free html hit counter Architectures of Control: Harvard, Facebook, and the Chicago School | John Battelle's Search Blog

Architectures of Control: Harvard, Facebook, and the Chicago School

By - April 02, 2012

Early in Lessig’s “Code v2,” which at some point this week I hope to review in full, Lessig compares the early campus networks of two famous educational institutions. Lessig knew them well – in the mid 1990s, he taught at both Harvard and the University of Chicago. Like most universities, Harvard and Chicago provided Internet access to their students. But they took quite different approaches to doing so. True to its philosophy of free and anonymous speech, Chicago simply offered an open connection to its students – plug in anywhere on campus, and start using the net.

Harvard’s approach was the polar opposite, as Lessig explains:

At Harvard, the rules are different….You cannot plug your machine to the Net at Harvard unless the machine is registered – licensed, approved, verified. Only members of the university community can register their machines. Once registered, all interactions with the network are monitored and identified to a particular machine. To join the network, users have to “sign” a user agreement. The agreement acknowledges this pervasive practice of monitoring. Anonymous speech on this network is not permitted – it is against the rules. Acceess can be controlled based on who you are, and interactions can be traced based on what you did.

In the preceding paragraph, change “Harvard” and “university” to “Facebook” and – there you have it. Facebook was the product of a Harvard mindset – and probably could never have come from a place like Chicago or Berkeley (where I taught).

I called up Harvard’s IT department to see if the policy had changed since Lessig’s experiences in the 1990s, or Mark Zuckerbeg’s six or so years ago. The answer was no – machines still must be registered, and all actions across Harvard’s network are trackable.

There are many benefits associated with a “real names” identity policy, including personalized services and a far greater likelihood of civil discourse. But the reverse is also true: without the right to speak anonymously (or pseudonymously), dissent and exploration are often muted. And of course, there’s that tracking/monitoring/data issue as well…

In Code, Lessig goes on to predict that while the original Internet began with a very Chicago-like approach to the world, architectures of regulation and control will ultimately end up winning if we don’t pay close attention.

He wrote the original Code in 1999, and updated it in 2006. The word Facebook is not in either version of the text. Just thought that a curious anecdote worth sharing.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
  • Cancerianflirt

     You might find this interesting about how a hactivist was able to get around the Harvard “registered” computers security to download millions of Academic records. Oh, and the hactivist/student was a Reddit founder. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/07/reddit-founder-arrested-for-excessive-jstor-downloads.ars

    • Anonymous

      That’s very interesting, did not know that. Thanks!

      • SG

        Oh yeah, absolutely. Thanks for catching that. I remember reading that a while back and reading your article reminded me of it.

    • Anonymous

      Oh, but upon reading it…looks like it was MIT, not Harvard. Same approach though. East Coast Code vs. West Coast Code, as Lessig puts it.

  • http://twitter.com/privacychoice Jim Brock

    If Harvard’s IT had been any tighter we wouldn’t have Facebook, right?

    • Anonymous

      I don’t know for sure. But clearly Mark and his friends managed to piss off the folks at Harvard’s IT department back in the day, according to lore!