Exploring Physical vs Digital
I have always found the digital world fascinating. The way that something can exist in a virtual realm, yet reflect properties of the physical world, makes it unusual yet strangely tangible.
Is it appropriate to treat digital representations as objects or entities in their own right? What are their similarities and differences and what do they mean to us? What dangers do these properties present?
Properties of digital stuff
I recall having a conversation years ago with an old friend. We both had computers, which was still a relative novelty at the time. My father has an electrical engineering background and so computers were in our family for as long as they were available (even a kit computer, with a wooden box!). My friend’s family on the other hand, had teaching backgrounds and cared little for computers.
My friend’s father had written a document and was contemplating printing it. There’s nothing unusual about that, but his fear that it would no longer be on the computer was; sending the document to the printer meant just that to him — it would go from within the computer to outside of it, materialising in paper form. How we chuckled at the time!
I have never forgotten this conversation. It made me think about how people may apply real world properties to something where they don’t exist. It helped me to understand that computers do not always work as expected. The language used to describe operations with a computer may both help and hinder the understanding of them.
Data can be copied, cloned, moved and destroyed in moments. Access to it can be granted easily, then taken away just as fast. There is no manufacturing of data in a traditional sense, as once there is a single copy, it can be duplicated over and over again, at near zero cost.
Properties of physical stuff
For those of us who dwell in the digital realm, real stuff can be a pain. If I want to change the design of an application, I just type some words onto the screen and give it a try. I don’t need to put my old rags on, I don’t need to wear safety glasses, nor do I need to pull on protective gloves. I don’t expect to work up a sweat, strain my muscles or get physically exhausted.
Creating a new class or function is simple. Effort is minimal and if it doesn’t work, a few taps on the delete key erases it from the application. In the real world, I have to machine, build and construct something. I may have to design it and even the tools to make it. It will take time, money and skill. If I get it wrong, it may be useless. Even if I get it right, it may still break when I’m using it. I may even get broken using it!
Then there are the forces acting upon real stuff. It may be heavy, due to gravity acting on its mass. There may be friction with one thing rubbing against another. Wear and tear will occur, even when correctly lubricated. Even the lubrication itself must be monitored and replaced. None of this applies to software. The idea of servicing software to stop it wearing out is as nonsensical to a computer as a document being moved from a disk to a piece of paper after printing.
Parallels between physical and digital stuff
Despite many differences, there are still parallels.
We patch software to keep it up to secure and safe, which is reassuringly similar to what we do with physical items, such as cars.
While software may not wear, the world around it changes in a way that doesn’t happen in the physical world. The digital ecosystem is evolving and constantly reinventing itself. It happens at such a rapid pace that it impacts on the digital things that reside within it.
We can think about sending an email or message to someone online and it feels very much like a letter. It appears to leave the outbox and arrive in an inbox, much like a physical letter does. Of course, much of this is an illusion to make the process feel familiar, but this helps us feel comfortable with these processes.
Some times we just abandon any notion of similarity. We just say something is ‘in the cloud’, to express that it is out there somewhere. We don’t know exactly where or how, but we often don’t want or need to know either.
Is ignorance bliss?
Life is sometimes complex enough without knowing the exact locations of our stuff. Accepting that it is it is safely where we left it is sufficient. The same is true of our data.
There is no cloud. It is just someone else’s computer.
Should we be content to leave our data in the cloud though? Should we be concerned that the applications we use now often belong to someone else? Should we be worried that this data may not be safe and secure?
There was a time when we installed all of our applications. The entirety of the application was loaded onto our computers and they operated totally independently. There was no server to connect to, even if we were able to get online at all. Ownership of the application and the data it created were obvious — they belonged to us on our machines.
With the physical world, this is largely true too. We buy tools, machines, equipment and so forth which we store at our property. There is no ambiguity over ownership. Finance and leasing may have blurred this ownership model in the modern world, but there is almost always a choice. We can elect to own both the equipment and the results they produce.
When tools are run in the cloud, we don’t take ownership of them. When the product of these tools is also held in the cloud, we don’t take ownership of that either. We’re beholden to the corporations behind the cloud. Not only do we rent their tools, but we also rent our data. Is it even legally our data at all?
The cloud shouldn’t be a walled garden
Ownership of our stuff is important. We must be able to own tools and the products created with them. It is key to our personal independence and it prevents our productivity being stifled and our creativity being censored.
In the physical world, it is hard to obfuscate ownership. A restriction in our ability to move or retain stuff is obvious. In the digital world, the edges are much more blurred and gaining a complete understanding is more difficult.
Data can move with very little friction or momentum, which can be a double edged sword. On one had it can be extremely easy to give everyone the ability to access new tools and create compelling content. On the other hand, it can be trivial to restrict access to these tools and confiscate the products created by them.
We must remain vigilant and be aware of where we access our digital tools and how our content is stored. We need to understand the key differences and parallels between the digital and the physical world. If we don’t, sending data somewhere may indeed be as we may naively imagine — it is no longer on our computers and access to it in the cloud may evaporate.
