|
DevinMcDougallFirstPaper 8 - 15 Jan 2012 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
The Distributed Generation: Technology, Politics, Law | | | -- DevinMcDougall - 27 Oct 2011 | |
<
< | As it turns out, just to
take the last point first, electrical markets show pipes and switches
elements pretty closely. Deregulating switching into the "free
market" in electricity allocation was the big theme of the 90s among
a subgroup of deregulationists. Enron then transpired. We lost the
lesson in the larger signals generated by a more catastrophic
deregulatory nightmare late last decade, but you might want to
rethink your way through it. Maybe you need to see "The Smartest
Guys in the Room" again?
On the larger scale, I think this is an interesting beginning. You spend
too much time on the initial definitions, it seems to me; they're not
self-evident, and a reader might think herself required to decide how
precise they are, in view of their apparent precision. Either way,
that process in the reader is not what you want, because the terms
don't need to be precise the way you wind up using them. This is
supposed to be practical, after all.
The fact that "energy" is not a category harms you somewhat here. If
you were discussing "electricity" there would be, as I say, more
direct relationships in network theory of various sorts between the
metaphor you've chosen and the comparand. Maybe that's actually
undesirable, and what you want is solely a metaphor rather than
liminal ground. So maybe the path forward is to begin by answering
that question, and then we'll see how the argument should be further
developed. | >
> | These are useful
revisions. I don't see a way to improve the argument within the
space available; you are necessarily hampered, at this point, by the
inability to be specific. I still think some narrowing of focus
would have facilitated that strengthening, but that's not the essay
you've written, and within the scope chosen, I don't see how you can
proceed further.
In another context, however, I would suggest again that you write out
some of the ideas that follow from this with respect to electricity.
The technical meaning of "liberalization" in this market has been the
separation of generation from distribution. If you had said a
twenty-five years ago that Con Ed was going to remain the dominant
electric utility here, but that it would altogether stop generating
power, no one would have believed you. Now, it's not even a
remarkable fact. Some rumination on that point will bring you to a
useful insight or two, I still believe. | | | |
|
|
DevinMcDougallFirstPaper 7 - 26 Nov 2011 - Main.DevinMcDougall
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
The Distributed Generation: Technology, Politics, Law | | | I. Conceptual Tools | |
<
< | This essay addresses the following question:
How can the things we have learned so far in this course be applied to have useful ideas about dealing with climate change?
One useful conceptual tool introduced at the start of course is the triad of "law, technology and politics," accompanied by the suggestion that these three elements affect each other and are affected by each other in complex ways that vary over time. Parsing the distinction between law and politics is difficult, and some doubt meaningful distinction can be sustained. For the purposes of this essay, I will treat law as a sociological structure that provides constraints and opportunities, analogous to how technological structures provide constraints and opportunities. I will treat politics as the exercise of agency acting within and reshaping these structures. Altering structures of constraints and opportunities alters who has power to do what when. We might, applying a concept from sociology, refer to the combined, emergent system of constraints and opportunities as the political opportunity structure. | >
> | This essay addresses the following question: How can the things we have learned so far in this course be applied to have useful ideas about dealing with climate change? | | | | |
<
< | A second conceptual toolset, "pipes and switches," fills in some detail on the way in which the "technology" element, as it pertains to networks for moving bits, is structured today. The internet is made of pipes, which carry bits, and switches, which decide which bits to transmit, when, and to which pipes. Telecommunication companies, finding that control over pipes cannot produce significant profits, have acted politically to obtain laws that assist them in centralizing their control over switches. | >
> | One useful conceptual tool introduced at the start of course is the triad of "law, technology and politics," accompanied by the suggestion that these three elements affect each other and are affected by each other in complex ways that vary over time. A second conceptual toolset is the network metaphor to explain the technology element. In the network metaphor, things are either "pipes" or "switches," things that carry things, or things that send things. | | | | |
>
> | Putting these toolsets together creates a model which provides a description of reality, which can be used to generate strategies for change. As a general matter, one simple prediction of this model is that if law and technology interact to produce a system in which control over the network's switches is centralized this will encourage corruption and unfreedom. This essay will now discuss the model's applicability in two issue areas, internet freedom and sustainable energy. | | | II. Applications for Advocacy | |
<
< | A. Network Freedom | >
> | A. Internet Freedom | | | | |
<
< | These conceptual tools are not just good for generating explanations, but also for generating a strategy for change. They highlight two structuring systems that powerfully affect the network, technology and law. Many people with an interest in social change, perhaps especially those with legal training, seek to cause social change through legal change. This is based on the theory that political activity (I would include impact litigation as well as grassroots mobilization in that category) can change law, which in turn can change the societal distribution of power. However, the way telecommunications laws have concentrated wealth and power in a few telecommunications companies means that a strategy based on legal change is unlikely to succeed. The relevant organs of federal government are too far captured. | >
> | These conceptual tools are not just good for generating explanations, but also for generating a strategy for change. They highlight two structuring systems that powerfully affect the internet, technology and law. Many people with an interest in social change, perhaps especially those with legal training, seek to cause social change through legal change. This is based on the theory that political activity (I would include impact litigation as well as grassroots mobilization in that category) can change law, which in turn can change the societal distribution of power. However, the way telecommunications laws have concentrated wealth and power in a few telecommunications companies means that a strategy based on legal change is unlikely to succeed. The relevant organs of federal government are too far captured. | | | However, in broad terms, one might instead focus on the triad's other structuring principle: technology. It turns out that technology might be used to route around the current legal system's roadblocks to education and its surveillance checkpoints. Thoughtfully developed technology might even, in the long term, sufficiently change the political opportunity structure to enable the realization of a better legal system. Technology might reinforce and expand desired political goods like the freedom to share. |
|
|
DevinMcDougallFirstPaper 6 - 06 Nov 2011 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
The Distributed Generation: Technology, Politics, Law | |
<
< | [ready for editing] | | | | | | That's a great point. I can't believe I didn't think of that distinction. I will incorporate it into rewrites. Thanks!
-- DevinMcDougall - 27 Oct 2011
\ No newline at end of file | |
>
> | As it turns out, just to
take the last point first, electrical markets show pipes and switches
elements pretty closely. Deregulating switching into the "free
market" in electricity allocation was the big theme of the 90s among
a subgroup of deregulationists. Enron then transpired. We lost the
lesson in the larger signals generated by a more catastrophic
deregulatory nightmare late last decade, but you might want to
rethink your way through it. Maybe you need to see "The Smartest
Guys in the Room" again?
On the larger scale, I think this is an interesting beginning. You spend
too much time on the initial definitions, it seems to me; they're not
self-evident, and a reader might think herself required to decide how
precise they are, in view of their apparent precision. Either way,
that process in the reader is not what you want, because the terms
don't need to be precise the way you wind up using them. This is
supposed to be practical, after all.
The fact that "energy" is not a category harms you somewhat here. If
you were discussing "electricity" there would be, as I say, more
direct relationships in network theory of various sorts between the
metaphor you've chosen and the comparand. Maybe that's actually
undesirable, and what you want is solely a metaphor rather than
liminal ground. So maybe the path forward is to begin by answering
that question, and then we'll see how the argument should be further
developed.
| | | \ No newline at end of file |
|
|
DevinMcDougallFirstPaper 5 - 27 Oct 2011 - Main.DevinMcDougall
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
The Distributed Generation: Technology, Politics, Law | | | I wonder how much of the analysis we've applied to informational goods also applies to energy. The biggest difference I see is that energy is not produced at zero marginal cost. Maybe there is value in moving energy over pipes. Thus analyzing the pipes and switches for energy may not be as helpful when it comes to energy.
-- AaronChan - 27 Oct 2011
\ No newline at end of file | |
>
> | That's a great point. I can't believe I didn't think of that distinction. I will incorporate it into rewrites. Thanks!
-- DevinMcDougall - 27 Oct 2011 | | | \ No newline at end of file |
|
|
DevinMcDougallFirstPaper 4 - 27 Oct 2011 - Main.AaronChan
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
The Distributed Generation: Technology, Politics, Law | | | Our class's law-tech-politics triad is applicable to goal of sustainable energy, because as with network freedom, technology and law are very important structuring principles organizing the political opportunity structure. Further, energy, as with telecommunications, is tightly regulated, which means technology and law interdigitate. However, there are some relevant differences. As with telecommunications, prospects for salutary changes in the relevant federal law are poor. However, unlike telecommunications, there is significant lawmaking power at the state level. This is the result of differences in how the relevant law and technology are structured. A network performs its bitmoving functions better the wider it can cast its net. Energy, however, can be generated and used locally and regionally, which contributed to the evolution of state-level regulation. Although some federal laws powerfully affect energy, state public utility commissions also play an important role in modulating the sustainability of the energy system. The creates a broader field of potential openings for directly affecting law through politics than is the case for network freedom.
Within the domain of technology, aspects of our class's pipes-switches concept are also applicable. One key strategy for protecting network freedoms is decentralizing: to multiply the number of switches and help them talk to each other. This entails helping users convert zombie "platforms" into working switches. Decentralization is also a helpful strategic principle for sustainable energy advocates. On a technical level, decentralization has special relevance for sustainable energy because electrons don't travel well, even with the best infrastructure. On a political level, however, decentralization benefits both network freedom and sustainable energy by dispersing malignant concentrations of economic power. Finally, on a personal level, decentralization benefits individuals psychologically by contributing to a sense of personal efficacy, which is a useful trait for individuals engaged in advocacy in any domain and for sustaining justice generally. | |
>
> |
--
I wonder how much of the analysis we've applied to informational goods also applies to energy. The biggest difference I see is that energy is not produced at zero marginal cost. Maybe there is value in moving energy over pipes. Thus analyzing the pipes and switches for energy may not be as helpful when it comes to energy.
-- AaronChan - 27 Oct 2011 | | | \ No newline at end of file |
|
|
DevinMcDougallFirstPaper 3 - 21 Oct 2011 - Main.DevinMcDougall
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
| |
<
< |
Distributed Generation: Technology, Politics, Law
-- By DevinMcDougall - 17 Oct 2011
Conceptual Tools
This essay addresses the following question: How can the things we have learned so far in this course be applied to have useful ideas about dealing with climate change?
One useful conceptual tool introduced at the start of course is the triad of law, technology and politics, accompanied by the suggestion that these three elements affect each other and are affected by each other in complex ways that vary over time. Parsing the distinction between law and politics is difficult, and some doubt meaningful distinction can be sustained. For the purposes of this essay, I will treat law as a sociological structure that provides constraints and opportunities, analogous to how technological structures provide constraints and opportunities. I will treat politics as the exercise of agency acting within and reshaping these structures.
Law in the Internet Polity?
What are the conceptual tools provided so far in LNS, and what can we build with them?
society level:
the opportunities are in distributed, decentralized collaboration.
less on centralized, washington d.c. based politics as often implicit in 60s narratives
this is due to law, tech and politics
law: federal courts, esp DC Circuit and SC less interested in progressive work
politics:
tech: we have new tools that enable new kinds of pathways to route around these issues | >
> | The Distributed Generation: Technology, Politics, Law | | | | |
<
< | Consilience: overlapping layers | >
> | [ready for editing] | | | | |
<
< | Marshal Ganz: campaign - online materials.
Applications
Subsection A
Problem: Climate change
driver: energy use
solution: sustainable energy
campaign idea:
distributed photovoltaic in NYC
why NY?
I live here.
demonstration effect: nyc is watched in many places.
law:
building codes
zoning
landmarking
politics:
NIMBY
bureaucracy
status quo inertia
PlaNYC?
tech:
1. human communication: organizing to share info, create shared identity
2. machine communication: smart grid. things talking to each other.
Subsub 1 | >
> | | | | | |
<
< | Subsection B | >
> | I. Conceptual Tools | | | | |
>
> | This essay addresses the following question: | | | | |
<
< | Subsub 1 | >
> | How can the things we have learned so far in this course be applied to have useful ideas about dealing with climate change? | | | | |
>
> | One useful conceptual tool introduced at the start of course is the triad of "law, technology and politics," accompanied by the suggestion that these three elements affect each other and are affected by each other in complex ways that vary over time. Parsing the distinction between law and politics is difficult, and some doubt meaningful distinction can be sustained. For the purposes of this essay, I will treat law as a sociological structure that provides constraints and opportunities, analogous to how technological structures provide constraints and opportunities. I will treat politics as the exercise of agency acting within and reshaping these structures. Altering structures of constraints and opportunities alters who has power to do what when. We might, applying a concept from sociology, refer to the combined, emergent system of constraints and opportunities as the political opportunity structure. | | | | |
<
< | Subsub 2 | >
> | A second conceptual toolset, "pipes and switches," fills in some detail on the way in which the "technology" element, as it pertains to networks for moving bits, is structured today. The internet is made of pipes, which carry bits, and switches, which decide which bits to transmit, when, and to which pipes. Telecommunication companies, finding that control over pipes cannot produce significant profits, have acted politically to obtain laws that assist them in centralizing their control over switches. | | | | |
>
> | II. Applications for Advocacy | | | | |
<
< | Section II | >
> | A. Network Freedom | | | | |
<
< | Subsection A | >
> | These conceptual tools are not just good for generating explanations, but also for generating a strategy for change. They highlight two structuring systems that powerfully affect the network, technology and law. Many people with an interest in social change, perhaps especially those with legal training, seek to cause social change through legal change. This is based on the theory that political activity (I would include impact litigation as well as grassroots mobilization in that category) can change law, which in turn can change the societal distribution of power. However, the way telecommunications laws have concentrated wealth and power in a few telecommunications companies means that a strategy based on legal change is unlikely to succeed. The relevant organs of federal government are too far captured. | | | | |
<
< | Subsection B | >
> | However, in broad terms, one might instead focus on the triad's other structuring principle: technology. It turns out that technology might be used to route around the current legal system's roadblocks to education and its surveillance checkpoints. Thoughtfully developed technology might even, in the long term, sufficiently change the political opportunity structure to enable the realization of a better legal system. Technology might reinforce and expand desired political goods like the freedom to share. | | | | |
>
> | B. Sustainable Energy | | | | |
<
< |
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 "#" on the next line: | >
> | Our class focuses on the freedom to move bits to people that want them without spying. However, these conceptual tools are also applicable to thinking about strategies for dealing with climate change. Greenhouse gas emissions produced by our energy system are a major driver of climate change. Changing the way our energy system works such that it produces less greenhouse gas is therefore a major strategic objective. The term "sustainable energy" is sometimes to used to refer collectively to the basket of technologies that help accomplish this goal, from renewable energy generation, to distributed generation, to energy storage, to the smart grid. | | | | |
<
< | # * Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, DevinMcDougall | >
> | Our class's law-tech-politics triad is applicable to goal of sustainable energy, because as with network freedom, technology and law are very important structuring principles organizing the political opportunity structure. Further, energy, as with telecommunications, is tightly regulated, which means technology and law interdigitate. However, there are some relevant differences. As with telecommunications, prospects for salutary changes in the relevant federal law are poor. However, unlike telecommunications, there is significant lawmaking power at the state level. This is the result of differences in how the relevant law and technology are structured. A network performs its bitmoving functions better the wider it can cast its net. Energy, however, can be generated and used locally and regionally, which contributed to the evolution of state-level regulation. Although some federal laws powerfully affect energy, state public utility commissions also play an important role in modulating the sustainability of the energy system. The creates a broader field of potential openings for directly affecting law through politics than is the case for network freedom. | | | | |
<
< | Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of that line. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated list | >
> | Within the domain of technology, aspects of our class's pipes-switches concept are also applicable. One key strategy for protecting network freedoms is decentralizing: to multiply the number of switches and help them talk to each other. This entails helping users convert zombie "platforms" into working switches. Decentralization is also a helpful strategic principle for sustainable energy advocates. On a technical level, decentralization has special relevance for sustainable energy because electrons don't travel well, even with the best infrastructure. On a political level, however, decentralization benefits both network freedom and sustainable energy by dispersing malignant concentrations of economic power. Finally, on a personal level, decentralization benefits individuals psychologically by contributing to a sense of personal efficacy, which is a useful trait for individuals engaged in advocacy in any domain and for sustaining justice generally. |
|
|
DevinMcDougallFirstPaper 2 - 19 Oct 2011 - Main.DevinMcDougall
|
| |
| 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. | | | | |
<
< | Paper Title | >
> | Distributed Generation: Technology, Politics, Law | | | -- By DevinMcDougall - 17 Oct 2011 | |
>
> | Conceptual Tools
This essay addresses the following question: How can the things we have learned so far in this course be applied to have useful ideas about dealing with climate change?
One useful conceptual tool introduced at the start of course is the triad of law, technology and politics, accompanied by the suggestion that these three elements affect each other and are affected by each other in complex ways that vary over time. Parsing the distinction between law and politics is difficult, and some doubt meaningful distinction can be sustained. For the purposes of this essay, I will treat law as a sociological structure that provides constraints and opportunities, analogous to how technological structures provide constraints and opportunities. I will treat politics as the exercise of agency acting within and reshaping these structures. | | | | |
<
< | Conceptual Tools | | | | |
<
< | Law, Technology and Politics | | | Law in the Internet Polity? | | | Marshal Ganz: campaign - online materials. | |
>
> | Applications | | | Subsection A
Problem: Climate change |
|
|
DevinMcDougallFirstPaper 1 - 17 Oct 2011 - Main.DevinMcDougall
|
|
>
> |
| 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.
Paper Title
-- By DevinMcDougall - 17 Oct 2011
Conceptual Tools
Law, Technology and Politics
Law in the Internet Polity?
What are the conceptual tools provided so far in LNS, and what can we build with them?
society level:
the opportunities are in distributed, decentralized collaboration.
less on centralized, washington d.c. based politics as often implicit in 60s narratives
this is due to law, tech and politics
law: federal courts, esp DC Circuit and SC less interested in progressive work
politics:
tech: we have new tools that enable new kinds of pathways to route around these issues
Consilience: overlapping layers
Marshal Ganz: campaign - online materials.
Subsection A
Problem: Climate change
driver: energy use
solution: sustainable energy
campaign idea:
distributed photovoltaic in NYC
why NY?
I live here.
demonstration effect: nyc is watched in many places.
law:
building codes
zoning
landmarking
politics:
NIMBY
bureaucracy
status quo inertia
PlaNYC?
tech:
1. human communication: organizing to share info, create shared identity
2. machine communication: smart grid. things talking to each other.
Subsub 1
Subsection B
Subsub 1
Subsub 2
Section II
Subsection A
Subsection B
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 "#" on the next line:
# * Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, DevinMcDougall
Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of that line. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated list |
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|