inspired by George Orwell

那麼我以個廣告作為開場,

that Apple ran in 1984.

其創作靈感來自喬治‧奧威爾

(Video) Big Brother: We are one people

蘋果電腦(Apple) 在1984年推出的這個廣告。

with one will, one resolve,

(視頻)老大哥(Big Brother):「我們是一個族群,

one cause.

意志一致, 決心一致

Our enemies shall talk themselves to death,

我們有共同的理想。

and we will fight them with their own confusion.

我們的敵人必定會一直講......講到他們自己煩死,

We shall prevail.

我們可藉其慌亂攻克他們。

Narrator: On January 24th,

我們將會戰勝。」

Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh.

敍述者: 在1月24日,

And you'll see why 1984

蘋果電腦將出「麥金塔」(Macintosh簡稱Mac)。

won't be like "1984."

你將明白為何1984年

Rebecca MacKinnon: So the underlying message of this video

會不同於《1984》。

remains very powerful even today.

Rebecca Mackinnon:可以說,這個短片所傳遞的基礎訊息

Technology created by innovative companies

在今天仍然是非常具有影響力。

will set us all free.

由各家創新企業所創造的「科技」

Fast-forward more than two decades:

將會解放我們所有人。

Apple launches the iPhone in China

時間快進到20多年後,

and censors the Dalai Lama out

蘋果首度在中國推出iPhone時

along with several other politically sensitive applications

達賴喇嘛便遭審查出局,

at the request of the Chinese government

連帶其他幾個政治敏感的軟體,

for its Chinese app store.

都是中國政府要求

The American political cartoonist

Apple中國軟體商店審查刪除的。

Mark Fiore

美國政治漫畫家

also had his satire application

Mark Fiore,

censored in the United States

他的諷刺作品軟體也同樣

because some of Apple's staff

在美國審查遭拒

were concerned it would be offensive to some groups.

因某些蘋果的軟體審查人員

His app wasn't reinstated

顧及其諷刺作品會令某些團體反感,

until he won the Pulitzer Prize.

他的軟體未獲採用

The German magazine Stern, a news magazine,

直到他贏得了普立茲獎 (Pulitzer Prize)才准獲用。

had its app censored

德國新聞週刋《明星》(Stern),

because the Apple nannies deemed it

其軟體遭審查

to be a little bit too racy for their users,

因Apple 「審查褓母」認為刋物內容

and despite the fact that this magazine

對apple的用戶來說,有點太過辛辣煽情,

is perfectly legal for sale

儘管事實上這個週刋

on newsstands throughout Germany.

絶對是合法,可正當銷售

And more controversially, recently,

在全德國的各個報攤都可見。

Apple censored a Palestinian protest app

還有,最近備受爭議的是

after the Israeli government voiced concerns

Apple 審查巴勒斯坦的抗議軟體

that it might be used to organize violent attacks.

是因為以色列政府表示擔憂

So here's the thing.

此類軟體可能被用來組織暴力攻擊。

We have a situation where private companies

這麼說來,事情是這樣的

are applying censorship standards

有種情形 ── 私營的企業

that are often quite arbitrary

正施行審查制度規範,

and generally more narrow

審查標準經常是相當地獨斷專制

than the free speech constitutional standards

並通常又更為嚴密,

that we have in democracies.

比保證在民主國家人民擁有言論自由

Or they're responding to censorship requests

的憲法還要嚴苛。

by authoritarian regimes

也就是說,他們回應審查制度的求要

that do not reflect consent of the governed.

是以專權的制度來處理,

Or they're responding to requests and concerns

這種制度未能反映人民意願。

by governments that have no jurisdiction

換言之, 他們回應請求和關切的事情,

over many, or most, of the users and viewers

是以不具審判權的管理形式

who are interacting with the content in question.

支配許多人,大部分是用戶和觀看者,

So here's the situation.

他們與這種制式的內容交流。

In a pre-Internet world,

所以,情況是這樣的--

sovereignty over our physical freedoms,

在沒有網際網路前的世界

or lack thereof,

國家主權支配著我們的物質自由,

was controlled almost entirely

或者說是缺乏物質自由,

by nation-states.

幾乎完全受制於

But now we have this new layer

民族國家。

of private sovereignty

但現在有新階層存在:

in cyberspace.

「私營的統治主權」

And their decisions about software coding,

就存在於我們的電子網際空間(cyberspace)。

engineering, design, terms of service

而且他們作的決定,如:軟體編碼、

all act as a kind of law

工程設計、圖型設計、服務條款

that shapes what we can and cannot do with our digital lives.

每每都具法律的作用,

And their sovereignties,

規範我們的數位生活──我們可以做什麼;不可以什麼。

cross-cutting, globally interlinked,

況且他們的「統治主權」

can in some ways

縱橫全球環環相扣,

challenge the sovereignties of nation-states

就某些方面來說

in very exciting ways,

考驗民族國家的主權

but sometimes also act

而且方式相當刺激。

to project and extend it

但他們有時也採取行動,

at a time when control

凸顯並擴展其「統治主權」

over what people can and cannot do

每次當控制、

with information

支配人們可以如何處理

has more effect than ever

資料信息時,

on the exercise of power

這樣的控制支配比任何時候都更有影響力,

in our physical world.

深深的影響

After all, even the leader of the free world

我們實質世界的權力運作。

needs a little help from the sultan of Facebookistan

最終,甚至是在自由世界的領導者,

if he wants to get reelected next year.

都得求助於臉書(facebook)的蘇丹王(指facebook創辦人Mark Zuckerberg)

And these platforms

若他明年還想要連任的話。

were certainly very helpful

而且這些平台

to activists in Tunisia and Egypt

的確相當有用,

this past spring and beyond.

對此次突尼西亞和埃及的改革行動大有幫助

As Wael Ghonim,

──改革活動是在今春及稍後。

the Google-Egyptian-executive by day,

戈寧(Wael Ghonim),

secret-Facebook-activist by night,

白天是Google 駐埃及主管,

famously said to CNN

夜晚則潛行於Facebook鼓吹抗議行動。

after Mubarak stepped down,

他受CNN採訪時,說了一句名言

"If you want to liberate a society,

就在穆巴拉克(Mubarak)下台後,他說:

just give them the Internet."

「若你要解放一個社會,

But overthrowing a government is one thing

給他們一個網路便行了。」

and building a stable democracy

但推翻一個政府是一回事,

is a bit more complicated.

建立一個穩健的民主政體,

On the left there's a photo taken by an Egyptian activist

這又更複雜了。

who was part of the storming

在左方的這張照片,是由埃及參與改革者拍下的,

of the Egyptian state security offices in March.

他參與突擊

And many of the agents

埃及國安辦事處,就在今年三月份。

shredded as many of the documents as they could

許多國安情報人員

and left them behind in piles.

儘可能地把檔案以碎紙機切碎

But some of the files were left behind intact,

成堆地遺留在現場。

and activists, some of them,

但有些檔案文件還完好留著,

found their own surveillance dossiers

而且某些參與改革者

full of transcripts of their email exchanges,

發現他們自己受監視的卷宗:

their cellphone text message exchanges,

所有電子郵件往來的副本,

even Skype conversations.

手機簡訊收發的內容,

And one activist actually found

甚至是Skype的通話。

a contract from a Western company

其中有人還確實發現

for the sale of surveillance technology

一份與西方世界某公司簽署的合約,

to the Egyptian security forces.

內容是出售監視科技系統

And Egyptian activists are assuming

給埃及保安警察部門。

that these technologies for surveillance

可是埃及參改者認為

are still being used

這些監控系統

by the transitional authorities running the networks there.

還在被使用,

And in Tunisia, censorship actually began to return in May --

現在則是由臨時管理組織接管電子及網路通訊。

not nearly as extensively

而且五月時突尼西亞的審查制度又重新開始,

as under President Ben Ali.

審查範圍縮小

But you'll see here a blocked page

不同於總統Ben Ali 執政時一般。

of what happens when you try to reach

可是你可以看到有些網頁遭封鎖,

certain Facebook pages and some other websites

你無法連結到某事件的Facebook網頁

that the transitional authorities

和其他網站。

have determined might incite violence.

因臨時管理組織

In protest over this,

已確定網頁內容可能會煽動暴亂。

blogger Slim Amamou,

為抗議網頁遭封鎖,

who had been jailed under Ben Ali

博客Slim Amamou

and then became part of the transitional government

在Ben Ali 執政時已入獄。

after the revolution,

後來在革命後,他成為

he resigned in protest from the cabinet.

臨時政府的一員。

But there's been a lot of debate in Tunisia

為了抗議網頁封鎖,他退出內閣。

about how to handle this kind of problem.

但是在突尼西亞一直存在著許多的爭議,

In fact, on Twitter,

關於如何處置這個問題眾說紛紜。

there were a number of people who were supportive of the revolution

事實上,在Twitter上

who said, "Well actually,

有很多支持改革的人

we do want democracy and free expression,

他們說:「其實,

but there is some kinds of speech that need to be off-bounds

我們的確要求民主政體和言論自由,

because it's too violent and it might be destabilizing for our democracy.

但是某些類型的言論有需要被限制

But the problem is,

因為那太過暴力而且可能會破壞民主。」

how do you decide who is in power to make these decisions

但問題是

and how do you make sure

如何決定誰有權作決定,

that they do not abuse their power?

並且如何能確保

As Riadh Guerfali,

他們不濫權?

the veteran digital activist from Tunisia,

Riadh Guerfali 是善用數位

remarked over this incident,

鼓動改革的突尼西亞資深科技人。

"Before, things were simple:

他對該事件作評論:

you had the good guys on one side and the bad guys on the other.

「在以前人事結構簡單──

Today, things are a lot more subtle."

好人是一派,另一派是壞人。

Welcome to democracy, our Tunisian and Egyptian friends.

今天,人事更加的微妙且複雜。」

The reality is

歡迎到民主世界, 我們的突尼西亞和埃及朋友們。

that even in democratic societies today,

事實是,

we do not have good answers

即便是處於今日的民主社會,

for how you balance the need

我們沒有合適的答案來回應──

for security and law enforcement on one hand

你要如何平衡需要:

and protection of civil liberties

一方面是保安和法律實行的需要,

and free speech on the other

另一方面則是保障公民自由

in our digital networks.

和論事自由的需要,

In fact, in the United States,

在我們的數位網路世界。

whatever you may think of Julian Assange,

事實上,在美國

even people who are not necessarily big fans of his

無論你如何想Julian Assange(維基揭密創辦人)

are very concerned about the way

即便不是他的擁護者,

in which the United States government and some companies have handled Wikileaks.

也非常關切

Amazon webhosting dropped Wikileaks as a customer

美國當局和企業如何對待「維基揭密」。

after receiving a complaint from U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman,

亞馬遜將「維基揭密」逐出其雲端平台,

despite the fact

因為收到美國參議員Joe Lieberman的抗議。

that Wikileaks had not been charged,

儘管實際上

let alone convicted,

「維基揭密」沒被控告,

of any crime.

更別提被宣判

So we assume

任何罪名。

that the Internet is a border-busting technology.

我們認為

This is a map of social networks worldwide,

網路是跨越疆界的科技。

and certainly Facebook has conquered much of the world --

這是一個全球社交網絡地圖,

which is either a good or a bad thing,

毫無疑問Facebook已佔領世界版圖多數面積,

depending on how you like

這不是件好事,就是件壞事

the way Facebook manages its service.

全憑你怎麼看待

But borders do persist

Facebook如何經營網站服務的方式。

in some parts of cyberspace.

但是疆界持續存在於

In Brazil and Japan,

某些電子網際空間。

it's for unique cultural and linguistic reasons.

好比巴西和日本的

But if you look at China, Vietnam

疆界存在是因為獨特的文化和語言的原故。

and a number of the former Soviet states,

但是若你瞧瞧中國、越南

what's happening there is more troubling.

和前蘇聯,

You have a situation

事情就更為棘手。

where the relationship between government

有個情形──

and local social networking companies

政府

is creating a situation

和當地社群網站公司往來的關係

where, effectively,

正形成了一種局面──

the empowering potential of these platforms

實際上,

is being constrained

這些社交平台的自主力

because of these relationships

是受牽制的,

between companies and government.

因為這層「關係」存在於

Now in China,

企業和政府的所致。

you have the "great firewall," as it's well-known,

目前在中國

that blocks Facebook

有一種「長城防火牆」相當有名,

and Twitter and now Google+

封鎖Facebook、

and many of the other overseas websites.

Twitter、Google+

And that's done in part with the help from Western technology.

和很多其他國外的網站。

But that's only half of the story.

其功能之強,大部分是拜西方科技的協助所賜。

The other part of the story

這還不是故事的全貌。

are requirements that the Chinese government places

故事的下半部是

on all companies operating on the Chinese Internet,

中國當局開出條件,

known as a system of self-discipline.

要求所有在中國網路營運的企業

In plain English, that means censorship and surveillance

─據了解是一套「自律系統」--

of their users.

以易懂的英文來說, 施行審查制度

And this is a ceremony I actually attended in 2009

監控網路用戶。

where the Internet Society of China presented awards

這個典禮在2009年舉辦,我實際參與該典禮。

to the top 20 Chinese companies

典禮上,中國互聯網協會頒獎

that are best at exercising self-discipline --

給20家最佳中國企業

i.e. policing their content.

「自律及監控執行」的傑出貢獻─

And Robin Li, CEO of Baidu,

也就是監控他們的網站內容。

China's dominant search engine,

百度執行長李彥宏

was one of the recipients.

經營中國最大的搜尋引擎,

In Russia, they do not generally block the Internet

也是領獎人之一。

and directly censor websites.

在俄羅斯他們通常不封鎖網際網路

But this is a website called Rospil

或直接偵查網站。

that's an anti-corruption site.

但是有一個網站叫Rospil

And earlier this year,

是一個反賄賂的網站

there was a troubling incident

今年稍早時,

where people who had made donations to Rospil

有一件惱人的事發生。

through a payments processing system

那些捐款給Rospil的人

called Yandex Money

透過一種付款處理系統捐款,

suddenly received threatening phone calls

這系統叫Yandex Money

from members of a nationalist party

捐款人突然接到威脅電話,

who had obtained details

由國家黨黨員打來的。

about donors to Rospil

他們獲得詳情

through members of the security services

內容是關於這些人捐款給Rospil,

who had somehow obtained this information

細節是由政府安全部門提供,

from people at Yandex Money.

資料來源是從

This has a chilling effect

Yandex Money內部取得。

on people's ability to use the Internet

這種寒蟬效應

to hold government accountable.

影響人們使用網路的能力

So we have a situation in the world today

來監督政府責任。

where in more and more countries

今天這個世界存在一種狀況

the relationship between citizens and governments

愈來愈多的國家

is mediated through the Internet,

人民和政府的關係

which is comprised primarily

是透過網路傳達的

of privately owned and operated services.

而且主要是由

So the important question, I think,

私營的和受操作的服務所構成的。

is not this debate over whether the Internet

我認為最重要的問題

is going to help the good guys more than the bad guys.

不是爭論是否網路

Of course, it's going to empower

能幫助好人多於壞人。

whoever is most skilled at using the technology

當然它有益於

and best understands the Internet

任何最善用科技

in comparison with whoever their adversary is.

和最熟悉網路的人

The most urgent question we need to be asking today

無論他們的對手是誰。

is how do we make sure

今天我們必須問的最迫切的問題是

that the Internet evolves

我們如何確保

in a citizen-centric manner.

網路的發展

Because I think all of you will agree

是以服務人民為本的方式。

that the only legitimate purpose of government

我想大家都會同意

is to serve citizens,

政府存在的唯一公正合理的使命

and I would argue

是服務人民。

that the only legitimate purpose of technology

而且我會主張

is to improve our lives,

科技唯一的正當合法的目的

not to manipulate or enslave us.

是改善且提昇人民生活,

So the question is,

而非操控或奴役人民。

we know how to hold government accountable.

所以問題是

We don't necessarily always do it very well,

我們要知道如何追究政府的責任。

but we have a sense of what the models are,

我們不必總是作的非常好,

politically and institutionally, to do that.

但是我們要懂得運用各種形式──

How do you hold the sovereigns of cyberspace

利用政治和法規的手段去處理。

accountable to the public interest

而你如何讓電子網際空間的統治者