The phrase “consensual hallucination experienced daily by billions” was first used by science fiction novelist William Gibson when describing the new place created by worldwide computer networks that he called “cyberspace.” But what exactly did Gibson mean by this consensual hallucination? Well, to him it was a new world that the networked computers created. It was a place with its own geography, its own laws, and a space for new ideas to be created. Individuals signed onto the computers to enter this new world. Essentially, it really was separate and succinct to the physical real world. It was a sort of hallucination because it wasn’t physical, but rather virtual. You could virtually communicate with someone else or exchange ideas across this virtual world. It was only accessible to those that chose to log on and be a part of it.

However, I think this phrase is no longer an accurate description of conduct on the internet. First, the very word “consensual” is not true anymore. You no longer have to sit down at a desk and boot up a giant computer to have a role on the internet. I’m not even talking about the fact that we carry it around in our pockets on our phones now implies we have some say in make the decision. But more than that, now there are smart devices, aka “internet of things” that are connected to the internet, even when we are not. Additionally, other people could upload pictures, videos, or truly anything about you onto the internet these days. I think the idea of “consensual” involvement in the internet is no longer accurate.

Second, the term “hallucination” is simply an inaccurate description of our experience with the internet these days. It has integrated to be an essential part of the physical world. Again, consider the Internet of Things. There are so many “smart” devices that we use in our lives today. Cyberspace is not just an virtual reality we can escape to, it is the real world now.

In 1776, the thirteen colonies set out to immortalize our separation from the British empire by signing the Declaration of Independence. In doing so, we recognized our right to govern ourselves and our grievances against the King. Similarly, in 1996, Barlow begins the Cyberspace Declaration of Independence by declaring that no government shall have authority over Cyberspace and that those in Cyberspace are forming their own “Social Contract.” Barlow then goes on to air his grievances against governments trying to impose themselves in Cyberspace. He notes that governments have not “engaged in our great and gathering conversation” and they have “do not know our culture, our ethics, or the unwritten codes.” Most importantly, his concern is with legislation countries are passing to regulate Cyberspace. Similar grievances can be seen throughout the Declaration of Independence against the King, who was an ocean’s distance from the New World. In both instances, freedom is sought from an entity that seemingly does not understand the “new world” that exists, whether that be the new country or new cyberspace.

The Internet however, is vastly different that the small territorial bounds of the thirteen original colonies. There is far greater reach with the Internet. Those congregating on the internet come from many different backgrounds, cultures, and ideologies. Those in the thirteen colonies largely shared a similar background. Thus, giving cyberspace the same kinds of self-determination as the citizens of the thirteen colonies could be chaotic. There is less of a consensus on what priorities or rules should be on the internet. Without some influence by governments, it would be left to individuals which would be almost impossible to come to a consensus.

There are more ins and outs of the internet than I realized. It was particularly interesting seeing the physical aspects of it in the YouTube video How does the internet work?  I do not come from a STEM background, but I am currently enrolled in a Masters program in Cybersecurity Risk Management where I am learning more about the infrastructure of the internet and computers. Additionally, our readings help develop my level of understanding.

The iPhone was originally sterile, and was not to be generative beyond the innovations that Apple wanted. However, then the App Store was introduced which invites invention. Apple acts as a platform for developers to post new apps. To this degree, I think they should be somewhat responsible that the apps are not harmful to the iPhones. They should screen the applications to ensure there are no harmful bugs that the user will download. I typically feel confident that the app I download will not harm my device. I stick to apps that are widely known and have lots of downloads on the app store.