know that has happened. In that sense, it is much the way it was.” Audio Tape: Interview withGreg Jackson (1/9/06) (on file with author).

5. See Helen Nissenbaum, “Values in the Design of Computer Systems,” Computers andSociety (March 1998): 38.

6. As network adminstrator Greg Jackson described to me, while certain ports (includingthe wireless network) require that the user initially register the machine, there is no ongoingeffort to verify the identity of the user. And,more importantly, there are still a significant num-ber of ports which remain essentially unregulated. That doesn’t mean that usage, however,isn’t regulated. As Jackson described,

“But the truth is, if we can identify a particular peer-to-peer network that is doinghuge movie sharing, we will assign it a lower priority so it simply moves slower anddoesn’t interfere with other people. So, we do a lot of packet shaping of that sort.Almost never does that extend to actually blocking particular sites, for example,although there are a few cases where we have had to do that just because . . .”

According to Jackson, it is now Columbia that earns the reputation as the free-est network.“Columbia . . . really doesn’t ever try to monitor at all who gets on the wired network on cam-pus. They just don’t bother with that. Their policy is that they protect applications, not the net-work.”

Audio Tape: Interview with Greg Jackson (1/9/06) (on file with author).

7. For an extremely readable description, see Peter Loshin, TCP/IP Clearly Explained (SanFrancisco: Morgan Kaufmann, 1997), 15–23; see also Craig Hunt,TCP/IP Network Administra-tion, 2d ed. (Sebastopol, Cal.: O’Reilly and Associates, 1998), 8–22; Trust in Cyberspace, editedby Fred B. Schneider (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999), 29–36.

8. Peter Steiner, cartoon,New Yorker, July 5, 1993, 61.9. In some contexts we call a network architecture that solves some of these “imperfec-

tions”—that builds in these elements of control—an intranet. Intranets are the fastest-growingportion of the Internet today. They are a strange hybrid of two traditions in network comput-ing—the open system of the Internet, based on TCP/IP, and the control-based capability of tra-ditional proprietary networks layered onto the Internet. Intranets mix values from each toproduce a network that is interoperable but gives its controller more control over access thananyone would have over the Internet.My argument in this book is that an “internet”with con-trol is what our Internet is becoming.

CHAPTER FOUR

1. TelecomWorldWire, “Compuserve Moves for Porn Techno Fix,” January 11, 1995.2. See Ed Krol, TheWhole Internet: User’s Guide and Catalogue (Sebastopol, Cal.: O’Reilly

and Associates, 1992), 23–25; Loshin,TCP/IP Clearly Explained, 3–83; Hunt, TCP/IP, 1–22; seealso Ben M. Segal, “A Short History of Internet Protocols at CERN,” available at link #12.

3. See Jerome H. Saltzer et al., “End-to-End Arguments in System Design,” in IntegratedBroadband Networks, edited by Amit Bhargava (Norwood,Mass.: Artech House, 1991), 30–41.

4. Shawn C.Helms,“Translating Privacy Values with Technology,”Boston University Jour-nal of Science and Technology Law 7 (2001): 288, 296.

5. For a description of HTTP Protocols as they were used in the early 1990s, see link #13.6. For an extraordinarily clear explication of the point, see Dick Hardt—Etech 2006:

“Who Is the Dick on My Site?” (2006), available at link #14.

notes to chapter four 351

0465039146-RM 12/5/06 12:31 AM Page 351