关于互联网研究,律师应该知道的十件事

K. Claffy
{"title":"关于互联网研究,律师应该知道的十件事","authors":"K. Claffy","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1266324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Updating legal frameworks to accomodate technological advancement of communications capabilities requires first updating other legal frameworks to accommodate empirically grounded research into what we have built, how it is used, and what it costs to sustain. Unfortunately for - and due to - well-intentioned policymakers, our scientific knowledge about the Internet is weak because researchers are typically not allowed access to any data on operational network infrastructure for privacy reasons. This data access problem was recognized long ago for its detrimental impact on infrastructure protection capabilities; many public and private sector efforts have failed to solve it. Public policy intended to protect individual user privacy places the research community in the absurd situation of not being able to do the most basic network research even on the networks established explicitly to support academic network research. Despite the methodological limitations of Internet science today, the few data points available suggest a dire picture of the future. But while the situation overwhelmingly indicates the need for a closer objective look, the only people with measurement capability on publically accessible network infrastructure today are tasked with inferring as much private information on individual users as possible - whether its to target terrorists or ads. The traditional mode of getting data from public infrastructures to inform policymaking - regulating its collection - is a quixotic path, since the government regulatory agencies have as much reason to be reluctant as providers regarding disclosure of how the Internet is engineered, used, and financed. Less surprising with hindsight, the opaqueness of the infrastructure to empirical analysis has generated many problematic responses from rigidly circumscribed communities trying to get their jobs done. As dismal as it sounds though, the news is not all bad - there is a reason everyone wants to be connected to all the world's knowledge, as well as each other, besides its status as the most powerful complex system ever created by man. The Internet's practical promise for individual freedom, democratic engagement, and economic empowerment, is also unparalleled. Moreover, even in the dim light of the profoundly needed but under attended interdisciplinary research into the network, we can ascertain some concrete constraints on the possible range of policy solutions, which all involve increasing the congruity between what we legislate and what we know.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"74 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ten Things Lawyers should Know about Internet Research\",\"authors\":\"K. Claffy\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1266324\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Updating legal frameworks to accomodate technological advancement of communications capabilities requires first updating other legal frameworks to accommodate empirically grounded research into what we have built, how it is used, and what it costs to sustain. Unfortunately for - and due to - well-intentioned policymakers, our scientific knowledge about the Internet is weak because researchers are typically not allowed access to any data on operational network infrastructure for privacy reasons. This data access problem was recognized long ago for its detrimental impact on infrastructure protection capabilities; many public and private sector efforts have failed to solve it. Public policy intended to protect individual user privacy places the research community in the absurd situation of not being able to do the most basic network research even on the networks established explicitly to support academic network research. Despite the methodological limitations of Internet science today, the few data points available suggest a dire picture of the future. But while the situation overwhelmingly indicates the need for a closer objective look, the only people with measurement capability on publically accessible network infrastructure today are tasked with inferring as much private information on individual users as possible - whether its to target terrorists or ads. The traditional mode of getting data from public infrastructures to inform policymaking - regulating its collection - is a quixotic path, since the government regulatory agencies have as much reason to be reluctant as providers regarding disclosure of how the Internet is engineered, used, and financed. Less surprising with hindsight, the opaqueness of the infrastructure to empirical analysis has generated many problematic responses from rigidly circumscribed communities trying to get their jobs done. As dismal as it sounds though, the news is not all bad - there is a reason everyone wants to be connected to all the world's knowledge, as well as each other, besides its status as the most powerful complex system ever created by man. The Internet's practical promise for individual freedom, democratic engagement, and economic empowerment, is also unparalleled. Moreover, even in the dim light of the profoundly needed but under attended interdisciplinary research into the network, we can ascertain some concrete constraints on the possible range of policy solutions, which all involve increasing the congruity between what we legislate and what we know.\",\"PeriodicalId\":337841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Legal Education eJournal\",\"volume\":\"74 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Legal Education eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1266324\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal Education eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1266324","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

更新法律框架以适应通信能力的技术进步,需要首先更新其他法律框架,以适应对我们所建立的东西、如何使用以及维持成本的经验基础研究。不幸的是,出于善意的政策制定者,我们对互联网的科学知识很薄弱,因为出于隐私原因,研究人员通常不允许访问任何有关运营网络基础设施的数据。这个数据访问问题很久以前就因其对基础设施保护能力的有害影响而被认识到;许多公共和私营部门的努力都未能解决这个问题。旨在保护个人用户隐私的公共政策将研究界置于一种荒谬的境地,即即使在明确为支持学术网络研究而建立的网络上,也无法进行最基本的网络研究。尽管今天的互联网科学在方法上存在局限性,但为数不多的可用数据点显示了未来的可怕图景。但是,虽然情况压倒性地表明需要更仔细地客观观察,但今天唯一有能力测量公共网络基础设施的人的任务是尽可能多地推断个人用户的私人信息——无论是针对恐怖分子还是广告。从公共基础设施获取数据以为政策制定提供信息的传统模式——监管其收集——是一条不切实际的道路。因为政府管理机构和提供商一样有理由不愿意披露互联网是如何设计、使用和融资的。事后看来,基础设施对实证分析的不透明性已经在试图完成工作的严格限制社区中产生了许多有问题的反应,这并不令人惊讶。尽管这听起来令人沮丧,但也不全是坏消息——除了作为人类有史以来创造的最强大的复杂系统的地位之外,每个人都希望与世界上所有的知识以及彼此联系,这是有原因的。互联网对个人自由、民主参与和经济赋权的实际承诺也是无与伦比的。此外,即使在对网络进行的跨学科研究中,我们也可以确定一些具体的限制政策解决方案的可能范围,这些解决方案都涉及到增加我们立法和我们所知道的之间的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ten Things Lawyers should Know about Internet Research
Updating legal frameworks to accomodate technological advancement of communications capabilities requires first updating other legal frameworks to accommodate empirically grounded research into what we have built, how it is used, and what it costs to sustain. Unfortunately for - and due to - well-intentioned policymakers, our scientific knowledge about the Internet is weak because researchers are typically not allowed access to any data on operational network infrastructure for privacy reasons. This data access problem was recognized long ago for its detrimental impact on infrastructure protection capabilities; many public and private sector efforts have failed to solve it. Public policy intended to protect individual user privacy places the research community in the absurd situation of not being able to do the most basic network research even on the networks established explicitly to support academic network research. Despite the methodological limitations of Internet science today, the few data points available suggest a dire picture of the future. But while the situation overwhelmingly indicates the need for a closer objective look, the only people with measurement capability on publically accessible network infrastructure today are tasked with inferring as much private information on individual users as possible - whether its to target terrorists or ads. The traditional mode of getting data from public infrastructures to inform policymaking - regulating its collection - is a quixotic path, since the government regulatory agencies have as much reason to be reluctant as providers regarding disclosure of how the Internet is engineered, used, and financed. Less surprising with hindsight, the opaqueness of the infrastructure to empirical analysis has generated many problematic responses from rigidly circumscribed communities trying to get their jobs done. As dismal as it sounds though, the news is not all bad - there is a reason everyone wants to be connected to all the world's knowledge, as well as each other, besides its status as the most powerful complex system ever created by man. The Internet's practical promise for individual freedom, democratic engagement, and economic empowerment, is also unparalleled. Moreover, even in the dim light of the profoundly needed but under attended interdisciplinary research into the network, we can ascertain some concrete constraints on the possible range of policy solutions, which all involve increasing the congruity between what we legislate and what we know.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信