41
Disruptive Technology Mathias Klang

disruptive technology

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

Page 1: disruptive technology

Disruptive Technology

Mathias Klang

Page 2: disruptive technology

Democracy & other mythical creatures

Page 3: disruptive technology

e-

Page 4: disruptive technology

Disruptive Technology

Page 5: disruptive technology

Life is organized around technology

(and always has been)

Page 6: disruptive technology

What Churchill Understood

Page 7: disruptive technology

The disruption occurs when the technology, which is introduced

effects the social arrangements around

which we build our lives

Page 8: disruptive technology

Impulse Control

Page 9: disruptive technology

Structuration Theory

Page 10: disruptive technology

In this thesis the theory of structuration launched by Giddens (1984) and later developed and adapted

(DeSanctis & Poole 1994, Orlikowski 1992, Orlikowski 2000, Orlikowski & Robey 1991) is used as an outer framework with which to study the role of power within social systems.

Page 11: disruptive technology

This adapted structuration theory understands that

technology enables, forms and limits the actors’

choices and actions. This should not be seen as a one-

way relationship. It is the actors themselves who

constitute the structures.

Page 12: disruptive technology

Regulation: From Command and Control to

Fuller

Page 13: disruptive technology

What’s wrong with Command and Control?

Page 14: disruptive technology

Lon Fuller

Page 15: disruptive technology

The position of this work is that regulation is every force or external controls exerted upon those to be

regulated.

Page 16: disruptive technology

“the enterprise of subjecting human conduct

to the governance of rules”

Page 17: disruptive technology

Latour, B. (1992). “Where are the Missing Masses?

Sociology of a Few Mundane Artefacts”

Winner, L. (1985) “Do Artefacts have Politics?”

Page 18: disruptive technology

HCI people can think of this as the tyranny of

affordance*

* I want to write an article with this title…

Page 19: disruptive technology

Lessig (1999)

Page 20: disruptive technology

Murray (2006)

Page 21: disruptive technology

…and now for six stories of regulation…

Page 22: disruptive technology

Participation

• The purpose of this chapter is to better understand the political protest activities carried out online and to see whether traditional civil disobedience theory embraces these new forms of political activism.

Page 23: disruptive technology
Page 24: disruptive technology

Conclusion

• The present trend is the use of hierarchical (Murray & Scott 2001) regulation to criminalises DoS attacks and more in the name of terrorism are much too far reaching and seriously hamper the enjoyment of individuals’ civil rights.

Page 25: disruptive technology

Communication

• The purpose of this chapter is to explore the regulation of online communication by exploring the attempts by the regulator to come to terms with the computer virus.

Page 26: disruptive technology
Page 27: disruptive technology

Conclusion

• From the three national approaches to the regulation of the disruptive technology of viruses we can deduce two basic approaches to regulating the phenomenon, these are hierarchical and design-based regulation (Murray & Scott 2001). The design-based control is seen through the use of anti-virus software – this has not been the focus of this chapter.

Page 28: disruptive technology

Integrity

• The purpose of this chapter is to illuminate an example where regulatory structures fail to act in an adequate manner and the solution to the problem is enacted by the socio-technical means in the sense that the solution lies in a combination of technological, organisational and social solutions.

Page 29: disruptive technology
Page 30: disruptive technology

Conclusion

• The form of regulation seen in this chapter is a blend of the design-based and competition-based (Murray & Scott 2001) forms of regulation. As this case study has shown, the lack of hierarchical regulation leads to an opening for competition-based regulation to fill this gap. In this specific case the form which competition-based regulation has taken is one that uses design-based regulation in the form of anti-spyware software.

Page 31: disruptive technology

Property

• This chapter therefore will look at the way in which new environments, such as MMORPGs, challenge existing established principles in property and attempt to re-interpret them to better suit their new environment.

Page 32: disruptive technology
Page 33: disruptive technology

Conclusion

• The forms of regulation most evident in this chapter are the design-based and the hierarchical forms of regulation (Murray & Scott 2001). The design-based regulation is seen in the way in which the software making up the MMORPG environment can be changed to suit the regulatory needs of the platform owners. This is used together with the application of the EULA as a form of hierarchical regulation, which is supported by the courts through the implementation of contract law.

Page 34: disruptive technology

Access

• This chapter therefore studies the creation of an information infrastructure with the express political goal of being freely available for everyone who wants it, to be used in any way the users desire.

Page 35: disruptive technology
Page 36: disruptive technology

Conclusion

• The two forms of regulation seen in this chapter are community-based and design-based (Murray & Scott 2001) regulation. The community-based regulators can be seen in the force of the policy decisions and mindsets of those making technology investments while the design-based regulators are the effects of the lock-in and path dependencies caused by the installed software base.

Page 37: disruptive technology

Autonomy

• The purpose of this chapter is to present censorship theory and practice in relation to the debate of Internet regulation. The chapter will also present the results of some empirical censorship research and look at the growing anti-censorship movement.

Page 38: disruptive technology
Page 39: disruptive technology

Conclusion

• In this case we see three regulators interacting to control user access to information. These are design-based, community-based and hierarchical regulators. The design-based regulators refer to the filtering software employed to block user access, the community-based regulators are the “soft” voluntary policy documents which corporate entities choose to enforce while the hierarchical regulators are the legal actions with both intended and unintended consequences.

Page 40: disruptive technology

Results

I. Regulator seriously adopt the functional equivalency approach to ensure against online discrimination.

II. Users activity without deferring tough choices to experts.

III. Regulator to accept user participation in the regulatory process.

IV. The tolerance of non-conventional uses of technology.

Page 41: disruptive technology

Conclusions

• Where to now?• Activism• Academy