The Price of Freedom: Reclaiming the Open Promise of the World Wide Web and Governing AI

The Founding Principle of the Web

The original concept for the World Wide Web stemmed from the combination of two existing technologies: the internet and hypertext. This fusion provided a simple mechanism for navigation, often referred to as "links," which promised to unlock creativity and collaboration on a global scale. It was recognized early on that for the web to achieve universal scale and contain "everything," it needed to be universally accessible without charge.

This necessity—that users could not be required to pay for every search or upload—was foundational. This led to the pivotal decision in 1993 to donate the intellectual property of the World Wide Web to the public domain, ensuring the resource was given away freely to everyone.

The Centralization Trap

A critical examination of the web's current state suggests a severe departure from the founding principle of freedom. Today, a handful of large platforms routinely harvest users' private data, often sharing it with commercial brokers or even repressive governments.

In this environment, the user has shifted from being the customer to becoming the product, where personal data—even if anonymized—is monetized and sold to actors far removed from the user's intent. This ecosystem is characterized by ubiquitous algorithms designed for engagement and addiction, raising significant concerns regarding psychological wellbeing and social cohesion. Trading personal data for platform access stands in direct contradiction to the vision of a free, open resource.

Is the web still free today? The pervasive use of personal data for commercial ends suggests that, for many, the answer is no.

The Potential for Data Empowerment

Technical solutions exist to return control over personal information to the individual. Standards like Solid, an open-source, interoperable framework, aim to achieve this by fundamentally altering the data relationship: applications must explicitly request data from the user, who retains the choice to agree or refuse.

Instead of data being scattered across countless separate silos (e.g., fitness trackers, financial records, social media updates), the information resides in one location, wholly controlled by its generator. If individuals generate data through their actions, choices, and preferences, the argument follows that they should retain complete ownership and empowerment over it. The technical capability exists to liberate and consolidate this information; the current default expectation of data siloing and obfuscation must be challenged.

The Crossroads of Artificial Intelligence

The failures experienced during the transition to centralized Web 2.0 present crucial lessons for the governance of Artificial Intelligence. Society is now at a new crossroads, requiring an immediate decision on whether AI will serve the betterment or detriment of humanity.

The slow regulatory response that characterized the rise of social media must not be repeated. Policy makers cannot afford to play the same decade-long game of catchup. Given the fiercely competitive nature of the AI industry, governance cannot be left solely to the dictation of major companies, as history demonstrates this approach often leads to monopolies that prioritize control and harvesting of personal data.

It can be argued that AI requires governance models analogous to those governing established professions like law or medicine, binding systems by regulations and codes of conduct. This structure would ensure that the power inherent in AI is used responsibly and ethically.

A Collaborative Path Forward

Part of the frustration with 21st-century democracy often stems from the inability of governments to keep pace with the demands of digital citizens. To ensure AI truly works for everyone, international collaboration on a scale reminiscent of organizations like CERN—which operated on a not-for-profit basis driven by historic scientific necessity—is essential.

It is difficult to imagine a large technology corporation willingly sharing world-changing intellectual property without commercial expectation, underscoring the necessity for a CERN-like, not-for-profit body to drive international AI research. Reclaiming the web as a global tool for collaboration, creativity, and compassion is technically feasible. The final challenge rests entirely on mustering the political will to enact necessary regulation and global governance. It is believed that it is not too late to re-empower individuals and take back the web.

Comments are closed.