Who owns the Internet and who is in charge?

The Internet/Matrix still depends heavily on public infrastructure and there is no dedicated owner of the whole Internet/Matrix, but the networks it consists of are run and owned by corporations and institutions. Access to the Internet is usually provided by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) for a monthly fee. Each network is owned by someone and has a network operation center from where it is centrally controlled, but the Internet/Matrix is not owned by any single authority and has no network operation center of its own. No legal authority determines how and where networks can be connected together, this is something the managers of networks have to agree about. So there is no way to ever gain ultimate control of the Matrix/Internet.
The in some respects decentralized Matrix/Internet architecture and administration do not imply that there are no authorities for oversight and common standards for sustaining basic operations, for administration: There are authorities for IP number and domain name registrations, e.g.
Ever since the organizational structures for Internet administration have changed according to the needs to be addressed. Up to now, administration of the Internet is a collaborative undertaking of several loose cooperative bodies with no strict hierarchy of authority. These bodies make decisions on common guidelines, as communication protocols, e.g., cooperatively, so that compatibility of software is guaranteed. But they have no binding legal authority, nor can they enforce the standards they have agreed upon, nor are they wholly representative for the community of Internet users. The Internet has no official governing body or organization; most parts are still administered by volunteers.
Amazingly, there seems to be an unspoken and uncodified consent of what is allowed and what is forbidden on the Internet that is widely accepted. Codifications, as the so-called Netiquette, are due to individual efforts and mostly just expressively stating the prevailing consent. Violations of accepted standards are fiercely rejected, as reactions to misbehavior in mailing lists and newsgroups prove daily.
Sometimes violations not already subject to law become part of governmental regulations, as it was the case with spamming, the unsolicited sending of advertising mail messages. But engineers proved to be quicker and developed software against spamming. So, in some respects, the Internet is self-regulating, indeed.
For a detailed report on Internet governance, click here.

TEXTBLOCK 1/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611791/100438658447
 
Implant technology

Kevin Warwick at the University of Reading works on implant technologies which could enhance or modify functions of the limbs and the brain, or bring back functionalities lost, for example, in an accident or as a consequence of a stroke. Implants are also used for identification in "intelligent buildings" where they serve to control "personnel flows". However, the real potential of electronic implants seems to lie in the field of electronic drugs. The basics of the brain computer interface are already explored, and there are now efforts to electronically modify the function of the mind. Large software and IT companies are sponsoring this research which could result in the commercialisation of electronic drugs, functioning as anti-depressants, pain killers and the like. Evidently, the same technologies can also be used as narcotic drugs or to modify people's behaviour. The functioning of body and mind can be adapted to pre-defined principles and ideals, their autonomous existence reduced and subjected to direct outside control.

TEXTBLOCK 2/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611777/100438658731
 
Movies as a Propaganda- and Disinformation-Tool in World War I and II

Movies produced in Hollywood in 1918/19 were mainly anti-German. They had some influence but the bigger effect was reached in World War II-movies.
The first propaganda movie of World War II was British.
At that time all films had to pass censoring. Most beloved were entertaining movies with propaganda messages. The enemy was shown as a beast, an animal-like creature, a brutal person without soul and as an idiot. Whereas the own people were the heroes. That was the new form of atrocity.
Leni Riefenstahl was a genius in this respect. Her movies still have an incredible power, while the majority of the other movies of that time look ridiculous today. The combination of light and shadow, the dramatic music and the mass-scenes that resembled ballet, had its effect and political consequences. Some of the German movies of that period still are on the index.

U.S.-President Theodore Roosevelt considered movies the best propaganda-instrument, as they are more subtle than other tools.

In the late twenties, movies got more and more important, in the USSR, too, like Sergei Eisenstein demonstrated with his movies. Historic events were changed into symbolism, exactly the way propaganda should function. It was disinformation - but in its most artistic form, especially in comparison to most U.S.- and European movies of that time.

TEXTBLOCK 3/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611661/100438658547
 
body and mind as defects

In an increasingly technisised world where technology has also become a determinant of value-free values, mind and body are increasingly considered as "imperfect" compared to the brilliant designs of technology. While for centuries the "weakness" of the human flesh has been the object of lamentations, the 21st century seems set to transform the genre of tragedy into a sober technological project of improvement. Within this project, men and women receive the status of "risk factor" which potentially destabilises technological systems, a circumstance which calls for correction and control measures.

Two main ways of checking the risk of "human error", as well as inefficiency, irrationality, selfishness, emotional turbulence, and other weaknesses of human beings: by minimizing human participation in technological processes, and, to an increasing extent, by technically eliminating such risk factors in human beings themselves.

Human beings, once considering themselves as the "crown of creation" or the "masters of the world" are reducing themselves to the "human factor" in globally networked technical systems, that factor which still escapes reliable calculation and which, when interacting with fast and potent technical environments, is a source of imperfection. For the human mind and body to perfect itself - to adapt itself to the horizon of perfection of science and technology - takes long time periods of discipline, learning, even biological evolution.

In the calculating thinking required in highly technisised context, mind and body inevitably appear as deficient compared to a technology which, unlike the human organism, has the potential of fast and controlled "improvement". Surely, the human organism has always been prey to defects, to "illnesses" and "disablement". Disease has therefore been one of the main motivations behind the development of Bio-ITs: Bio-ITs are being developed to help the blind get their eyesight back, the deaf to hear, the lame to walk, the depressed to be happy. Such medical applications of Bio-ITs are nothing essentially new: Captain Silver's crunch, the wheelchair, a tooth filling save the same basic purpose of correcting a physical deficiency.

But there is a much wider scope to this new development, in which the "normal" biological condition of a human being, such as proneness to death, forgetfulness, aging, inefficiency, solitude, or boredom are understood as defects which can and should be corrected. The use of ITs to overcome such "biological" constraints is often seen as the "ultimate" technological advance, even if the history of utopian visions connected to technological innovation is as old as it is rife with surprise, disappointment, and disaster.

TEXTBLOCK 4/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611777/100438658726
 
William Frederick Friedman

Friedman is considered the father of U.S.-American cryptoanalysis - he also was the one to start using this term.

INDEXCARD, 1/2
 
Sergei Eisenstein

Though Sergei Eisenstein (1898-1948) made only seven films in his entire career, he was the USSR's most important movie-conductor in the 1920s and 1930s. His typical style, putting mountains of metaphors and symbols into his films, is called the "intellectual montage" and was not always understood or even liked by the audience. Still, he succeeded in mixing ideological and abstract ideas with real stories. His most famous work was The Battleship Potemkin (1923).

INDEXCARD, 2/2