Sir Tim Berners-Lee's plan to save the Internet and give us back control of our data raises questions for us all about how far we, as individuals, want the Internet to intrude on our daily lives. Recent legal actions in countries such as Australia against the large Internet data providers such as Facebook and Google raises a key question about how far we all want such providers to know about not just our personal likes and dislikes, for example in terms of what we purchase and how, but also our movements, travel plans, and personal lives, all of which is collected in massive data bases employing the latest artificial intelligence (AI) tools. It is very much an individual choice. I have never subscribed to any social media platforms such as Facebook and LinkedIn for security reasons. I am only too aware of how foreign entities prey on such data bases. However, unless one is in the national security domain or feel that privacy is a critical need, then most may well find that the major Internet providers and information sources such as Google offer a vast panoply of important services that we have grown to need and want on a daily 24/7 basis. So has the creator of the World Wide Web, that provided the world for free this amazing capability, come up with a solution to the key issue of privacy and control of personal data?

What Tim Berners-Lee has devised is a "Data Sovereignty" concept which he believes will allow you and me to have control over our own data. He wants the big tech companies to lose control of yours and my data. What is the key basis for doing this? Well it's simply this: To prevent a few tech giants thriving on a system of "surveillance capitalism" which has access to and control over our personal data and harvest this data to target advertisements and other sales tools as we all browse the web. Berners-Lee sees your and my personal data as something that only you and I should control. This covers key data rights to control our personal information and what may or may not be collected, analyzed, stored, then owned in essence by the large tech internet providers, and used for commercial gain. You may surf the web for instance and not be at all aware that in fact the tech giants are actually taking all your personal information without your knowledge and consent and using it in ways that various countries legal authorities determine is both unfair competition and without your consent or indeed compensation.

The counter argument from the tech giants is that the data being exploited is not our property. The argument of the European Union lawyers and many others is that this process has led to big tech monopolies that expand exponentially their business bases. In the west the so called GAFAM dominates – Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft, and in China it is the BAT – Baidu, Alibaba, and Tencent.

Tim Berners-Lee through a new company called Inrupt wants to create "Pods" – "Personal On Line Data Stores" so that we can all control our own data, not big tech. The Pods are in effect personal digital data safes that only you and I can control and access. Access to the huge digital platforms of the tech giants is denied unless we individually allow access to an individual pod in return for services but the tech company such as Google will not be able to extract or sell the data. The pod owners control access through a system called "Solid" and authentification from Solid is required before our data can be released. Solid is a Silicon valley start up and is the "bank in which the safe" (our individual Pods) is stored.

This approach may not be for everyone. I am of the opinion that I like Google, for example, because of its information sources that I use all the time, and if Google is tracking what I buy, and my likes and dislikes, then I'm not particularly concerned because at the end of the day I decide what I will buy through say Amazon. However, many others, and this is a global view, fear genuinely for the privacy of the world's personal data. There is no question in my opinion that big tech's digital dominance does need to be controlled, particularly in preventing unfair marketing and pricing practices whereby we, the consumers, are denied access to other sources, and those sources are victims of unfair competitive practices. Small companies can be and are the victims of these unfair practices. None of this is good for fair competition. However, when I did a recent personal survey of the products that I have bought over the past few months on Amazon I found that for each product that I had bought there was enormous choice and price range. The counter argument to this personal analysis is that many small companies cannot afford to pay the Amazon fees for being in the Amazon product data bases and therefore are being severely restricted from not just the American but the global market given the reach of Amazon. We consumers and Internet users can of course use other data bases to search for products and obtain prices and order on line, thus enabling small companies and suppliers to set up their own web sites that we can access through key word searches. At the same time we are all acutely aware that, dare I say, Amazon Prime will have a product on our doorstep today that was ordered on line yesterday, together with a photo in your email telling you where a package was left and requesting feedback on the quality of service. Let's be candid, that's tough to beat. Well established companies like L.L.Bean can provide similar services at competitive prices though maybe not quite as rapid as Amazon unless one wants to pay extra for fast delivery.

This is not a simple issue, and as I indicated up front it is for every Eccentric reader to decide what they want, or don't want. I hope this provides a sound basis for everyone to make their own personal decisions and keep a wary eye out for privacy intrusion of your personal data, and what you are prepared to allow and not.

One technical aspect with which I will conclude that we should all follow with considerable interest is the impact that "Quantum Computing" will have on the above domains during this decade and beyond. What I call quantum resistant cryptography in the Five Eyes Intelligence Community will be able to provide the private and commercial sectors with means to provide watertight encryption while, from an intelligence perspective enabling the United States and Five Eyes allies to exploit this capability to decrypt others' transmissions in real time. We are going to need increasingly every means at our disposal to protect individuals, banks, the international financial structure, transport, hospitals, and all other forms of critical infrastructure from power and water supply to communications and the media from state-sponsored cyber attacks, and those of state-sponsored surrogates, criminal organizations, and malicious hackers. On Sunday, May 9, 2021 the US government issued emergency legislation after the largest fuel pipeline in the United States was hit by a cyber-attack. The Colonial Pipeline carries 2.5 million barrels a day, and provides 45% of the East Coast's supply of diesel, petrol, and jet fuel. This recent attack is symptomatic of the threats that we will all increasingly face.

Please be well and by now I hope that most in our wonderful community are on the way to vaccination. Happy Spring.