<
Wavepacket Blog
only displaying 'economics' posts
>
    << Newer entries <<
2011
    February
         Tue Feb 8 22:51:24 2011
Free Internet
    January
         Thu Jan 27 22:35:37 2011
Upheavals in the Middle East
         Mon Jan 3 20:27:34 2011
Charitable Giving
    >> Older entries >>
    >> links >>
Tue Feb 8 22:51:24 2011
 
Free Internet
 More thoughts on free Internet...


Internet (and communications) to the people!
Image courtesy of Philip Halling
 
In my previous post ( Upheavals in the Middle East) I mentioned my crazy idea for giving free Internet connections (and smart phones) to people in repressive regimes. The idea is that by having the the ability to communicate with each other and the outside world, people in those countries would be able to avoid one of the chief tools of repression: limited access to information.  
 
Also, within repressive regimes, access to communications and outside information can itself be an agent for change and improvement--and even revolution. Witness how Tunisia and Egypt both attempted to crack down on the Internet during the recent protests, with Egypt going to particular extremes.  
 
In fact, Egypt cut off Internet access just as I was posting my blog entry about using the Internet as an asymmetric attack against repressive regimes! Talk about coincidences.  
 
Yesterday Slashdot had a link to a story about how the US has secret tools to force Internet on dictatorships (which references a Wired story as the primary source), which I thought was awesome timing given my blog post! Obviously both Wired and Slashdot read my blog a lot.  
 
However, the story isn't quite what I was thinking. The Wired story talks about how the US Gov't could take out foreign computer networks (hardly news) or even restore some Internet service to localized areas via flying networks or satellite dish drops.  
 


North Korea guards--here's looking at you!
Image courtesy of Edward N. Johnson
 
All in all, I found it pretty underwhelming, and small-scale. Plus, as the article noted, flying our own aircraft in someone else's airspace could be construed as an act of war, even if we were just flying Internet relay stations.  
 
No, it's way better to go the full deal. Set up satellite-based internet, using satellite-enabled smart phones or routers. Then people could get access to the Internet, and communicate with each other, without us having to invade peoples' air space. In fact, we could just provide satellite-based Internet hubs, and people could use their own smart phones. That would be more flexible and cheaper.  
 
[Providing a satellite network does raise the problem of antisatellite weapons, but having satellites isn't by itself an act of war.]  
 
Would providing a satellite-based Internet for North Korea, China, or Myanmar be expensive? Sure, maybe billions of dollars a year. But a war costs billions of dollars a week. So providing free satellite-based Internet to repressive regimes could be even more effective, at a fraction of the price, not even counting the lives saved.  

Comments

Related:
  > economics <
  geopolitics


Unrelated:
  books
  energy
  environment
  lists
  mathematics
  predictions
  science

 

Thu Jan 27 22:35:37 2011
 
Upheavals in the Middle East
 How will this all work out?


Sidi Bou Said in quieter days...
Image courtesy of Gabriel Vidal (wiki)
 
One of my favorite trips ever was a 2001 trip to Tunisia, almost ten years ago exactly. At the time, it struck me as almost the perfect country: a perfect climate, beautiful seashores, a range of terrain including mountains and deserts, great people, great food, and fun driving.  
 
And there were amazing Roman ruins scattered throughout the country.  
 
Most of all, I was impressed by the people. I was a westerner travelling alone in a predominantly Muslim country (this was pre-9/11), but I really never felt uncomfortable, especially once I was out of the grittier parts of Tunis. The countryside was beautiful, and the people were generous and friendly. It reminded me more than any other trip how alike people really are, no matter the country.  
 
Now, of course, Tunisia is in the news due to the recent riots and general unrest that caused the downfall of the regime and the flight of their President.  
 
Even in 2001, I noticed that Ben Ali wasn't much liked:  
 
     There are pictures of Ben Ali (the current president) everywhere, I assume it's some kind of law. The expression on his face is difficult to pin down. I think he was aiming for a look that said "I have the vision to lead you" but to my eyes it looks like he's saying "I can get the chicks." The rulers of countries have a range of pick-up lines that aren't available to mere mortals. But in any case, most Tunisians don't have a god-like respect for their political leadership. Cynicism is probably a better word.
 
And I also noticed the unemployment and dissatisfaction, which a fellow traveler Smith and I commented on:  
 
     ...Tunisia's unemployment rate is very high by any standard, and so there are a lot of young Tunisians loitering on the streets.
     "They have no jobs, so all they do is sit in the cafes and drink and smoke," Smith observed as we walked through the suburbs of Tunisia...
     "Sitting and smoking is better than rebelling," I replied. Smith laughed and nodded.
 
Well, it looks like people stopped drinking and smoking. And now the Tunisian disturbance has spread to Egypt and Yemen at least. How far will this go, and where will it end?  
 


Happier times in 2001...
Image courtesy of tomva (wavepacket)
 
Hopefully this will end up with all of the repressive governments of the Middle East being replaced by more representative governments that respect individual rights and freedom of expression.  
 
But I don't think it will.  
 
Instead, I think only a few countries--the poorest ones--will see revolts. Egypt, Yemen, and Tunisia are obvious candidates. Countries with a lot of oil--and oil money--likely won't see these sorts of uprisings, since they have more content citizens, and larger security forces. So the richer repressive governments will be fine.  
 
Even in the countries that do revolt, will democracy take root? Will we see a flourishing of individual rights and freedoms in the Middle East?  
 
Again, I hope so, but I wouldn't bet on it.  
 
The main reason I don't think so is that these riots are creating power vacuums. There is no credible democratic opposition in Tunisia, Yemen, or Egypt. Instead, various fringe power groups will try to take control. Even worse, Western countries have a poor image in these countries, and many of the hated regimes had at various points attempted to Westernize. So a shift to supposedly "western" values such as individual rights or democracy could easily be twisted by demagogues to appear as non-patriotic!  
 
This problem of a power vacuum was first really studied during the French Revolution.  
 
In fact, the French Revolution was studied and used as a template for action by the Bolsheviks when they seized power after the Russian Revolution of 1917.  
 
The result of the French Revolution? The Reign of Terror, culminating in Bonaparte's dictatorship. It took many years--a generation--before the Republic gained its footing.  
 
The result of the Russian Revolution? The Red Terror and Communism, which didn't really fall until 1990.  
 
In fact, there are very few examples of revolutions leading to democracies that champion individual rights, and they all seemed to involve politically powerful or influential pro-democatric factions involved from the start. So I am not optimistic about prospects for democracy and individual freedoms in the Middle East in the near term.  
 
There is one chief learning through all of this that I hope pro-democracy countries take note of. That is the role of the Internet in the upheavals. It was the ability of people to communicate events and plan across entire countries at once that made the uprisings so effective and total.  
 
I've had this crazy idea for a while, so I'll mention it now: pro-democracy countries should fund smartphone networks that cover repressive autocracies. We (the world's pro-freedom countries) should build out the networks, and provide hardware, for citizens of countries who are denied freedom of speech. We could even give away the smartphones to citizens for free, through airdrops or other delivery methods.  
 
We'd want to ensure that the majority of the smart phones reached real citizens, and not the regime. And our control of the network would mean that citizens could communicate with each other and the rest of the world without the regime intercepting, blocking, or listening to the messages.  
 
This would cost billions, but would be far cheaper than troops on the ground, and maybe more effective.  
 
It is also a beautiful asymmetric attack. If a repressive regime retaliated by building a free smart phone network for us, I think we would welcome it.  
 
Tell your congressman about this idea. We should give away smart phones and operate networks that cover the world's repressive regimes!  
 
But in the meantime, pray for the people of the countries that are rioting, and hope they get better governments than what they have now. I think the best action we as outsiders can take is to ensure that all of those involved are able to communicate with each other and the outside world.

Comments

Related:
  > economics <
  geopolitics
  predictions


Unrelated:
  books
  energy
  environment
  lists
  mathematics
  science

 

Mon Jan 3 20:27:34 2011
 
Charitable Giving
 2010 Summary and 2011 Plans


Giving green...
Image courtesy of Tom Harpel (wiki)
 
Last year I re-vamped My Charitable Giving, and in 2010 I intended to stick to the plan I came up with then.  
 
However, I was somewhat worried about my finances earlier in the year, so I stopped giving for a while. Not great, but that's kind of the idea: you give to charity when you can, and don't when you can't. I think that's better than becoming a charity case myself!  
 
But by November of 2010 it was pretty clear that I'd be fine, so I caught up with all of my charitable giving in one night. The Internet makes giving very easy! Although there was one problem: The United Way of Whatcom County had a broken giving link for a while, and I missed my 2010 donation window. So I'll catch up to them in 2011.  
 
As I do every year, I bumped up the contribution amount over the previous year.  
 
This was the breakdown by charity categories: Normally I give more to Charitable Causes, but like I said, the United Way of Whatcom County didn't accept website donations for a while so I missed them.  
 
All of those are worthwhile causes, but these are my three favorite charities (in alphabetical order):
  • Reporters Without Borders: they focus on press and journalist freedoms around the world. They publish a yearly Press Freedoms Index, which is widely covered and shames both dictatorships and supposed free democracies. Did you know that blasphemy is still subject to a 25,000 EUR fine in Ireland?
  • Wikipedia: I don't give as much to wikipedia as other causes, but certainly this is an Internet phenomenon that needs to be supported for a while. I don't know how it will pay for itself long term (community hosting? ads?) but it remains a top destination on the Internet, which is pretty amazing for a free, community-driven site.
  • Yellowstone to Yukon: they have a very cool vision for assembling large contiguous regions of parks and corridors so that megafauna (bears, elk, etc.) can continue to roam across reasonable distances. Over time they have refined the Y2Y vision to focus on grizzly bears, birds, and fish. The thinking is that if they cover those three, they'll capture the needs of most animals.
For 2011 I'll continue along roughly the same lines of giving.

Comments

Related:
  > economics <
  environment


Unrelated:
  books
  energy
  geopolitics
  lists
  mathematics
  predictions
  science

 

Links: Science Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory    Blog Directory    Blog Blog    Technorati Profile    Strange Attractor