Cyberinfrastructures are a little outside of my comfort zone so I’m not sure I completely understand how they work, but I like how Yang places it in real world context.
It seems like the purpose of a cyberinfrastructure is to get more done, in less time, in more than one place. Great concept right? I agree that this sounds great, but I agree with some of the criticisms that Yang brings up. What if the type of research that you are performing is illegal in some countries, but not in others? The other day at work I heard some pretty well-known DJ’s talking about piracy. The first DJ was concerned that he would be fined for having pirated material on his computer. The other DJ brushed it off and stated that he would simply move his server to “somewhere like Thailand or Botswana” where it isn’t illegal. What happens if a computer that stores some of that information where it is illegal? Does the person responsible for the content get charged back home even a said law does not exist in that country, or does he have to be extradited first? Is the country where it isn’t illegal have to anything at all? I personally don’t think so, but it brings up some valid concerns. Will an international cyber-law enforcement come to fruition at some point soon? INTERINTERPOL (International Internet Criminal Police Organization) maybe.
On another note, but still somewhat related to international frontiers, I like how Yang continues the debate regarding ontologies. What becomes an official ontological language? How are we supposed to accommodate foreign languages in the web 3.0? Will many key words and ontological definitions from several languages all be linked to one parcel of data labelled “10010101” for example?
I don’t know much about programming or cyberinfrastructures but I get the impression that the issues that Yang brings to the surface are increasingly important. I don’t think that the solutions are impossible, I’m simply curious to know how the laws form around cloud servers and cyberinfrastructures.
Andrew