http://www.kozubik.com/published/fsosa.txt John Kozubik - john@kozubik.com - http://www.kozubik.com In the very recent past, the world has crossed a threshold, beyond which anonymous free speech can only be limited by completely removing the basic infrastructure of commerce. The union of cryptography, ubiquitous portable computers and low-cost- standards-based wireless networking does not guarantee free speech, but it does guarantee that such restrictions imply an inability to conduct modern business and a dramatically lowered standard of living. In this environment freedom of speech is atomic - it cannot be partially limited. It can be both global and instantaneous. Most importantly, it is not dependent on centralized public networks like the Internet. It will be shown that tools available to anyone in a society that takes part in modern commerce are all that is required for anonymous free speech. It will further be shown that such tools must be available for such a society to continue participating in modern commerce, and that their availability is an all or nothing proposition. Finally, it will be shown that a high value should be placed on open standards and interoperability as well as peer-centric attitudes towards communication and networks. Taken as a whole, the FSOSA concept should be used to encourage free speech and to discourage policymakers from pursuing policies that are destined either to fail, or to relegate them to the "stone age". Free Speech Or Stone Age All digital information can be encrypted, and a rich set of tools exists to hide the use of encryption. These tools are widely used for all manner of commerce such as online banking and corporate intranets. Even the most mundane protection of a cafe or hotel wireless network implies encryption tools sufficient to protect any piece of data[1]. Even if these tools were not already universally adopted, they can themselves be hidden, as can their use. Therefore, the only way to keep a piece of data from a person or group is to deny posession of general purpose computers and to deny all international travelers from importing their own. Portable computers are now largely ubiquitous[2] and the price of older models approaches zero[3]. Their mass adoption and the reliance on them by every economic sector makes them synonymous with modern commerce. As with the software that hides information, the device it runs on cannot be proscribed without breaking a society away from modern commerce. Finally, standardized wireless protocols have been established worldwide. These protocols, like the familiar "Wi-Fi" family or the CDMA and GSM mobile telephone protocols, as well as the more specialized bluetooth and wireless USB, make it possible to negotiate communications between disparate hardware and computing platforms. While participation on a particular network may imply costs, direct point to point connections, or ad-hoc internets have no cost other than hardware and electricity[4]. Significantly, repeating, reflecting, amplifying or otherwise obfuscating the signal can make it difficult to quickly locate the source of these wireless communications, while merely receiving them remains simple. This is especially true in densely populated urban environments. Once again, the standardization and interoperability of these protocols that so readily enables anonymous free speech are the same qualities that make them so valuable to commerce. You cannot restrict access to this functionality and continue to take part in modern commerce. A Thought Experiment Oceania is a statist, authoritarian society transitioning from a planned economy to some semblance of a free market. They participate in all manner of modern commerce and allow relatively free internal movement as well as (most importantly) foreign visitors. Various cultural mores, combined with a reactionary government, have established certain documents, and even certain topics as forbidden. Materials in physical form are confiscated and destroyed, and electronic documents accessible through the Internet are either removed from national providers, or blocked from international links. Violation of these proscriptions incurs criminal charges and often harsh prison sentences. In this scenario partaking of, or distributing the proscribed speech in a personally identifiable manner (while avoiding repurcussion) is impossible. The legal and technical controls erected by the state are sufficient to restrict conventional free speech, such as physical paper media, large public gatherings and fixed broadcast infrastructure. No matter how selective you are in your distribution, or how modest your distribution network is, eventually an agent of the state can witness you passing out a leaflet, or can trace a television signal back to a source antenna. However, personally identifiable speech is not our goal, nor are conventional delivery mechanisms. The phrase "free speech or stone age" does not imply those abilities. What it does imply is that all of these communications can still occur, with relative ease, in any state such as Oceania. If general purpose computers are allowed to be imported by travelers and possessed by nationals, then any piece of data can be possessed and perfectly hidden. If standards-based wireless communication is available, then this hidden data can be transferred arbitrarily between users, perfectly disguised as legal traffic. Using those basic building blocks, all manner of anonymous publication, distribution and consumption can occur, and there is nothing Oceania can do to stop it. Stone Age Societies There is nothing the state can do to stop this, that is, other than choosing to live in the "stone age". It is worth noting that some states in the 21st century have, in fact, made this choice. The "free speech or stone age" concept does, unfortunately, imply the ability of a state to divorce itself from modern commerce and accept the drastically limited possibilities and reduced standard of living that this implies. North Korea circa 2008 is a good example of this. This government has successfully curtailed free speech, even in anonymous form, by restricting international travel, by the probable de jure (and certainly de facto) proscription of computing devices, and lack of access to standards-based wireless communication. [5] Whether they realize it or not, it is impossible for them to become a part of modern commerce without, by definition, losing this ability to curtailing speech. Attempts to enter modern commerce in a piecemeal fashion will also fail - probably very quickly. Once general purpose computing devices are introduced, and standards based wireless protocols are available, only a single international traveler or cross border signal is necessary to introduce any form of information. Looking beyond North Korea, it's not impossible for a state to move backwards, dropping out of modern commerce to pursue total control over information (which implies, essentially, an absence of information). This is very unlikely, however, and the steps that some states have taken towards this [6], however chilling, will surely fail. If there is any doubt as to how important it is to remain connected to modern commerce, consider the severe economic impact of the 2002/2003 SARS epidemic and how desperate the countries involved were to normalize ties of commerce and tourism. Consider further the infrastructure providers in the developed world whose profits depend on continued adoption and proliferation of the very technologies that make curtailing speech impossible. A Call to Action Many people alive today greatly overestimate the ability of the state they live in to curtail their anonymous free speech. It is my hope that demonstrating the access to that speech which modern commerce implies will encourage these people to begin speaking. It is my further hope that as our technical sophistication grows, it is accompanied by an increasing value placed on open, extensible standards and general purpose computing devices. If we are optimizing simply to communicate, it is not processor speed or OS version or disk size that matter as much as simple things like Ethernet, TCP/IP, USB, (S)ATA and the like. A relatively higher value should be placed on devices that contain widely adopted, standard interfaces such as this. Devices or implementations that alter these specifications, or contain proprietary protocols should be highly suspect if not avoided altogether. [7] Further, while "appliances" with simplified feature sets are convenient, it is general purpose computing devices that enable the ability to obfuscate information arbitrarily. Appliances are quite useful, and will therefore proliferate, but we must retain access to general purpose computing devices. Content protection, digital rights management (DRM) and other seemingly reasonable schemes for information usage are not merely relevant to consumption of mass media - they are steps away from the toolset required for free speech and should be viewed with suspicion. Finally, I would like greater understanding of the fact that the Internet, and the client role that users assume on that fixed infrastructure, is not a given. Ad-hoc networks can be brought into existence easily, and usually without any additional cost, promoting the user from a client to a peer. The same is true for mobile devices and entrenched wireless carriers. If you don't like the network you're communicating on, start a new one. The basic tools of modern commerce give you everything you need to do so. A Call to Caution Speakers should be ever vigilant and exercise great care. Just because tools exist to enable your speech does not mean you will use them properly, nor does it mean that low technology methods of survelliance and coercion cannot be used on you. Educate yourself, be as conservative as possible in what you say and how much you say of it, and live free to speak another day. [1] These tools are almost universally broken in their implementation and nearly worthless in providing security to the wireless networks that use them. They are ubiquitous, however, and their legal use implies the ability to use similar tools which would not, presumably, be as poorly implemented. [2] Notebooks Pass Desktops In US Retail http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-146603.html PC Milestone - Notebooks Outsell Desktops http://news.cnet.com/PC-milestone--notebooks-outsell-desktops/2100-1047_3-57... [3] Brand new general purpose PC laptops can be purchased in Vietnam for less than $100 in 2009. Used laptops can be found for much, much less. [4] It should be understood that electricity is not always a trivial resource to obtain, but inasmuch as we are discussing the freedom to communicate on computer networks, it is safe to assume that it can be obtained. [5] North Korea has, in the past, deployed cellular telephone networks, and appears to be doing so again with a CDMA network provided by Orascom. Presumably the Democratic People's Republic of Korea believes that such technology can be controlled in ways so as not to eventually allow arbitrary communications, but they are wrong. Only by so severely limiting such a network so as to make it incompatible with modern commerce will they continue to curtail free speech. [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Shield_Project [7] Avoiding non-standard and proprietary hardware and software has long been considered good practice, but strictly for the sake of technical concerns. Now we may add human values to the list of reasons that open standards are important. John Kozubik - john@kozubik.com - http://www.kozubik.com