Though Internet routing has worked well over the years, there have been instances of errors that caused routing stability issues. There is also opportunity for malicious activities that could damage the routing infrastructure in the future. To prevent future errors and malicious activity, it is important to increase the resiliency and security of the Internet???s routing infrastructure through the adoption of best current operational practices for routing resiliency and the deployment of secure routing protocols.
As noted in our blog post announcing this new topic area, when we speak of ???resiliency??? we mean:
the ability of the network to provide and maintain an acceptable level of service in the face of various faults and challenges to normal operation.
In the months ahead we will be engaging with network operators around the world to help understand how we can best help them and the larger operator community make the Internet more secure and resilient.
But, the worlds of the very small, as well as the very large, are not the only ones that exhibit counter-intuitive, seemingly magical behaviors. So is the world of highly complex systems, especially those systems whose components and interrelationships are themselves quite complex, as is the case with systems biology and evolution.
Such is also the case with organizational and sociotechnical systems whose main components are people. Even though these chaotic systems are in principle deterministic, their dynamic, non-linear nature renders them increasingly unpredictable and accounts for their emergent behavior. New terms, like long tails, Freakonomics and black swan theory, – every bit as fanciful as quarks, charm and strangeness, – have begun to enter our lexicon.
It’s always been beyond our ken, that’s what bounded rationality is about. But hope springs eternal that something will solve the understanding problem for us.
The reason that’s important is because if we are here today for one reason at least that we’re here today is that it seems like 2012 has been the year in which the network has come of age politically between the SOPA PIPA battle at the beginning of the year after and its failure, let alone the prior year in the Arab spring where it’s more ambiguous how much was played by the network and how much was played by existing social networks.
But this was really the year of network politics fighting for itself. And so this moment requires that we understand not only what networks are but also what networks are against and what networks are threatened by. And that’s why I wanted this particularly stark definition between twentieth and twenty-first century, or industrial hierarchical and network. Yochai Benkler
Audio and transcripts available.
To reframe the issue of counter-radicalization, we decided to spotlight formers as positive role models for youth. We also knew that there has traditionally been an over-reliance on governments to tackle these problems, so we wanted to see what diverse groups outside the public sector could offer. Finally, we needed to go beyond the in-person, physical conversations we had at the summit into the realm of the virtual, using the Internet to ensure sustained discussion and debate.
Perhaps a better way to view the data is as an illustration of how mobile phones in general, and texting in particular, have taken over the experiential world of the young. An economist might expect that teens deprived of texting would simply substitute another method of communication – – talking, for instance. As it turns out, a significant minority will not. They will behave instead, researchers report, the way people do when deprived of human contact.
How has the nature of trust changed in the information age?
These notions of trust and trustworthiness are as old as our species. Many of the specific societal pressures that induce trust are as old as civilisation. Morals and reputational considerations are certainly that old, as are laws. Technical security measures have changed with technology, as well as details around reputational and legal systems, but by and large they’re basically the same.
What has changed in modern society is scale. Today we need to trust more people than ever before, further away ??? whether politically, ethnically or socially ??? than ever before. We need to trust larger corporations, more diverse institutions and more complicated systems. We need to trust via computer networks. This all makes trust, and inducing trust, harder. At the same time, the scaling of technology means that the bad guys can do more damage than ever before. That also makes trust harder. Navigating all of this is one of the most fundamental challenges of our society in this new century.
Given the dangers out there, should we trust anyone? Isn’t “trust no one” the first rule of security?
It might be the first rule of security, but it’s the worst rule of society.