At What Cost?

By Dan Scott in Technology on June 6th, 2008

-->

by Dan Scott

There has been much ado lately about the potential freedoms created by the new age of communication evinced by the Internet. People are mainly focused on the newness of it all; how modern technology is changing all the rules, but this idea has actually been around as long as we’ve been creating new things. Every new technological innovation leads inevitably to the discussion of new freedoms. Basic freedom from the limitations imposed by the old technology to freedom based on paradigm shifts in our society enabled by the new technology. Electricity, the automobile, radio, the airplanethe list goes on and on; each of them bringing major changes in our lives, our language, and our perception of the world.

With each new innovation there is a renewed sense of hope that this one will set us free…from something. Free from household drudgery or free from cubicles and traffic jams or free from the earthly bonds of gravity. For example, thanks to modern technology, in the course of writing this article I have travelled from one side of the country to the other and back again. Right now I am enjoying an iced tea at a sidewalk caf in Phoenix and by the time I finish this article I expect to be in Seattle. I am free to do my work from anywhere that has an Internet connection. Every day I work with people all over the country and I haven’t seen a cubicle (at least not one that is mine) in many months.

But, at what cost? Freedom is never free whether we’re speaking of grand-scale freedoms like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness or small-scale freedoms like not having to go into the office today. By giving me the ability to connect to my coworkers and customers alike from wherever I happen to be, the Internet has afforded me greater independence but it has cost me my private time. Because there is the capability to always be connected wherever I go there is now the expectation that I am always available. The question is, is it worth giving up the distinction between when you are at work and when you aren’t for greater latitude in how and where we do our work?

Apparently, the answer depends at least in part on how old you are. Younger people that have spent a greater percentage of their lives “hooked in” tend to deal with the lack of privacy afforded by the Internet with, if you will pardon my saying so, a certain wild abandon; whether due to an enhanced sense of openness nurtured by constant contact with the rest of the world or simply naive innocence I do not know. Older folk, more accustomed to dealing with the results of man’s darker nature, tend to look at such openness with uneasiness and even suspicion.

The iGeneration is likely to have spent a significant fraction of their life on the Internet by the time they reach a point in the generational cycle where they are determining the political structure of the planet. The Internet will become such an integrated and accepted part of our culture that the distinction between what is “online” and what is “offline” will be mainly philosophical. Using the Internet to accomplish things once thought of as too sensitive in nature to be subjected to the potential scrutiny of the public will not only be accepted, it will be assumed.

Indeed, the open forum offered by the Internet could be seen as a platform to promote democracy across the planet. On the surface a seemingly good thing to those of us living in free societies, but true democracy has never worked. The average person is too easily duped, too easily swayed by emotional appeal for a government ruled by the masses to work on a large scale. Many of the founding fathers of our country felt the same way and that is in large part why our government is a form of representative republic instead of a democracy.

Not that I’m against democratically elected government. I think history clearly shows the most effective form of government is one that represents the needs of the people and acts in their behalf and the surest way to achieve that kind of government is by democratic election. But, to extrapolate that idea to include every political decision in the voting process may take things too far. All government officials will quickly learn the lesson to always leave “sticky” questions up to the people. Anything that could possibly go astray would be dealt with by proxy allowing them to take credit when things go right and when things go wrong it is simply “the will of the people”. Just imagine what a large corporation would be like if all business decisions had to be made by popular vote.

We are quickly approaching a day when the Internet will provide the means to create the first true, large-scale democracy. We may live to see a demonstration of a real government “of the people” where everyone has a say in everything. But, at what price?

About the Author:

Dan Scott is a Computer Scientist with over 25 years of accomplishments developing, building, and supporting computers and computer applications. Make sure you see his web hosting analyses covering the top affordable web hosting sites.