There’s something really beautiful about the global network. It is a tool that can take on many forms depending on whose hands it falls into. It’s both a tool and environment, creating a sea of opportunities. And we (at RosKomSvoboda – author’s note) are staunch advocates of freedom when it comes to developing this environment. Up until 2011-2012, the Network had been developing through self-regulation, and it was this very principle (which implied government non-intervention in the evolution of network infrastructure) that helped land Internet projects, Internet commerce and Internet industry in general. Thanks to this approach, Russia was able to provide a significant counterweight to foreign services, since few search engines elsewhere in the world are able to compete with Google. In our case it is Yandex. The online social media and social networking service VK is competing with Facebook. However, on a global level such cases are not quite common. It was the fact that the Russian government did not intervene in the network’s growth that actually led to the emergence of these services. The market became free, efficient and self-regulated. Unfortunately, at a certain point, things began to go downhill.
Artem Kozluk, the head of RosKomSvoboda. An excerpt from the interview, given to the author
Some ten years previously, the government didn’t really pay much attention to the Internet, and we were trying to attract the people’s attention. Today, I realize we shouldn’t have done that. Life would have been much easier for us, since at some point the government decided to tap into the benefits of the Network. Among the initiatives proposed was an idea of creating a transparent government. Later, they realized that the country’s citizens use the Internet too. Then, they began to exert pressure on the people using the good old methods – like implementing a countless of prohibiting laws. Therefore, traffic control will always be in trend. Should they want to, they will control everything. However, there are ways to avoid this scrutiny. Of course, they are taking measures to curb that. Just look at what happened to RosKomSvoboda’s site, which listed ways to evade such scrutiny: the site was eventually blocked. Then again, such methods are more or less known to those, who realize where this may be leading to. And those, who paid no interest to the issue, will probably become victims of a new order.
Ivan Pavlov, head of the Institute for Development of Freedom of Information. Rosbalt. “Runet will be scrutinized in an event of war”. February 12, 2016
They, who can give up essential Liberty to obtain a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
Benjamin Franklin
Innocence
Today, much of what I remember about the Internet and its users, despite the fact that these memories harken back to about a decade from now, might seem not only amusing, but strange. It’s odd, isn’t it, to wake up on a day-off at five in the morning to download a new song and wait anxiously for the download to complete some twenty minutes later. Or think of those packages which gave access to the Internet during night hours at reduced rates. It so happened, that my personal growth coincided with the rising popularity of the Internet, and we matured together, so to speak. That’s why I had always been exploring its opportunities, phenomena and logic with never-ceasing enthusiasm. Some of my findings became the focus of this book.
Success of any endeavor pretty much depends on a single factor. I’m talking about putting the correct emphasis. This is true for all things, be it a good crescendo in a melody, an accurate image in a painting or a shrewd phrase in a book – the things we so deeply love and that will stay with us until the end of our lives. I on the other hand want to admit otherwise. The emphasis of my book has been shifted more than once, at times taking such a break from the agenda that it would almost become secondary. That’s why I would ask anyone, who fears uncertainty or relies only on their succinct conclusions, to put this book aside until better times. This is not a case of my showing off or some kind of cheap decoy. It’s not all that simple. The way we interpret events today can differ drastically from whatever conclusions we make tomorrow. As of now, we can freely talk about reasons behind wars, the changes they brought to the world order or the number of people died fighting on opposite sides. The impact of events, still happening today, can hardly be measured because their implications and real scope are unclear. It’s not always easy for us, humans, to make accurate assumptions either. Making long term weather forecasts is a good example of that. To say I can predict a coherent outcome of the history of the Internet and freedom of speech online, important decisions, which propelled the creation of today’s Network, and, once and for all, deal with a complex “maze” of definitions and logic – would be to lie to myself and to my Readers, and that’s the last thing I feel like doing. That is why I urge you to take my warning very seriously.
It is hard to believe today, but when I began working on my book, I was absolutely sure that I would stay away from sensitive topics. Publishing a book at a time, when every single action of yours may have a political underlining, even if it isn’t true, compels you to treat the text differently. In the end, my narrative became filled with acid sarcasm toward certain politicians, draft laws and decisions, which affect the lives of many Internet-users across the world.
There is nothing more treacherous and deceitful than telling the Readers the things they want to hear. That’s why I feel it’s my duty to introduce you to the signature features of the book.
Politics
Politics is the major focus of the book. After all, this topic, raised quite frequently here, is part of an unwritten list of the most controversial topics. And believe me, you’ll find quite a lot of controversies here. I couldn’t help but mention a story of Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, and his political persecution; a multilayered Russian-Ukrainian conflict, as well as a “turf war” these countries entered into.
Facts
The facts I used, which are in free access on the Internet, were lifted from online media publications, encyclopedias and other resources. Thanks to them, I was able to start working on my book, and there were almost no barriers to gaining and collecting information.
Originality
Despite all “mysteries”, “secrets” and other “breaking news”, the facts and sources mentioned in my book do not purport to be unique, yet it’s my own approach in putting the facts together that makes my narrative one-of-a-kind.
Attitudes
Any book is a combination of its author’s beliefs, and no one can ever take that away. Obviously, you don’t have to agree with everything I say, however, everyone will only benefit from that. I free myself from having to bombard you with excessive evidence, and you – from any obligations that may follow.
Here’s one more thing: the Readers may be tempted to think that I belong to one of the many existing political societies. Sorry to disappoint you (hopefully, it is the first and last time I’ve done that), but there’s no way I would become a member of “parties” or “movements” of any kind. To me, such “congregations” of people hold no true value, while pushing a certain idea isn’t really my thing either. I prefer to process my thoughts when I’m on my own: it’s easier, and, eventually, you can always release these thoughts whatever is going to happen next.
Contrary to extended discourse and scrutiny to lots of details, when writing this book I did my best to make the narrative – accessible and easy-to-read. Because of this, it may seem that the book asks more questions than it gives answers. This approach did not only become the book’s signature feature but, hopefully, an advantage too. I am also very pleased not to have overburdened you with my own findings and conclusions.
Trust no one, think with your head, and double-check all the facts!