September 7-9, Woods Hole, Massachusetts
an
production
an
production |
|
|
September 7-9, Woods Hole, Massachusetts
an
production |
|
|
Welcome to BigHook2005! The moving force of BigHook (2000 through 2005) has been to figure out how we can leave the best network possible to our grandchildren. At BigHook2005, we explore territory that is relatively close-in; a ten year projection of a set of plausible futures (scenarios) for the network. Scenario planning as a discipline
Thumbnail scenarios for Net2015
Scenario planning as a discipline Scenarios tap what we know about the future. When we expect something to happen, or when we fear that it might happen, when we argue that somebody else's business model works or not, these are forms of knowledge about a multidimensional outcome space we call The Future. Scenarios provide ways of thinking about otherwise partisan, emotional issues in ways that tend to discourage denial and emotionalism, and encourage eyes-wide-open, impartial examination. Scenarios are for situations that are too complex to predict. Prediction might work locally or in simple systems, but when an outcome is determined by technological, economic, business, political and social drivers, the only accurate predictions are perforce trivial. Scenarios come in sets. To do otherwise, or even to choose a preferred or feared scenario is tantamount to predicting the future. Scenarios are stories. Good scenarios have plots that shows how they develops from today's known facts and dynamics. Scenarios are disconfirmable by evidence. They are stated with enough specificity that when new relevant information arrives, it can tell us whether we are moving closer. Scenarios are points chosen from an infinite, multidimensional outcome space. There are infinite scenarios. Scenario planners try to choose specific ones to work with according to the following criteria: (a) they are distinct from each other, (b) they represent conclusions that are as extreme as we can plausibly imagine along the dimensions we are considering without positing highly improbable events (e.g., asteroid strike), (c) there is a plausible roadmap from here to there. Scenarios involve a certain suspension of disbelief. In doing scenario planning, we need to suspend our (absolutely correct) belief that, "This scenario will never happen," and treat each scenario as a real possibility. No specific scenario will happen as envisioned. Scenarios are simply points in an outcome space to drive an "outcome simulator." Just as brainstormers initially agree to suspend disbelief about real-world practicality, scenario planners need to agree to treat the set of scenarios as plausible futures. Scenarios put us all on the same side. We're not trying to convince anybody about our position. We're a team of futurenauts, going where nobody has been, exploring new worlds and civilizations . . . We're solving the problem, "What does the future look like?" together, in common. Thumbnail scenarios for Net2015 (revised, but far from done!) Structural Separation -- A single entity runs the network below the Internet Protocol layer, while open competition flourishes above it. It becomes obvious that this is the most successful networking policy. Globally those countries that pursue structural separation develop robust networks, vibrant economies, creative cultures, open political systems and active international exchange. The entity that administers the physical infrastructure (poles, conduits, fiber strands), and certifies the transmission characteristics of radio transmitters) diminishes to become a relatively minor public agency. Within ten years, structural separation becomes so obviously successful that even nations that had been pursuing other Internet policies have joined the Structural Separation Movement. The Internet becomes the prime driver of growth, commerce, culture and communication worldwide. Return of the Intelligent Network -- The telcos and cablecos, and their allies in the old publishing, music and movie business, get their way. The new network is to be vertically integrated and content-aware, and they're in control of the stack. Spectrum is licensed or owned outright. Rights of way are available only to established carriers. Deep packet inspection determines whether the "content" is video, audio, web, email, or from other authorized applications. Unauthorized applications are banned for national security purposes. Mandatory tags flag copyrighted material; charges based on content type are assessed accordingly deep within the network. Encrypted content is banned, except for licensed encryption schemes and authorized agencies. Federal telecommunications authorities authorize and regulate existing carriers and services. The Chairman of the FSC (formerly FCC) becomes a cabinet level officer. The interface to the network is extremely complex; people who install and administer servers and routers must be highly educated experts -- these are federally licensed. The Internet becomes "TV with a buy-button." There remains a more creative side to the Internet, thanks to remnants of common carrier principles that survive in case law, but content providers are federally licensed. Real-time communications applications, and especially applications that run on "open platforms" become more difficult and become rare. Customer-Owned Networks -- For a while there, in 2007 and 2008, it looked like the future network would belong to a heavily regulated duopoly. But the central bureaucracy moved slowly, regulated the wrong things, and failed to "get it." The bottle was somewhere else, and the genie escaped. That is, while the FCC was worrying about intercarrier compensation, universal service and four letter words, underground peer groups were developing the simple, capable new technology that mattered. Soon there was a web of unlicensed, open, capable, ubiquitous networks that were free -- as in free speech and free beer. While the official networks played yet another blonde gossip story over its closed network, the new "underground" net was carrying all the communications that mattered. Network technology based on meshes of peers emerged. The bigcos and the regulatorium never saw this "under the radar" activity as a threat until it was too late. When the bigcos tried to regain control, employees within these companies already depended on the technology too much to give it up. In 2014, President Dean's FCC Chairman, Leo Hindery, failed to ram an emergency Verizon bailout bill through Congress, and the last large telco went belly-up; Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts bought Verizon's remnants for fractions of a cent on the dollar and sold the copper into a booming private spacecraft market. App-Layer Lockdown -- The Internet becomes a place where we do our "official" business, but it is not much fun. Government security concerns, intellectual property law, DRM, content filtering, and surveillance by private industry makes the Internet an unfriendly place -- false alarms (leading to investigations and arrests) are common. Young and creative people don't log on anymore; they know that when they log on, they're being watched. Innovators know that when they're on line, they're being surveilled and frequently ripped off. Carrying a cell phone broadcasts your position to entities you'd rather not inform, so you leave your cell phone at home except for the commute to work and other official activities. The limited individual communication that does occur on the 'net is done with the knowledge that others are listening; innocuous-sounding cyphers are used even for innocent activities like arranging a date. Cultural creation, individual expression and innovation go off-line completely. Expression becomes a face-to-face activity. Creativity and innovation wither. The RIAA, MPAA, CNN and similar become the only communications channels; when they continue to lose audience, nobody can figure out what's happening. In 2009, David Isenberg read his first novel in decades; _Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom_ -- a PAPERback that had been hand-to-handed for five years. Digital Divide Among Nations -- Some countries "get the net" and others don't. The world is deeply fragmented; the countries "behind the silicon curtain" become dismal places with backwards economies and repressive governments, while the Networked First World supports a vibrant economy, happy people and a high quality of life. Google World -- Google becomes the biggest company in the world, and -- surprise! -- it succeeds at not being evil while doing it! It does this by keeping a well-defined interface between its free services and its advertising. Each new Google service becomes immensely useful in its domain, and in so doing, generates massive amounts of personal information about each user. Google realizes that for all intents, devices will be free, routers and switches will be free, transmission facilities will be free, software will be free, processing will be free, copies of information goods (music, video, art, text) will be free, network access will be free, or darn near free, de facto if not de jure. Google realizes that its ads, not its services based on "free", are its main business. With no skin in any game being propped up by the slide towards free (as in free beer), Google is free (as in free speech) to disrupt every established information industry that depends on high margins, including telcos, book publishers, movie and music publishers, the travel industry, and finally even the largest operating system companies. Google successfully keeps its personal information encrypted and secure, avoiding scandles such as those that plagued all the old financial services houses of the 2000s, and decisively winning a huge Supreme Court case on Fourth Ammendment principles. And Google alone carries the practice of personalized advertising towards high art, delivering that low airfare offer or that new pair of shoes just as its users began to think about it, ever sensitive to when advertising becomes intrusive, cementing the loyalty of its customers. Thus, just as the telephone company used to use its revenue-generating application (telephony) to subsidize its wires and switches in days of yore, so does Google, in 2015, use its revenue generating personal advertising services to subsidize its incredible suite of free services. |
BigHook Home |