used a stun gun on her. Sherry Turkle explains this by asserting that hackers, being able to predict correctlty the actions of a computer through their mastery over it, are at a loss while facing the real and unpredictable world. This leads them to leading lonely and isolated lives with their computer, resulting in their anti-social image.
Hacker - a flawed personality?
Turkle maintains that writing off hackers as juvenile or childish destroys any attempt to understand them. To her and others, the hacker is not an inherently flawed personality. Many of us, in our desire to make knowledge free and our mistrust of authority have unknowingly associated with the hacker ethic. Hackers, in their own way, are human and just as romanticists escape into nature, hackers find soul in the machine. Many of the hackers are those who are aware of their bodily defects and have failed at establishing meaningful relationships. However, this is not always the case. In my opinion, hackers still lead content and fulfilled lives - both in their own world and those who even return to a normal life, wiser from their experiences. In my opinion, Steve Wozniak - phone phreaker, hacker and co-founder of Apple is a prime example that hackers are not so different from the rest of us and can find acceptance in our society.
Before engaging on a discussion on the social construction of a hacker, the first question we must ask ourselves is, what exactly is a hacker? The Jargon file, a collection of hacker slang derived from technical cultures such as the MIT AI Lab, defines a hacker as 'A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and stretching their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary.' We shall see that a hacker as several other distinguishing qualities in addition to these. We explore the hacker ethic through a view of the life of Adrian Lamo, listed second in the top 10 hackers of all time by the CIA.
The Homeless Hacker:
Born in Boston, Massachusetts, Lamo gained widespread notoriety after breaking into the internal computer network of The New York Times, adding his name to the internal database of known sources and conducting research on its high profile subjects. Two years and a lawsuit later, he was convicted and sentenced to two years of probation along with a large amount of money in damages. Within this time, he had already gained popularity in hacker circles for gaining access to restricted areas in the Microsoft, Yahoo and WorldCom servers. Dubbed the 'homeless hacker', he used Internet connections at hotels, coffee shops and libraries to perform his intrusions. Lamo is a typical example of a hacker, someone who tries to stretch the limits and explore the capabilites of a computer system. He would fall into the black hat category - someone who uses his knowledge for nefarious and destrucive purposes. Nowadays, hackers tend to disassociate themselves from these people, instead referring to them as 'crackers'. So what do hackers gain from their exploitation and breaking in to computer systems?
Social Construction of the hacker:
Accorinding to Bryan Pfaffenberger in his article on the 'Social Meaning of the Personal Computer' tries to explain the strange motives in the new subculture emergent in the 60s. He says that hackers experience a feeling of technically induced ecstasy. Such a feeling can only be experienced an expert programmer and someone who has complete mastery of the system they are working on, as Sherry Turkle maintains after her experiences with the game of 'Adventure'. Hackers try to improve the system in order to gain its acknowledgement and approval.
Another aspect of hackers is their desire to be in control. Lamo's ex-girlfriend has descibed him as 'very-controlling', saying he had once used a stun gun on her. Sherry Turkle explains this by asserting that hackers, being able to predict correctlty the actions of a computer through their mastery over it, are at a loss while facing the real and unpredictable world. This leads them to leading lonely and isolated lives with their computer, resulting in their anti-social image.
Hacker - a flawed personality?
Turkle maintains that writing off hackers as juvenile or childish destroys any attempt to understand them. To her and others, the hacker is not an inherently flawed personality. Many of us, in our desire to make knowledge free and our mistrust of authority have unknowingly associated with the hacker ethic. Hackers, in their own way, are human and just as romanticists escape into nature, hackers find soul in the machine. Many of the hackers are those who are aware of their bodily defects and have failed at establishing meaningful relationships. However, this is not always the case. In my opinion, hackers still lead content and fulfilled lives - both in their own world and those who even return to a normal life, wiser from their experiences. In my opinion, Steve Wozniak - phone phreaker, hacker and co-founder of Apple is a prime example that hackers are not so different from the rest of us and can find acceptance in our society.
Information Panopticon and its impact on ICT
Introduction:
A term coined by Jeremy Bentham over two centuries ago, the panopticon was a type of prison designed by Jeremy Bentham to allow the observer to watch over its prisoners without giving them the impression that they were being watched. Bentham's central goal of the panopticon was control through both isolation and the possibility of constant surveillance. Although the design was not completed in his time, the French philospher and historian Michel Foucault developed on this idea of controlling space and applied it as a metaphor for the oppressive use of information in a modern disciplinary society.
Foucault's vision and current relevance:
In modern society, quoting Foucault, our spaces are organized "like so many cages, so many small theaters, in which each actor is alone, perfectly individualized and constantly visible". So, we are already living in a kind of panopticon where information about us is available without our knowledge. Also, Foucault realized that oppression in the information age is no longer about physical domination and control, but rather the potential for complete knowledge and observation. In such a society, physical intimidation is not relevant as people need to regulate their own behaviour to escape the constant threat of detection. In the current age, Foucault's vision of the panopticon is relevant in the context of surveilance and electronic monitoring of workers commonplace today. Thus the sentiment of an 'invisible omniscience' has persisted albeit in a different form. According to some, this is construcing a society where all behaviour is sharply regulated through the fear of observation.
In contemporary society:
Monitoring of data and profiling is now commonplace on the internet, wherever we go. From a simple search on Google to a credit card transaction, details of our browsing history, searches and bank details are stored in large databases and servers. In the age of ICT, such information has become increasingly public and privacy has become hard to find. Most people are unaware that they are being tracked and few of those who do can do anything about it. A case in point is the widespread use of wireless networks, most of which follow weak standards and unencrypted protocols from which data can easily be stolen. Here, we see the power of the panopticon - in the quest for making some information public and decentralised, we have unintentionally crossed the line somewhere and now almost nothing can remain hidden.
Conclusion:
The idea of the panopticon, initially conceived as a means to regulate, discipline and punish using all seeing gaze still exists today in a form that Bentham and Foucault did not imagine. We live in a world where we are constantly monitored, either by CCTV cameras at departmental stores to cookies and other details stored on our computer. On the occasions when we are aware of this, we behave differently because of this fear of being watched. Does this however ultimately help to regulate society and change our behaviour for the better? One may argue that we can only be judged when we do not know that we are being watched. As the world grows smaller, the information panopticon grows increasingly evident and our society heads towards a new and unexpected danger - the risk of too much information.
A term coined by Jeremy Bentham over two centuries ago, the panopticon was a type of prison designed by Jeremy Bentham to allow the observer to watch over its prisoners without giving them the impression that they were being watched. Bentham's central goal of the panopticon was control through both isolation and the possibility of constant surveillance. Although the design was not completed in his time, the French philospher and historian Michel Foucault developed on this idea of controlling space and applied it as a metaphor for the oppressive use of information in a modern disciplinary society.
Foucault's vision and current relevance:
In modern society, quoting Foucault, our spaces are organized "like so many cages, so many small theaters, in which each actor is alone, perfectly individualized and constantly visible". So, we are already living in a kind of panopticon where information about us is available without our knowledge. Also, Foucault realized that oppression in the information age is no longer about physical domination and control, but rather the potential for complete knowledge and observation. In such a society, physical intimidation is not relevant as people need to regulate their own behaviour to escape the constant threat of detection. In the current age, Foucault's vision of the panopticon is relevant in the context of surveilance and electronic monitoring of workers commonplace today. Thus the sentiment of an 'invisible omniscience' has persisted albeit in a different form. According to some, this is construcing a society where all behaviour is sharply regulated through the fear of observation.
In contemporary society:
Monitoring of data and profiling is now commonplace on the internet, wherever we go. From a simple search on Google to a credit card transaction, details of our browsing history, searches and bank details are stored in large databases and servers. In the age of ICT, such information has become increasingly public and privacy has become hard to find. Most people are unaware that they are being tracked and few of those who do can do anything about it. A case in point is the widespread use of wireless networks, most of which follow weak standards and unencrypted protocols from which data can easily be stolen. Here, we see the power of the panopticon - in the quest for making some information public and decentralised, we have unintentionally crossed the line somewhere and now almost nothing can remain hidden.
Conclusion:
The idea of the panopticon, initially conceived as a means to regulate, discipline and punish using all seeing gaze still exists today in a form that Bentham and Foucault did not imagine. We live in a world where we are constantly monitored, either by CCTV cameras at departmental stores to cookies and other details stored on our computer. On the occasions when we are aware of this, we behave differently because of this fear of being watched. Does this however ultimately help to regulate society and change our behaviour for the better? One may argue that we can only be judged when we do not know that we are being watched. As the world grows smaller, the information panopticon grows increasingly evident and our society heads towards a new and unexpected danger - the risk of too much information.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Hackers and hacker ethics
Introduction
In this essay, I explore the questions - what is a hacker? what do we mean by hacker ethic? with reference to Bryan Pfaffenberger's article "The social meaning of the personal computer : or, why the personal computer revolution was no revolution", Sherry Turkle's book "The second self" and the Discovery channel documentary "The history of hacking". Various aspects of hacking are discussed through the example of one of the greatest ethical hackers of 20th century, Richard Stallman.
What is a hacker?
The Jargon file, a collection of hacker slang derived from technical cultures like MIT AI lab, defines a hacker as "A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and stretching their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary."
Hackers that use their skills for good are called as "white hat" hackers. these white hats often work as certified "Ethical hackers", hired by companies to test the integrity of their system.
We explore the culture of these white hat hackers and their hacker ethic through a view of life of Richard Stallman, one of the top 5 biggest white hat hackers ever existed.
Motivation behind hacking
Captain Crunch, arguably the first "hacker" summarizes his motives beautifully in the following statement
Stallman's crusade for software liberation started with a printer. At the MIT lab, he and other hackers were allowed to modify the code of printer so that they sent convenient alert messages. However, a new printer came along - one that they were not allowed to modify. It was located away from the lab and the absence of alerts was a huge inconvenience. It was the point that he was "convinced... of the ethical need to require free software."
Hackers and the society
As Sherry Turkle points out, hackers are closer to the computer than people. They are shy and inarticulate - trapped in the quest for control and mastery with the computers as their medium. Hackers tend to prefer relationships with computers than with humans. A major reason being computers can be "mold to their desires" - a world far less threatening and more rewarding than the world of conventional relations.
Hackers find their true friend, soulmate in the computer. Computers provide refuce to their loneliness. Stallman is no exception. Text editor is program with which hackers spend most of their time. Stallman made a text editor which had a feature called "the doctor". The doctor was a program with which one could chat and the doctor would answer them intelligently. What a cure for loneliness!
Hacker ethics
Hacker's obsession with computing leads to impatience and intolerance towards anything else that may come in the way. Following are some important beliefs in hacker ethics, as codified by Stephen Levy.
Stallman dedicated his life for freedom of software and information. He came up with the revolutionary concept of "copyleft". IT ensures that information required to modify/improve the program is always freely available.
Conclusion
Although hackers tend to be isolated, they have made a great impact on the society - a positive one in case of white hat hackers. Naming of an asteriod after Stallman testifies his impact on the society.
Referecnes
In this essay, I explore the questions - what is a hacker? what do we mean by hacker ethic? with reference to Bryan Pfaffenberger's article "The social meaning of the personal computer : or, why the personal computer revolution was no revolution", Sherry Turkle's book "The second self" and the Discovery channel documentary "The history of hacking". Various aspects of hacking are discussed through the example of one of the greatest ethical hackers of 20th century, Richard Stallman.
What is a hacker?
The Jargon file, a collection of hacker slang derived from technical cultures like MIT AI lab, defines a hacker as "A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and stretching their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary."
Hackers that use their skills for good are called as "white hat" hackers. these white hats often work as certified "Ethical hackers", hired by companies to test the integrity of their system.
We explore the culture of these white hat hackers and their hacker ethic through a view of life of Richard Stallman, one of the top 5 biggest white hat hackers ever existed.
Motivation behind hacking
Captain Crunch, arguably the first "hacker" summarizes his motives beautifully in the following statement
"It's (the phone network) a beautiful system, you know. I want to work for her. I want to help her get rid of her flaws and become perfect."The idea of looking at the machine not as a means to end, but the end itself, originated by phone phreaks, more or less remains the central idea for computer hackers too.
Stallman's crusade for software liberation started with a printer. At the MIT lab, he and other hackers were allowed to modify the code of printer so that they sent convenient alert messages. However, a new printer came along - one that they were not allowed to modify. It was located away from the lab and the absence of alerts was a huge inconvenience. It was the point that he was "convinced... of the ethical need to require free software."
Hackers and the society
As Sherry Turkle points out, hackers are closer to the computer than people. They are shy and inarticulate - trapped in the quest for control and mastery with the computers as their medium. Hackers tend to prefer relationships with computers than with humans. A major reason being computers can be "mold to their desires" - a world far less threatening and more rewarding than the world of conventional relations.
Hackers find their true friend, soulmate in the computer. Computers provide refuce to their loneliness. Stallman is no exception. Text editor is program with which hackers spend most of their time. Stallman made a text editor which had a feature called "the doctor". The doctor was a program with which one could chat and the doctor would answer them intelligently. What a cure for loneliness!
Hacker ethics
Hacker's obsession with computing leads to impatience and intolerance towards anything else that may come in the way. Following are some important beliefs in hacker ethics, as codified by Stephen Levy.
- Access to computers should be unlimited and free.
- All information should be free.
- Mistrust the authority - promote decentralization.
Stallman dedicated his life for freedom of software and information. He came up with the revolutionary concept of "copyleft". IT ensures that information required to modify/improve the program is always freely available.
Conclusion
Although hackers tend to be isolated, they have made a great impact on the society - a positive one in case of white hat hackers. Naming of an asteriod after Stallman testifies his impact on the society.
Referecnes
- The second self - Sherry Turkle
- The social meaning of the personal computer - Bryan Pfaffenberger
- Wikipedia
- Richard Stallman biography
- List of 10 greatest hackers : an article on www.itsecurity.com
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Who is a Hacker?
Introduction
There is no one way to define a hacker. Hackers come in many varieties – Phone Phreakers, Network Hackers, Media Hackers, Hardware Hacker and so on. And while there is no one easy way to define a Hacker, one can observe, from their want for attention and their relentless disobedience of authority in their own pursuit of knowledge, that they are somewhat like a child – this analogy while not covering all the aspects of what it means to be a hacker, encompasses the essential aspects – Hackers ‘Do’ because they are curious, not for a cause, not for monetary gain and sometimes in this pursuit, they get caught as illustrated by Mitnick’s example. When Hackers do things, they bent the technology around them to achieve their goals, they never give into the constraints posed by the technology – infact one might go so far as to say that hackers really are just constraint benders and removers – and consequently are the Teasers at the Margin of technology. So while Hackers wield so much power in their hands (which arises from their juxtaposed tendencies to understand and control while also to be able to let loose and explore) , and when hacking culture gained momentum beginning with 1960s, a new set of ethical principles and a collective cultural view of society or at least how it should be arose in the eyes of the hacker leading to a established hacker subculture.
Ethics of the Hacker (?)
The Hacker ethic is essential to the idea of a Hacker Culture. It comprises of the set of rules and principles one must stick to in any situation, it is not a separate morality in itself but a product of the hacker’s world view. The product borne out of their mechanistic view of the universe and their thirst for understanding and conquering the “machine” - be it computer or telephone or in some cases even other people.
Take for example Kevin Mitnick, one of the famous 20th century hackers, even though he was accessing proprietary information, he always claimed to do so for the joy of it - to know that he could do it, and when he kept this information, it was not for monetary gain but as a trophy to him, a proof of his abilities and the understanding he had in navigating the system. This highlights another important characteristic of the hacker, their need to feel that they can also influence control on the state of things - in Mitnick’s case, computer network technology, in other words, they feel a need for a decentralised scheme of things. Thus, Hacking is a means for them of ensuring that their world is not controlled solely by external factors. Another, major hacker is Richard Stallmanm, the founder of the free software movement, he became so engrossed with developing and making free the fruits of computer programming that he started the OpenSource movement which helped boost the hacker ideal of sharing and freeness of information. This too is another essential quality of hacker ethic - the idea of freeware and imbuing freedom of use to one’s creative products.
In Conclusion
Often mistaken as hackers are the crackers who hack things not for the pleasure of understanding but maliciously with intent to injure and use the stolen information for illegitimate purposes, it must be noted that they are not operating in the true spirit of hacking as hacking seeks not to overthrow and control everyone but in it’s truest sense to try to embrace and understand technology and modify it for the better. The hacker is that mischievous and curious child near the sandbox in the playground not the Fist flinging bully near the swings.
Bibliography
1) Wikipedia: Hacker Ethic, Hacker Culture, Richard Stallman, Kevin Mitnick
2) Sherry Turkle, Hackers: Loving the Machine for Itself
3) Pfaffenberger, The Social meaning of the Personal Computer
Barath
The Emerging Preprocessing Directive
Introduction
The subjection of routine tasks to mechanical means gained thrust in the industrial age where automation became the norm of the factory production. Although, automation initially was detested by workers for slashing their jobs (as can be seen in the agitations of the Luddites), these feelings reduced as the Industrial Revolution marched on due to the migration of skilled workers into other avenues of employment. Thus, automation even though faced with initial resistance, achieved its ultimate aim of making easy the processes of industry. With the advent of Computers post-WWII, it was only time before information and data were also automated. This too happened, with some resistance, but it has not been quite successful as it is yet to reach full potential, for while it automated data, it failed to informate it. I would like to discuss the essential difference between these two and the significance this understanding plays in contemporary life with help of an example.
The Difference and its Challenge
Take the instance discussed in Alan November’s work Empowering Students with Technology of Schools where academic data records of students have been automated i.e. the schools have computerized the Grade Records of each Student and have made the calculation of functions based on these (say average, etc,.) automatic. This does automate the process of the making the Report Card of Students and hence is a definite improvement as it solves the problem with less effort than traditionally required but real informating this Data means to use it to give “more” information, achieve more control and make available more access than would be other not be possible – An explosion of new interactions and derivations with minimal effort enabled by the automating driving the informating. For example, with this computerization, the school could make the Grade card accessible to parents as an online Web-Grade Card which helps in tracking their Ward’s progress or they could schedule it to send emails to parents when their wards perform poorly or commend them when they do well. It could be used to inform the students themselves about the trend in previous years for electives chosen and how students before them performed, it could be used to help them find specific areas they need to concentrate on given their pursuit for higher education or it could even simply list the number of hours they need to put in to study based on their current score (possibly depending on a survey from previous batches of students). As can be easily realized, the variety of possibilities when one shuns the veil of automating and explores the possibility of informating are vast (even with such a small application as school student academic records) It only takes a little application, some insight and a little drive to achieve more than that offered by the plain platter of automation.
In Conclusion
As Technologists claim, we are in the Information Age and we need to take advantage of the possibilities offered by informating. The Main struggle against this currently I feel is the lack of understanding of the possibility offered by technology like the computer – most people do not know fully how to operate and take advantage of their computer, they are more than content with it for using it in sending, receiving email and surfing the web. This situation has to be remedied, at least by the next generation, where computer literacy should gain the foremost significance in education (both in spread and in depth) and an understanding of the essential difference people can make with computers (essentially a shift in people’s perspective from ‘computer as a tool for data crunching’ to ‘computer as a information deriver’), a complete integration of technology into education and work. With the realization of the vast possibilities of informating over plain automating, I feel confident that society will move towards this new information horizon and as we move through this stage of the information revolution - which is similar to what the initial stages of industrial revolution was for automating, I hope we will reach a time when informating, whose impact is currently only being realized in contemporary work life, will become an activity as mundane as automating - a preprocessing for newer and better analytics to come.
bibliography:
1) Alan November's Empowering Students with Technology
2)http://www.doug-johnson.com/dougwri/informate-not-automate.html
Barath A
What is the information panopticon? : Discussion with reference to the use of ICT in organization of work
Introduction
The brainchild of 18th century English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, panopticon was an architectural innovation designed to lead to safe, humane prisons. The human tendency to think that, "every thing you do is right, until you get caught!" is what Bentham sought to curb using panopticon. The panopticon was engineered in such a way that, from a central tower, every prisoner in any cell could be observed., without the possibility of being observed by the prisoner.
The central goal of panopticon was to achieve control through isolation and possibility of constant surveillance. The very thought of "somebody is watching us", in many cases, is sufficient to keep the behavior under control, regardless of the fact that at the moment, nobody might be observing. Surprisingly, this idea was far more generic and was a good one for even schools, hospitals etc.
The information panopticon
Realizing that in the modern, information centric world, control no longer requires physical domination over body, but can be achieved through isolation and constant possibility of observation, Michel Foucalt applied the idea of panopticon as a metaphor for the oppressive use of information in the modern disciplinary society.
To gain control, all that is needed is complete knowledge and observation. In the information panopticon, we are seen without seeing the observers. The information is available without the knowledge of the subject. With the presence of such a panopticon, people need to regulate their own behavior to escape the constant threat of detection.
The information panopticon is both literal and metaphorical. It manifests itself through public CCTV cameras, electronic monitoring of workers, face recognition and many more.
Information panopticon in use
Soon after it was conceptualized, the idea was put into use. With ever increasing mechanization and automation, factory setting was a perfect place for a panopticon. Its modest roots can be traced back to the days when workers needed to swap their "punch cards" through a slot in order to notify their arrival and departure. This simple setting, automatically did the job of keeping track of number of workers, their arrival and departure times automatically. This is good example of passive information collection.
With the advent of internet, teh world has become a global village, and information sharehouse. But simultaneously, it became a source of distraction, unproductive wastage of time and money, if not used with control. The idea of information panopticon is central to organization of work in any modern corporation/organization/company whose employees work on computers. In this case, the panopticon is even more powerful by rendering itself invisible. With the use of advanced software, all the employees are being monitored in real time for their online activities. Websites which are found to distract the employees and waste a lot of productive time are being banned based on the collection by the panopticon.
Conclusion
The notion of information panopticon has a great role to play in the moders information centric society. But this brings forth the question of integrity of those who are in power, the "observers" of the panopticon. The question "how much is too much?" must be addressed as the internet is being overpowered with services like google and facebook who are the bare essentials, information panopticons with vested, commercial interests.
Limits are already being crossed. Facebook now decides whos is my best friend and who I must interact iwth. Google knows everything about me from how I plan my travel to what kind of information content is "relevant" to me.
I conclude with an open question "who will observe the observers?"
Reference
The brainchild of 18th century English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, panopticon was an architectural innovation designed to lead to safe, humane prisons. The human tendency to think that, "every thing you do is right, until you get caught!" is what Bentham sought to curb using panopticon. The panopticon was engineered in such a way that, from a central tower, every prisoner in any cell could be observed., without the possibility of being observed by the prisoner.
The central goal of panopticon was to achieve control through isolation and possibility of constant surveillance. The very thought of "somebody is watching us", in many cases, is sufficient to keep the behavior under control, regardless of the fact that at the moment, nobody might be observing. Surprisingly, this idea was far more generic and was a good one for even schools, hospitals etc.
The information panopticon
Realizing that in the modern, information centric world, control no longer requires physical domination over body, but can be achieved through isolation and constant possibility of observation, Michel Foucalt applied the idea of panopticon as a metaphor for the oppressive use of information in the modern disciplinary society.
To gain control, all that is needed is complete knowledge and observation. In the information panopticon, we are seen without seeing the observers. The information is available without the knowledge of the subject. With the presence of such a panopticon, people need to regulate their own behavior to escape the constant threat of detection.
The information panopticon is both literal and metaphorical. It manifests itself through public CCTV cameras, electronic monitoring of workers, face recognition and many more.
Information panopticon in use
Soon after it was conceptualized, the idea was put into use. With ever increasing mechanization and automation, factory setting was a perfect place for a panopticon. Its modest roots can be traced back to the days when workers needed to swap their "punch cards" through a slot in order to notify their arrival and departure. This simple setting, automatically did the job of keeping track of number of workers, their arrival and departure times automatically. This is good example of passive information collection.
With the advent of internet, teh world has become a global village, and information sharehouse. But simultaneously, it became a source of distraction, unproductive wastage of time and money, if not used with control. The idea of information panopticon is central to organization of work in any modern corporation/organization/company whose employees work on computers. In this case, the panopticon is even more powerful by rendering itself invisible. With the use of advanced software, all the employees are being monitored in real time for their online activities. Websites which are found to distract the employees and waste a lot of productive time are being banned based on the collection by the panopticon.
Conclusion
The notion of information panopticon has a great role to play in the moders information centric society. But this brings forth the question of integrity of those who are in power, the "observers" of the panopticon. The question "how much is too much?" must be addressed as the internet is being overpowered with services like google and facebook who are the bare essentials, information panopticons with vested, commercial interests.
Limits are already being crossed. Facebook now decides whos is my best friend and who I must interact iwth. Google knows everything about me from how I plan my travel to what kind of information content is "relevant" to me.
I conclude with an open question "who will observe the observers?"
Reference
- The virtual panopticon - David Engberg
- Surveillance 2.0 : The "information panopticon" and education - Larry Kuhen
Friday, April 8, 2011
The Information Panopticon
It was very early on that Man realised that any organized work or activity requires some sort of supervision. It is for the sake of supervision that there are hierarchies in every organization. Supervision was even built into the architecture of buildings like schools, banks, prisons and hospitals; the supervising authority had an overview or a “panopticon” of the subjects, by which they could examine the activity and status of each and every one of the subjects. This is carried on to the present in the form of the Information Panopticon, where we are constantly being supervised with the help of technology.
Michel Foucault, in his book Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison gave examples of this kind of architecture. A prison, for example, had a central tower in which a guard was housed. The tower was surrounded by the cells. Hence, the guards could easily supervise the inmates. Even in many schools, the classrooms are arranged in a circle for easy supervision. Inside the classrooms, the teacher stands on a raised platform and can monitor students. In hospitals, all the wards would be transparent so that the status of the patient could be checked on any time.
Today, supervision by architecture has been replaced by supervision by computers. As much of our work today involves some kind of computer operation like running a program, creating a document or sending an email, this supervision becomes easy. The time stamp on our work automatically tells the boss when the job was done. A striking observation of this is that the supervising entity cannot be negotiated with or pleaded with. As always, the replacement of man by machine brings in some kind of rigidity. The machine simply does what it is programmed to do; neither does it need to negotiate with the subordinates nor does it need to listen to their excuses. Thus, the information panopticon has this impact on our work lives. Let us take for example the computerisation of British banking industry in the 70’s and early 80’s.
In British banking the traditional mode of training prior to computerization was based on a master-apprentice model, according to Steve Smith (1989). Employment began at age 15 or 16, and one then rose level by level through a pyramidal hierarchy. Ultimately, with luck and aptitude, any employee could hope to become manager of a branch bank or even a general manager at corporate headquarters. Along with this career structure went an ethos of employee flexibility. Clerks had a relatively wide range of skills, allowing them to shift from task to task during the banking day. British bankers installed computers as part of a general plan to move away from the craft-apprenticeship model toward a rationalized industrial production model. Computers facilitated, for example, progressive specialization of tasks and automation of a great deal of work once done by hand. Along with this specialization went a deliberate restructuring of career paths.
Thus, we can see that the use information panopticon in our work lives can bring about radical changes not only to the structure of the work system but also to the skill set and the attitude of the individual workers. But we can safely say that this change is for the better since it leads to greater efficiency and productivity.
By Pranav R Kamat
References:
Michel Foucault, “Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)