To give you some idea of the context in which it was written, unless you are over 70, it was more than half your life ago when in November 1989 Tim Berners-Lee's browser first accessed a page from his Web server. It was only about the same time that the first commercial, as opposed to research, Internet Service Providers started with the ARPANET being decommissioned the next year. Two years later, in December of 1991, the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center put up the first US Web page. In 1992 Tim Berners-Lee codified and extended the HTTP protocol he had earlier implemented. It would be another two years before Netscape became the first browser to support HTTPS. It would be two years after that before the ITEF approved HTTP/1.0 in RFC 1945. As you can see, Lynch was writing among the birth-pangs of the Web.
Although Lynch was insufficiently pessimistic, he got a lot of things exactly right. Below the fold I provide four out of many examples.
Page numbers refer to the PDF, not to the original. Block quotes without a link are from the report.
Disinformation
Page 66 |
The ultimate result a few years hence — and it may not be a bad or inappropriate response, given the reality of the situation — may be a perception of the Internet and much of the information accessible through it as the "net of a million lies", following science fiction author Vernor Vinge's vision of an interstellar information network characterized by the continual release of information (which may or may not be true, and where the reader often has no means of telling whether the information is accurate) by a variety of organizations for obscure and sometimes evil reasons.The Vernor Vinge reference is to A Fire Upon the Deep:
In the novel, the Net is depicted as working much like the Usenet network in the early 1990s, with transcripts of messages containing header and footer information as one would find in such forums.The downsides of a social medium to which anyone can post without moderation were familiar to anyone who was online in the days of the Usenet:
Usenet is culturally and historically significant in the networked world, having given rise to, or popularized, many widely recognized concepts and terms such as "FAQ", "flame", sockpuppet, and "spam".Earlier in the report Lynch had written (Page 23):
...
Likewise, many conflicts which later spread to the rest of the Internet, such as the ongoing difficulties over spamming, began on Usenet.:
"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea. Massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it."
— Gene Spafford, 1992
Access to electronic information is of questionable value if the integrity of that information is seriously compromised; indeed, access to inaccurate information, or even deliberate misinformation, may be worse than no access at all, particularly for the naive user who is not inclined to question the information that the new electronic infrastructure is offering.This resonates as the wildfires rage in Los Angeles.
Information Doesn't Want To Be Free
Although Tim Berners-Lee's initial HTTP specification included the status code 402 Payment Required:The parameter to this message gives a specification of charging schemes acceptable. The client may retry the request with a suitable ChargeTo header.the Web in 1993 lacked paywalls. But Lynch could see them coming (Page 22):
There is a tendency to incorrectly equate access to the network with access to information; part of this is a legacy from the early focus on communications infrastructure rather than network content. Another part is the fact that traditionally the vast bulk of information on the Internet has been publicly accessible if one could simply obtain access to the Internet itself, figure out how to use it, and figure out where to locate the information you wanted. As proprietary information becomes accessible on the Internet on a large scale, this will change drastically. In my view, access to the network will become commonplace over the next decade or so, much as access to the public switched telephone network is relatively ubiquitous today. But in the new "information age" information will not necessarily be readily accessible or affordable;The current RFC 9110 states:
The 402 (Payment Required) status code is reserved for future use.Instead today's Web is infested with paywalls, each with their own idiosyncratic user interface, infrastructure, and risks.
The Death Of "First Sale"
Lynch understood the highly consequential nature of the change in the business model of paid information access from purchasing a copy to renting access to the publisher's copy; from a legal framework of copyright and the "first sale" doctrine, to one of copyright and contract law (Page 30):Now, consider a library acquiring information in an electronic format. Such information is almost never, today, sold to a library (under the doctrine of first sale); rather, it is licensed to the library that acquires it, with the terms under which the acquiring library can utilize the information defined by a contract typically far more restrictive than copyright law. The licensing contract typically includes statements that define the user community permitted to utilize the electronic information as well as terms that define the specific uses that this user community may make of the licensed electronic information. These terms typically do not reflect any consideration of public policy decisions such as fair use, and in fact the licensing organization may well be liable for what its patrons do with the licensed information.The power imbalance between publishers and their customers is of long standing, and it especially affects the academic literature. In 1989 the Association of Research Libraries published Report of the ARL Serials Prices Project:
The ARL Serials Initiative forms part of a special campaign mounted by librarians in the 1980s against the high cost of serials subscriptions. This is not the first time that libraries have suffered from high serial prices. For example, in 1927 the Association of American Universities reported that:The oligopoly rents extracted by academic publishers have been a problem for close on a century, if not longer! Lynch's analysis of the effects of the Web's amplification of this power imbalance is wide-ranging, including (Page 31):
"Librarians are suffering because of the increasing volume of publications and rapidly rising prices. Of special concern is the much larger number of periodicals that are available and that members of the faculty consider essential to the successful conduct of their work. Many instances were found in which science departments were obligated to use all of their allotment for library purposes to purchase their periodical literature which was regarded as necessary for the work of the department"
Very few contracts with publishers today are perpetual licenses; rather, they are licenses for a fixed period of time, with terms subject to renegotiation when that time period expires. Libraries typically have no controls on price increase when the license is renewed; thus, rather than considering a traditional collection development decision about whether to renew a given subscription in light of recent price increases, they face the decision as to whether to lose all existing material that is part of the subscription as well as future material if they choose not to commit funds to cover the publisher's price increase at renewal time.Thus destroying libraries' traditional role as stewards of information for future readers. And (Page 30):
Of equal importance, the contracts typically do not recognize activities such as interlibrary loan, and prohibit the library licensing the information from making it available outside of that library's immediate user community. This destroys the current cost-sharing structure that has been put in place among libraries through the existing interlibrary loan system, and makes each library (or, perhaps, the patrons of that library) responsible for the acquisitions cost of any material that is to be supplied to those patrons in electronic form. The implications of this shift from copyright law and the doctrine of first sale to contract law (and very restrictive contract terms) is potentially devastating to the library community and to the ability of library patrons to obtain access to electronic information — in particular, it dissolves the historical linkage by which public libraries can provide access to information that is primarily held by research libraries to individuals desiring access to this information. There is also a great irony in the move to licensing in the context of computer communications networks — while these networks promise to largely eliminate the accidents of geography as an organizing principle for inter-institutional cooperation and to usher in a new era of cooperation among geographically dispersed organizations, the shift to licensing essentially means that each library contracting with a publisher or other information provider becomes as isolated, insular organization that cannot share its resources with any other organization on the network.
Surveillance Capitalism
Lynch also foresaw the start of "surveillance capitalism" (Page 60):we are now seeing considerable use of multi-source data fusion: the matching and aggregation of credit, consumer, employment, medical and other data about individuals. I expect that we will recapitulate the development of these secondary markets in customer behavior histories for information seeking in the 1990s; we will also see information-seeking consumer histories integrated with a wide range of other sources of data on individual behavior.He described search-based advertising (Page 61)
The ability to accurately, cheaply and easily count the amount of use that an electronic information resource receives (file accesses, database queries, viewings of a document, etc.) coupled with the ability to frequently alter prices in a computer-based marketplace (particularly in acquire on demand systems that operate on small units of information such as journal articles or database records, but even, to a lesser extent, by renegotiating license agreements annually) may give rise to a number of radical changes. These potentials are threatening for all involved.
The ability to collect not only information on what is being sought out or used but also who is doing the seeking or using is potentially very valuable information that could readily be resold, since it can be used both for market analysis (who is buying what) and also for directed marketing (people who fit a certain interest profile, as defined by their information access decisions, would likely also be interested in new product X or special offer Y). While such usage (without the informed consent of the recipient of the advertising) may well offend strong advocates of privacy, in many cases the consumers are actually quite grateful to hear of new products that closely match their interests. And libraries and similar institutions, strapped for revenue, may have to recognize that usage data can be a valuable potential revenue source, no matter how unattractive they find collecting, repackaging and reselling this information.Of course, it wasn't the libraries but Google, spawned from the Stanford Digital Library Project, which ended up collecting the information and monetizing it. And the power imbalance between publishers and readers meant that the reality of tracking was hidden (Page 63):
when one is accessing (anonymously or otherwise) a public-access information service, it is unclear what to expect, and in fact at present there is no way to even learn what the policy of the information service provider is.
No comments:
Post a Comment