on the enfranchisement of the rule-breakers.

disclaimer: this post should in no way be construed as an endorsement of or admission of complicity in any illegal act.

this is gonna be a heck of a long-winded entry, i think, because i've got lots to say. and it's probably going to be a bit snippy, cos that's pretty much how i feel right now. this is something which i've been thinking about for awhile, but let's begin by citing exactly what just provoked me. this is an email from my boss.

"Team,
As you know, I am a proponent of furthering one's education. So it is with some regret that I must announce a directive that has come from upper management that homework/educational materials may no longer be completed/read while on work time. In fact, to be more precise, the only reading materials and Internet sites that reps may visit are:
-work-related
-automotive industry-related
-news and current events related
Please do not hesitate to discuss this with a TL should you have any questions, or dislike email as a communication medium.
Thanks,
[name deleted]"

well, let's have a little think about this, shall we? this means that, whilst my erstwhile comrades are busy on their "London Auto Club" forums, talking about the 'phat rides' in which they intend to 'mack' on 'bitches;' i am forbidden from doing my Wittgenstein readings, or perusing the statutory materials for my poli sci paper. this should bother me quite a bit, i'd say. in fact, it's the sort of thing which, if there was nothing i could really do about it, i would fire off a terse little email advising my thoughtfully euphemistic boss where he could stick his flowery Newspeak corporate bullshit.

but, i like making 12 bucks an hour for doing nothing. and why am i not really very upset about this? because it doesn't matter in the least, really. all it means is that i can't openly have a book out when my boss is walking about. let's take into consideration two basic facts: my boss is almost always sitting at his desk, out of sight. and he's not in on weekends. so that limits the times when i even have to worry about this. but let's get to the point: alternative media let me do what i want, regardless of what my boss says. by simply pulling down my windows taskbar, i can make what programs i am in invisible - and my boss is dumb or something, and has never once noticed this. and alternative media, via the internet, are the VESSELS OF MY EMANCIPATION!

haha. okay, that was lame. let us ponder the alternative media that let me get around restrictions set up to stifle my intellectual career. i can do basic research for stuff on wikipedia, of course. and i can get my readings from hobbes, locke, and rousseau for philosophy online, in full hypertext. my poli sci prof has thoughtfully put a good chunk of his readings online. and of course my beloved blogger allows me both to contribute to this journal for MPI online, sans conspicuous paper and pen, and to vent my frustration at the crappy postmodern alienation-fest that is this call centre job. i can write papers in word (ick!) and send/receive them to/from my home computer with gmail. and when my boss is gone, i can jack my notebook into the intranet here, and do anything i'd be able to do from home... even the marginally-legal stuff that'd probably get me fired if it was monitored. (because when plugged into my laptop, it doesn't transmit any identifying data to the network; since i don't need to login using my own account, even if traffic was being monitored, the sysops could only tell that someone was accessing those sites, not who.)

in a way, my workplace here is a microcosm of a phenomenon that exists across the world, spread by the internet. just as my employers have a very limited toolkit with which they can restrain my actions, governments, especially in liberal democracies, are having their control mechanisms pushed into obsolescence or ineffectuality by the internet. certainly, the internet is not a realm in which the law does not exist. particularly in the case of crimes deemed sufficiently reprehensible by society, from pedophilia to terrorism, the government uses the internet to catch criminals as often as the criminals use it to evade. indeed, i remember reading that pedophilia was thought to be an extinct crime, like grave-robbing and such, until the development of the internet allowed investigative agencies to police rings of offenders more effectively. so the internet is as often a mechanism of control as it is one of emancipation. (not that i think criminals that infringe on the rights of others, like the ones mentioned above, ought to be 'emancipated.')

but in terms of crimes that are far more widespread and generally considered less 'destructive' to the fabric of society, the internet provides a great deal of enfranchisement to those who choose to disobey the laws. indeed, just as in our reading on the 'gay global village in cyberspace' pointed out, the (sometimes illusory) anonymity granted by the internet allows people who would be marginalized for fear of persecution in the 'real world' to find community in virtual spaces. one such community with which i am familiar is overgrow, an online information resource and forum with over 125,000 registered users. particularly in the United States, draconian drug laws mean that those interested in cultivating marijuana could face extremely harsh penalties. thus, few independent growers can discuss their craft in public for fear of discovery and prosecution. while some enterprising activists and growers like ed rosenthal published books on the subject of marijuana horticulture, rosenthal's subsequent felony conviction makes the consequences of such activism clear. (parallels obviously exist the case of marc emery) though books on the subject were available, they were often vague and of little use to beginning growers or growers with specific problems, even when they could get their hands on them.

overgrow, however, means that growers from across the world can effectively 'come out' online. (this was precursed by Usenet, like basically everything else online.) unlike the case of the 'gay global village,' however, the consequences of such a coming out have had less to do with legal emancipation (decriminalization) and more to do with practical emancipation. the mechanics of marijuana horticulture are not simple, and in order to obtain results, growers need to know what they're doing. overgrow (in notable conjunction with digital cameras) enables growers to post pictures of their growing cabinets or rooms, and obtain precisely-tailored advice from a community of 'experts.' they can obtain information on proper lighting, ventilation, odor control, media (growing medium, that is), and security/law enforcement concerns. through overgrow, new techniques for growing have been established, communal norms set up and enforced through moderators, and countless new growers indoctrinated in the cultivation of an illegal plant. contributors are ranked by a 'karma' system like Slashdot's, whereby gifted contributors can gain recognition, status, and often become moderators. some growers, like Tokahontas and NIMBY have taken on a near-celebrity status for their contributions. overgrow also helps perpetuate the community; the detailed advice on regional drug law and search&seizure legislation helps the community to gain knowledge of their rights and to ensure that, by way of carbon filters and sewer ventilation, their growing remains stealthy and unnoticed by "LEO," as they are (un-)affectionately called.

alright, i'm running out of steam. i'm gonna call time out; my next entry i'll move on to filesharing, and try to make some kind of generalized conclusions. until then: basically, the point is just that law becomes less relevant as the internet provides the people with skills and access the ability to engage in new levels of self-determination.

i just wrote 1300 words off the top of my head about random shit in an hour and a half, and loved it. i wish all schoolwork was like this.