« PREVIOUS ENTRY
Ban on peek-a-boo cam phones

David Weinberger on the moral shape of cyberspace

Last night at MIT I attended an extremely thought-provoking talk by David Weinberger — author of Small Piece Loosely Joined — on the moral shape of cyberspace.

Essentially, he argued that morality in the “real” world is created because we live in a shared world, and are constantly aware of each other. Merely being aware of each other is an act of selflessness; it means we’re constantly getting outside of ourselves when we pay attention to others. (As he notes, this theory is very much at odds with currently popular ideas about morality, which start by assuming we’re all atomistic individuals — and which thus puzzle over why we act in altruistic or selfless ways.)

Intersestingly, Weinberger argues that the web has a similar morality built into it, via the whole concept of links. A link, as Google has so profitably discovered, is a piece of social glue — someone calling attention to someone else. It thus mirrors the constant pinging of each other that takes place in the real world, with everyone being constantly (sometimes generously, sometimes nervously, sometime angrily) aware of each other’s existence, and shifting our behavior accordingly.

Weinberger put some notes up about it on his weblog:

Every time I put in a link to a site, I am sending people away from my site, a little act of selflessness and generosity. The Web is characterized by generosity throughout. The Web is a shared world created out of shared interests. It is fundamentally connected, sympathetic and moral.

Obviously, many immoral awful things occur on the Web. But its architecture reflects our moral nature. And it’s exciting to so many of us because of the promise it offers for moving the species forward not only technologically but also morally.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

Are we more or less moral online? Are we the same?

Is the Web a reflection of who we are or a reflection of our “better nature.”

Is there a developing online ethics or ethos? In what is it rooted?

Can a technology be moral or immoral, or do the terms not apply?

Is the Internet political? Does the value-free transmission of bits have its own value? What did the Taliban make of the Internet? China? Fundamentalists? Are they wrong?

What’s the best we could hope for (= work for) WRT the Web?

UPDATE: Weinberger has written an expanded version of these notes based on the talk, which is extremely cool. It boils his thesis down to a neat aphorism:

In a nutshell: The Internet is about truth and the Web is about morality.


blog comments powered by Disqus

Search This Site


Bio:

I'm Clive Thompson, a writer on science, technology, and culture. This blog collects bits of offbeat research I'm running into, and musings thereon.

Currently, I'm a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine and a columnist for Wired magazine. I also write for Fast Company and Wired magazine's web site, among other places. Email or AOL IM me (pomeranian99) to say hi or send in something strange!

More of Me

Twitter
Tumblr
Flickr


Recent Entries

A long German word for “noticing when ads are being customized based on your surfing history”

Gay squid sex

“El Ajedrecista” — an analog chess-playing computer from 1912

Hacking the Model T

“How did you find my site?” and Vannevar Bush’s memex

» visit the Collision Detection archives

Clive Thompson's Tumblr
a bunch of stuff

May 20, 2011 » 02:28 PM

From Christopher Kennedy’s very droll book “Neitzsche’s Horse”.

July 28, 2010 » 07:35 AM
“Wr” - S

July 06, 2010 » 10:05 AM

My Xbox broke, and I was trying to Google some possible technical solutions, when I noticed that Google appears to be encouraging me to make a typo. I suppose it’s possible that Google’s algorithms know that typing “wont” instead of “won’t” would produce better results.

June 29, 2010 » 05:00 PM

On the other hand, when I tried the test for multitasking, I was pretty abysmal. I performed worse than people who identify themselves as heavy multitaskers, and those who identify as low multitaskers.

June 29, 2010 » 04:58 PM

I finally got around to trying out the interactive “test your distractability and multitasking” page at the New York Times, which they put up alongside their story earlier this month about how computer distractions are eroding our lives. 

According to the test, I guess I have good focus — I’m not very distractable! 

» visit my Tumblr

Recent Comments

Photos

» see all of my photos on Flickr

Collision Detection: A Blog by Clive Thompson