This webpage uses Javascript to display some content.

Please enable Javascript in your browser and reload this page.

Home | Fiction | Nonfiction | Novels | | Innisfree Poetry | Enskyment Journal | International| FACEBOOK | Poetry Scams | Stars & Squadrons | Newsletter

Literature Discussion -


PopUps, Inverted Files and A Unique Citizen
Make Up for a Doomed Time Bug. What For?

By Michèle Ohayon (Paris)


Click here to send comments

Click here if you'd like to exchange critiques


Concerns about privacy, intervention of government in people‘s lives, growing identical concern from such intervention from large internet conglomerates such as Goggle and those who are or will follow in these footsteps as the world awareness weakens slowly, so enmeshed with the internet wonders prompts a question, that of widening up the public debate, a sort of democratization and globalization of the citizen of this global world as one and unique, without the inconvenient of professing or advocating openly rights supposedly acquired and granted by the constitutions of our democracies.  Namely freedom of writing, freedom of speech, and rights to body integrity and civic rights for example.  If this global participative democracy is what we are told today is under way, so are all of its potential locks and closings, as any safe guardian would prepare and provide for, to contain such so called abuses that would arise.  The question is why would we be locked in before we have even thought of abusing?  It remains a question to be answered if we were given the freedom constitutionally, and a sort of right to use that doesn’t exclude abuse if the party who guaranteed it has disappeared or if the letter of an amendment hasn’t been understood by other than dictatorial followers and/or those who believe too much was granted at first and use the extremists and fuel even these extremists so that their own reasoning prevails.  Politics as some may know it.  Or simply because of the world’s technological advancement.
Then there has to be a way of transforming this so called perception of a would be abuse of the letter of a constitutional amendment, this meaning having taken constitutionally more freedom than we were allowed, and having become revisionists or dictators of a sort that only revising these very freedoms would stop. I believe the real solution is taking the time to understand the society these amendments and these constitutions created.  For example, the Internet.  It doesn’t allow for a public debate, a global participation of citizens of the whole world into problem solving.  It is a forum with a multiplicity of debates where everyone is wary of speaking out in his own name, not towards the world but vis a vis its own government rules and customs, laws and regulations.  Moreover, even the formidable commercial window is hampered by the sizes of the companies and their levels of know-how, and may disappear at any time if not backed by a terrestrial window, a physical place of commerce.  The flurry of information is even worse, there is so much to read, from paper to virtual that the choice is made towards paper rather than Internet because as news on the Internet moves and changes from one minute to the next, news on paper is tangible and allows for work to be executed in time not virtual.  Our machines are not yet internet manned, are they?  Statistics have shown that Internet has not yet replaced television as news feed, even though scores of articles criticized the amount of time spent by viewers in front of the TV in America, which was about four hours.  TV is still a tool and is now associated with it.

I realized we could easily become actors of our own lives without the fear of government retaliation aided by those giant companies who help into classifying us unbeknownst to us or with us approving because there is no other choice anyway.

What if we created a device, a storage device, with encrypted access that stores all our research on the internet, all our physical and virtual buys, with receipts, all our interventions on forums, chats, discussion groups, our own websites, any of our interventions on the internet, privately, in our name namely publicly, etc.?  It would be a mini macro computer system, the size of a mobile or a tablet, with all the chip power of a macro computer only reduced and minimized, and with our own granting to others of choice to share our information, without this at the hands of hackers or any such internet experts that monitor access to forbidden sites, these by the way being easily accessible such as porn pedophile etc. through easily convertible internet files when not overtly open or sometimes just popping up without our knowledge because of a bug in the computer system.

The 2000 bug has allowed this to happen, all those computer clocks depending on these computer systems have failed to provide adequate guarantee that we wouldn’t be preys to a so called conspiring effort to deem us defrauding because associating with a banking system versus another, stealing five billion euros from a competitor bank that may fuel computer based  so called hacker’s associations with a political agenda, defrauding votes in a presidential election because of a convenient mishap at the click on the candidate of choice or a last minute change of the computer file that contains that name of our choice by a specially appointed exchange computer file broker with skills, or paying with someone else’s credit card because we have the same name or pseudo, and using passwords from old , 2000 is quite far, commercial files.  It just needs a pop up window on easily accessed computers from any part of the world.

This machine couldn’t allow it since it isn’t registered anywhere but with a special organization that is trusted to monitor its participants in a way computerized, not internet based computerized, but through the closest system to chain command as possible, the type that can’t be derailed.
Everyone then could plug in at any time and decide to advocate for his beliefs, his likenings, be a lawyer in defense of any theme he chooses, be it real persons, animal causes, or become a political candidate.  He could be reached through a specific mailbox, virus protected one if there was a return question and dialogue with anyone, be it a president of a country or a kid in a remote part of the world.  Real assessment of work potential could be done, it could be applied to the medical information, to news but also to preventing adamant intrusion of privacy in people’s life the internet allows today and would certainly stop special government programs attempting at creating the uniquely true citizen, the one that is stuck in its tow once promises have not been fulfilled.

Moreover, it would allow to create our own diversified cults and myths of the artistic or informational kind, we would be curious of unknown local customs, and national identities would get back in their places without fear of neo-Nazis coming in claiming exactly their own inverted view of nationalism.  Nations could coexist with these local customs without giving way to perceived or actual bias in judging each other’s policies, culture, customs and reviving national identities.  The melting  and therefore disappearance of the concept of one ‘s nationality and country’s belonging has been accentuated by the advent of the internet, the world is becoming one and we are forgetting our own cultures, selling thus ancestral and mechanical knowledge doomed to disappear, and so useful when computer communications failures arise, and revised along the way.  What if such failures had happened in the twin towers themselves at inception or construction, what if they were doomed because someone picked it up along the way, this kind of information is only understandable when you are an architect, and provided for as catch can.  What if worse, the towers’ own computers clashed with those of the planes at the time they got close, and what if a time bug chain reaction man manned maybe and tipped to that extent, sent planes on classified targets such as the pentagon because a bug inadvertently reverted the protective structure they were filed under into a target one, can we still talk about terrorism, or can’t we?  Terrorists may for intentional purposes, be they political or religious, claim such attempts, as long as their speech targets are reached.  Isn’t it a way to serve and disserve their existence, which is rooted in the politics of today’s world?  No one can do anything against the power of technological progress, machine conquers man, we all become its servants and subservient to the notions of technological advancement at all cost for a beautiful and attractive commercial window.

I believe in the power of the individual, served by a smaller machine that any man has ever been deemed such.  The Internet is ours, let it be true.