Soon after I wrote that, Malcolm Browne, the photographer of Thich Quang Duc's self-immolation passed away, so I guess there is a news item to go with this thread.
Yeah, things like flash mobs are related, as are the Anonymous Scientology protests, as they can unite unrelated, distant groups of people to action. But both of those things seem like largely planned, organized events. Simply using the network to efficiently plan activities isn't really that new of an idea -- it's just applying new technology to old-fashioned community organizing.
I'm more concerned about what this means in a place like India, where because of increased sectarian violence between tribal Hindus and Bengal Muslims, electronic communications have fueled a mass migration back into Assam. This led the Indian Government to limit everyone to five text messages per day. And while I don't mind that all of the high-schoolers will be forced to communicate in complete sentences, these are the actions of a government that really doesn't understand how technology actually works.
The situation with the Assamese migration looks like another kind of event where people are individually deciding to take action in a way that creates a spontaneous social movement, enabled through the network. India is blaming Pakistan for this, though it doesn't seem all that likely to me, given that it's a situation where people are contacting friends and family directly though texts, emails, and social media, in hopes of keeping them safe. Either way, it's creating massive instability in Northeast India.
I guess the difference between this and a riot is that it can happen everywhere, all at once. It makes me worry about the consequences of what governments will do when they figure out the implications of spontaneous online action/a stand alone complex. The responses so far have been to shut down network services (India, Egypt, Syria), but none of those have been terribly effective.
-- ∇×V
Yeah, things like flash mobs are related, as are the Anonymous Scientology protests, as they can unite unrelated, distant groups of people to action. But both of those things seem like largely planned, organized events. Simply using the network to efficiently plan activities isn't really that new of an idea -- it's just applying new technology to old-fashioned community organizing.
I'm more concerned about what this means in a place like India, where because of increased sectarian violence between tribal Hindus and Bengal Muslims, electronic communications have fueled a mass migration back into Assam. This led the Indian Government to limit everyone to five text messages per day. And while I don't mind that all of the high-schoolers will be forced to communicate in complete sentences, these are the actions of a government that really doesn't understand how technology actually works.
The situation with the Assamese migration looks like another kind of event where people are individually deciding to take action in a way that creates a spontaneous social movement, enabled through the network. India is blaming Pakistan for this, though it doesn't seem all that likely to me, given that it's a situation where people are contacting friends and family directly though texts, emails, and social media, in hopes of keeping them safe. Either way, it's creating massive instability in Northeast India.
I guess the difference between this and a riot is that it can happen everywhere, all at once. It makes me worry about the consequences of what governments will do when they figure out the implications of spontaneous online action/a stand alone complex. The responses so far have been to shut down network services (India, Egypt, Syria), but none of those have been terribly effective.
-- ∇×V