|
SkyeLeeFirstPaper 3 - 18 May 2022 - Main.SkyeLee
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
| |
<
< | Time to change from Analogue to Digital ‘Barriers of Silence’ | >
> | Silence and Noise within the Walled Cities | | | | |
<
< |
"Analog" is the word you want. That's not an alternative spelling; they're different words.
| >
> | -- By SkyeLee - 18 May 2022 | | | | |
<
< | -- By SkyeLee - 13 Mar 2022 | >
> | In 1955, Science Fiction Theatre’s “Barrier of Silence” prescient episode depicted malicious forces capturing a pilot on a flight gone wrong, placing him within a barrier that insulated him from all outside sound. Within days, he was psychologically broken into hypnotic obedience to commands from the ‘Voice’, the only sound he could hear. The real estate of the Net is increasingly divided by such ‘barriers’. More corners of the ‘World Wide’ Web are declaring digital statehood and constructing their virtual city-states. China mirrored their Great Wall with their Great Firewall; Iran and Belarus have set up their own ‘walled gardens’; and Southeast Asian countries like Thailand are also trending toward severance. | | | | |
<
< | The ‘Barrier of Silence’, a 1955 episode of Science Fiction Theatre, depicts malicious forces kidnaping the pilot on a flight gone wrong, before placing him within a ‘barrier of sound’. The barrier insulated him from all outside sources of sound and absorbed all noises he created within. Within days, the silence broke the pilot psychologically into hypnotic obedience to the only source of sound he could hear - commands made through a set of headphones. The devoted obedience that the silence induced was so strong, that the Voice could compel the pilot not only to give up the confidential details of his experiment, but even to forget the entire kidnapping. | >
> | The Barrier of Silence: The Foundation of it all
Each city-state’s techno-political structure is complex and unique, but fundamentally they are set up as concentric circles of protection with the opportunity to deter, detect and delay at each boundary. Almost always, they begin with a ‘barrier of silence’. Physical and technological barriers which censor the outside world, serving as the foundations of the digital state by sustaining the isolation of a part of the internet which makes construction of further internal structures of control possible. | | | | |
<
< | Although anechoic chambers can cause individuals deep discomfort within a short period, there is little basis for claims that commands made under conditions of absolute silence engender irresistible compulsion. The science behind the show’s fantasy of the hypnotic power of ‘absolute silence’ is dubious at best, but metaphorically applied to the technological sphere, reveals important technological and psychological ramifications of the ‘Splinternet’. This is a characterisation of the Internet splintering along technological, political and commercial lines. Politically speaking, the effectiveness of a ‘barrier of sound’ is much more than mere fantasy. | >
> | Russia’s present changes exemplifies a barrier of silence’s evolution. Amidst the atrocities accompanying Putin’s invasion, the barrier of sound quells whatever mostly disparate and individually undertaken protests are left, insulating the majority from having to contend with their conscience. Since the 2019 ‘Sovereign Internet’ law, regulations have been passed to restrict control over the technical space. The testing of Russia’s ‘RuNet’ demonstrates unambiguously Russia’s desire for a ‘splinternet’. With the recent conflict, foreign media platforms and internet service providers are either censored (Twitter), blocked (Meta), or have willingly withdrawn (Cogent), as Russia’s digital barrier closes around the nation. | | | | |
<
< | From ‘Analogue’ to ‘Digital’ Barriers
Barriers have become synonymous with imbued control throughout history, although the specific nature of the barrier varies and changes depending on other factors - significantly the evolution of communication methods. Physical barriers like the Berlin wall were carefully controlled by localisation of personnel scrutinising letters, packages, and radio waves. As the medium for ‘sound’ and communication transitioned online, so followed the barriers, marking a shift from the ‘analogue’ to ‘digital’. | >
> | Admittedly, accompanying Russia’s digital barrier was a flurry of VPN downloads. The BBC and Twitter have also started running Tor onion services for accessing unfiltered or unblocked content in Russia. This immediate subversion of Russia’s barrier reflects that ‘barriers of sound’ in real life are rarely absolute denials of access. Like the barrier in Science Fiction Theatre, real-life barriers of silence operate just as much psychologically as they do technologically. The actual denial of access is only one part of the barrier. For instance, China’s ‘panopticon’ of surveillance and access to VPN backdoors means all communication is not only subject to the Great Firewall but each individual’s own restraint and filtering. ‘Self-censorship’ essentially equals,‘subvert at your own risk’. | | | | |
<
< | The modern barriers look more like the Great Firewall of China, dedicated to the preservation of the ruling party’s narrative by filtering all streams of ‘sound’ from the World Wide Web. Other countries like Iran and Belarus have also set up their own ‘walled gardens’, and to some extent other Southeast Asian countries like Thailand have shown inclinations in that direction. | >
> | The Wall of Sound: Seizing the Narrative
The controlling authority capitalises on the silent space created by the barrier to build its wall of sound, establishing hegemony over what Bernays termed ‘public relations’. When each man’s mind is exposed to the same stimuli, they all receive ‘identical imprints’. ‘External sound’ or the World Wide Web is a threat to the creation of identical, obedient imprints on a populace, but the barrier ousts the multiple voices of the internet and allows concentration on the ‘Voice’ - the narrative of authority. The wall of sound builds on the success of the barrier, forming the second layer of our digital cityscape. | | | | |
<
< | Barriers to freedom in Russia’s adaptive authoritarianism?
The present changes in Russia is one demonstration of how a barrier of silence evolves. Amidst the atrocities accompanying Putin’s invasion, the barrier of sound quells whatever mostly disparate and individually undertaken protests are left, and insulates the majority from having to contend with their conscience. Queues of ordinary Russians signifying public endorsement of the war efforts and polling data showing a multi-year peak in Russian popular support, are clear indications that many have lived under the government-dictated narrative long before Facebook and Twitter were ousted on March 4. | >
> | Russia again provides a clear example. The wall of sound speaks of no ‘war’ or ‘conflict’, making the semantic choice to announce ‘special military operations’. Reports of Russian casualties and military frustrations are equally absent, as the wall and the barrier become accomplices in crafting a narrative of success. Disseminating disinformation has brewed a digital war to undermine Western democracy, sow confusion and retain public support. A uniform imprint is slowly but surely taking hold, evidenced by polling data showing a multi-year peak in Russian popular support. The news sources that have successfully snuck through the barrier have had limited success, the climate of war censorship stunting the growth of civic consciousness. | | | | |
<
< | Though Russia has been shifting from analogue to digital forms of control, it is still incomplete. Beginning with the 2019 ‘Sovereign Internet’ law, regulations have been passed to restrict control over the technical space. The testing of Russia’s ‘RuNet’ experimented with an internet operating independently from the rest of the world, insulated behind their digital Iron Curtain. As foreign media platforms and internet service providers are either censored (Twitter), blocked (Meta), or willingly withdrawn (Cogent), the separation is ripe for Russia to complete its construction of a digital barrier of silence and build its own 'Splinternet'.
Both Technological and Psychological Impacts
Accompanying Russia’s digital barrier was a flurry of VPN downloads - the top ten VPN apps on Apple and Google’s stores in Russia had six million downloads in the thirteen-day period after the invasion started. Social and news media sites like the BBC and Twitter have also started running Tor onion services for accessing unfiltered or unblocked content in Russia. This immediate subversion of Russia’s barrier partly reflects that Russia’s digital barrier is still maturing, but also that ‘barriers of sound’ in real life are rarely absolute denials of access. Crucially though, much like the barrier in Science Fiction Theatre, real-life barriers of sound operate just as much psychologically as they do technologically. The actual denial of access is only one part of the barrier. For instance, China’s ‘panopticon’ of surveillance and access to VPN backdoors means all communication is not only subject to the Great Firewall but each individual’s own restraint and filtering. Essentially, ‘subvert at your own risk’.
Barriers to freedom in American liberalism?
This evokes consideration of how much access needs to be actually restricted, to create a barrier of silence. The recent release of Trump’s ‘Truth’ social app, though purporting to be a platform for all views, seeks to carve out an internet enclave for users who adhere to a particular political or ideological viewpoint. It might further be suggested that the app is calculated to profit from the same psychological self-denial of diverse ‘sounds’. The application’s name - ‘Truth’ implicitly but unambiguously signals that its competitor media platforms peddle something other than the truth. This well-worn tactic of accusing news and media outside of the Trump mainstream as ‘fake news’ relies on the same logic as barriers (‘venture outside at your own risk’) and achieves the same effect of insulating all non-mainstream sounds within the Net.
Realistically, this non-coercive form of ‘barrier’ is unlikely to have the same effect. In free societies where infringements of the rule of law are exceptions rather than the norm, individuals who really live in politically partisan online news echo chambers are rare. Studies that demonstrate a strong indication of echo chambers or ‘filter bubbling’ often focus on one media platform, when most people get their news from a variety of sources. Even those who rely only on one source also typically rely on sources with relatively diverse audiences (commercial broadcasters for instance). Though a small minority may self-admit into echo chambers, it is a small percentage (around 5% average worldwide, slightly larger in the US). All in all, it is unlikely that this non-coercive form of the barrier of silence will become as popular as its authoritarian relative. Silencing sanctions (such as the law on knowing dissemination of false information about Russia’s armed forces that was passed just several days ago) will continue to play an indispensable role in maintaining Russia’s technological barrier of silence should she choose to continue its development.
This is a fascinating idea off to a good start.
Walls of defense are usually built as concentric circles, to delay and contain threats. Here the outermost layer filters the world outside, both literally and figuratively opening and closing ports. You call this a wall of silence. Inside that layer, however, is a wall of noise, all the effort by the State and other powers to shape reality by controlling what Sigmund Freud's nephew Edward L. Bernays first called "public relations." Inside that layer is a zone of distraction we call "civil society," increasingly organized for behavior collection by the Parasite with the Mind of God, the interfused tissues of previously-existing human social life and the software and hardware tissues of the parasite now mingling everywhere.
I think the way to make this essay even better, therefore, is to shorten the introduction's overlong retelling of someone else's art so that you can concentrate ;on further developing your own: to go from drawing one wall to describing the architecture of the imaginary city that, as Elias Canetti said, we all inhabit.
| >
> | The ‘Zone of Distraction’: Tranquilize and Conquer
Finally, within the wall of sound is the digitization of our ‘civil society’ or the ‘Zone of Distraction’. The internet has attached parasitically to us, and its influences inseparably onto our personal and social lives. This relationship feels symbiotic - the internet allows us to do many things apparently in exchange for very little, but it is an apparent ‘convenience’ that is fundamentally parasitic. The ‘services’ that the internet provides only disservices users by entrenching us in processes of behaviour collection and control. | | | | |
>
> | The ever-growing Parasite contributes to the architecture of control in two ways. First, the data it collects upgrades the walls of sound. The ‘Voice’ learns to become subversive and refined. The Obama administration followed an explicit policy to use behavioural science to ‘better serve the people’. The UK’s Behavioural Insights Team influences even the specific wording of government notices. Behaviour can now be ‘nudged’ instead of coerced. Secondly, it distracts. Its powers of distraction can stifle threats and pacify masses. China’s ‘Fifty Cent Party’ for instance is notorious for flooding social media and suffocating discussion with distraction posts following any subversive events. More importantly, perhaps, the Zone of Distraction distracts from itself. The Parasite is increasingly capable of redirecting our attention to issues and topics that divert from its parasitic leeches. It feeds our preoccupation with materialistic desires, algorithms are able to recognise higher engagement with like-minded people and push our interactions into echo chambers. The distractions monopolise our attention and render invisible the entire architecture of control. In this way, the zone of distraction completes digital sovereignty, allowing the human race to bury its head in the sand of blissful ignorance. | | | | |
>
> | Recognising the concentric structure of these digital cities is perhaps more important now than ever, as existing digital sovereigns expand their borders. Hong Kong, after its recent years of turmoil, looks ripe to be folded into China’s barrier of silence as the Government currently edges toward a ban on Telegram - the preferred social media application for Hong Kong’s anti-establishment movement. Recognising the movement of these constructs of control is the first step to resisting the splintering of the internet. | | |
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. |
|
|
SkyeLeeFirstPaper 2 - 11 Apr 2022 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
| |
<
< | It is strongly recommended that you include your outline in the body of your essay by using the outline as section titles. The headings below are there to remind you how section and subsection titles are formatted. | | | Time to change from Analogue to Digital ‘Barriers of Silence’ | |
>
> |
"Analog" is the word you want. That's not an alternative spelling; they're different words.
| | | -- By SkyeLee - 13 Mar 2022
The ‘Barrier of Silence’, a 1955 episode of Science Fiction Theatre, depicts malicious forces kidnaping the pilot on a flight gone wrong, before placing him within a ‘barrier of sound’. The barrier insulated him from all outside sources of sound and absorbed all noises he created within. Within days, the silence broke the pilot psychologically into hypnotic obedience to the only source of sound he could hear - commands made through a set of headphones. The devoted obedience that the silence induced was so strong, that the Voice could compel the pilot not only to give up the confidential details of his experiment, but even to forget the entire kidnapping. | | | Realistically, this non-coercive form of ‘barrier’ is unlikely to have the same effect. In free societies where infringements of the rule of law are exceptions rather than the norm, individuals who really live in politically partisan online news echo chambers are rare. Studies that demonstrate a strong indication of echo chambers or ‘filter bubbling’ often focus on one media platform, when most people get their news from a variety of sources. Even those who rely only on one source also typically rely on sources with relatively diverse audiences (commercial broadcasters for instance). Though a small minority may self-admit into echo chambers, it is a small percentage (around 5% average worldwide, slightly larger in the US). All in all, it is unlikely that this non-coercive form of the barrier of silence will become as popular as its authoritarian relative. Silencing sanctions (such as the law on knowing dissemination of false information about Russia’s armed forces that was passed just several days ago) will continue to play an indispensable role in maintaining Russia’s technological barrier of silence should she choose to continue its development. | |
>
> |
This is a fascinating idea off to a good start.
Walls of defense are usually built as concentric circles, to delay and contain threats. Here the outermost layer filters the world outside, both literally and figuratively opening and closing ports. You call this a wall of silence. Inside that layer, however, is a wall of noise, all the effort by the State and other powers to shape reality by controlling what Sigmund Freud's nephew Edward L. Bernays first called "public relations." Inside that layer is a zone of distraction we call "civil society," increasingly organized for behavior collection by the Parasite with the Mind of God, the interfused tissues of previously-existing human social life and the software and hardware tissues of the parasite now mingling everywhere.
I think the way to make this essay even better, therefore, is to shorten the introduction's overlong retelling of someone else's art so that you can concentrate ;on further developing your own: to go from drawing one wall to describing the architecture of the imaginary city that, as Elias Canetti said, we all inhabit.
| | |
|
|
|
SkyeLeeFirstPaper 1 - 13 Mar 2022 - Main.SkyeLee
|
|
>
> |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
It is strongly recommended that you include your outline in the body of your essay by using the outline as section titles. The headings below are there to remind you how section and subsection titles are formatted.
Time to change from Analogue to Digital ‘Barriers of Silence’
-- By SkyeLee - 13 Mar 2022
The ‘Barrier of Silence’, a 1955 episode of Science Fiction Theatre, depicts malicious forces kidnaping the pilot on a flight gone wrong, before placing him within a ‘barrier of sound’. The barrier insulated him from all outside sources of sound and absorbed all noises he created within. Within days, the silence broke the pilot psychologically into hypnotic obedience to the only source of sound he could hear - commands made through a set of headphones. The devoted obedience that the silence induced was so strong, that the Voice could compel the pilot not only to give up the confidential details of his experiment, but even to forget the entire kidnapping.
Although anechoic chambers can cause individuals deep discomfort within a short period, there is little basis for claims that commands made under conditions of absolute silence engender irresistible compulsion. The science behind the show’s fantasy of the hypnotic power of ‘absolute silence’ is dubious at best, but metaphorically applied to the technological sphere, reveals important technological and psychological ramifications of the ‘Splinternet’. This is a characterisation of the Internet splintering along technological, political and commercial lines. Politically speaking, the effectiveness of a ‘barrier of sound’ is much more than mere fantasy.
From ‘Analogue’ to ‘Digital’ Barriers
Barriers have become synonymous with imbued control throughout history, although the specific nature of the barrier varies and changes depending on other factors - significantly the evolution of communication methods. Physical barriers like the Berlin wall were carefully controlled by localisation of personnel scrutinising letters, packages, and radio waves. As the medium for ‘sound’ and communication transitioned online, so followed the barriers, marking a shift from the ‘analogue’ to ‘digital’.
The modern barriers look more like the Great Firewall of China, dedicated to the preservation of the ruling party’s narrative by filtering all streams of ‘sound’ from the World Wide Web. Other countries like Iran and Belarus have also set up their own ‘walled gardens’, and to some extent other Southeast Asian countries like Thailand have shown inclinations in that direction.
Barriers to freedom in Russia’s adaptive authoritarianism?
The present changes in Russia is one demonstration of how a barrier of silence evolves. Amidst the atrocities accompanying Putin’s invasion, the barrier of sound quells whatever mostly disparate and individually undertaken protests are left, and insulates the majority from having to contend with their conscience. Queues of ordinary Russians signifying public endorsement of the war efforts and polling data showing a multi-year peak in Russian popular support, are clear indications that many have lived under the government-dictated narrative long before Facebook and Twitter were ousted on March 4.
Though Russia has been shifting from analogue to digital forms of control, it is still incomplete. Beginning with the 2019 ‘Sovereign Internet’ law, regulations have been passed to restrict control over the technical space. The testing of Russia’s ‘RuNet’ experimented with an internet operating independently from the rest of the world, insulated behind their digital Iron Curtain. As foreign media platforms and internet service providers are either censored (Twitter), blocked (Meta), or willingly withdrawn (Cogent), the separation is ripe for Russia to complete its construction of a digital barrier of silence and build its own 'Splinternet'.
Both Technological and Psychological Impacts
Accompanying Russia’s digital barrier was a flurry of VPN downloads - the top ten VPN apps on Apple and Google’s stores in Russia had six million downloads in the thirteen-day period after the invasion started. Social and news media sites like the BBC and Twitter have also started running Tor onion services for accessing unfiltered or unblocked content in Russia. This immediate subversion of Russia’s barrier partly reflects that Russia’s digital barrier is still maturing, but also that ‘barriers of sound’ in real life are rarely absolute denials of access. Crucially though, much like the barrier in Science Fiction Theatre, real-life barriers of sound operate just as much psychologically as they do technologically. The actual denial of access is only one part of the barrier. For instance, China’s ‘panopticon’ of surveillance and access to VPN backdoors means all communication is not only subject to the Great Firewall but each individual’s own restraint and filtering. Essentially, ‘subvert at your own risk’.
Barriers to freedom in American liberalism?
This evokes consideration of how much access needs to be actually restricted, to create a barrier of silence. The recent release of Trump’s ‘Truth’ social app, though purporting to be a platform for all views, seeks to carve out an internet enclave for users who adhere to a particular political or ideological viewpoint. It might further be suggested that the app is calculated to profit from the same psychological self-denial of diverse ‘sounds’. The application’s name - ‘Truth’ implicitly but unambiguously signals that its competitor media platforms peddle something other than the truth. This well-worn tactic of accusing news and media outside of the Trump mainstream as ‘fake news’ relies on the same logic as barriers (‘venture outside at your own risk’) and achieves the same effect of insulating all non-mainstream sounds within the Net.
Realistically, this non-coercive form of ‘barrier’ is unlikely to have the same effect. In free societies where infringements of the rule of law are exceptions rather than the norm, individuals who really live in politically partisan online news echo chambers are rare. Studies that demonstrate a strong indication of echo chambers or ‘filter bubbling’ often focus on one media platform, when most people get their news from a variety of sources. Even those who rely only on one source also typically rely on sources with relatively diverse audiences (commercial broadcasters for instance). Though a small minority may self-admit into echo chambers, it is a small percentage (around 5% average worldwide, slightly larger in the US). All in all, it is unlikely that this non-coercive form of the barrier of silence will become as popular as its authoritarian relative. Silencing sanctions (such as the law on knowing dissemination of false information about Russia’s armed forces that was passed just several days ago) will continue to play an indispensable role in maintaining Russia’s technological barrier of silence should she choose to continue its development.
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable.
To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:
Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules for preference declarations. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of these lines. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated ALLOWTOPICVIEW list. |
|
| Revision 3 | r3 - 18 May 2022 - 14:24:22 - SkyeLee |
| Revision 2 | r2 - 11 Apr 2022 - 22:42:26 - EbenMoglen |
| Revision 1 | r1 - 13 Mar 2022 - 23:04:23 - SkyeLee |
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|