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
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
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 1/2 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611791/100438658447
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 2/2 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611777/100438658731
Friedman is considered the father of U.S.-American cryptoanalysis - he also was the one to start using this term.