Ownership of Things That Aren’t Things

“The things you own, end up owning you.”

But what if those “things” aren’t actual things?

I was reading an interesting gopher phlog (warning: you need a gopher-enabled browser to see it) called “Everything Is Amazing but Nothing is Ours.”

Essentially, it describes how in the early days of computing, users still thought of files as “things” that you could share, move, and delete. Over time, everything has migrated to a “service” where everything is just cell data stored in a database, delivered on demand.

I’ve seen this happen in numerous areas, like Android apps. Most of the big services moved from a “pay one price for the app” to a subscription model. Sometimes that works out better for consumers, sometimes it doesn’t. It always works out better for the companies, otherwise they wouldn’t do it. All major software companies are doing this, even with operating systems. You don’t “buy” a copy of Office, you have a subscription. You don’t “own” a copy of Windows or OSX, you pay for a license to use it- which can be revoked by them, at any time, for any reason.

I recently had a discussion with an older coworker (who’s an audiophile) about making recordings of broadcast music onto tapes or CDs. At first, I just said “with Spotify, you can listen to anything you want, wherever you want, whenever you want.” But the more I thought about it, I understand why he does this: it’s because he has a tangible copy in his hands. It’s not dependent on whether he has internet, or the correct DRM-equipped player. He just pops a tape into a deck, and he’s got music. He rips every DVD or CD that goes through his hands. He has a huge catalog of media, all re-recorded by himself, DRM-free.

Shane’s phlog accurately explains how the modern “service” model is better in many ways: it’s easier, faster, more powerful, flexible, and cheaper. But the flip side of that is that you lose “ownership” of your information. When everything becomes a service, then you no longer own anything.

The problem I personally have with this is that if you don’t actually own anything, it becomes very easy to take access to it away from you. Just restrict your password, and you suddenly have nothing. It’s not yours. You don’t have a physical (or even a digital) copy of it to hold as a backup. This is why, as Shane notes, that Dropbox is losing market share, even though it’s a service. Because it’s a file storage service. They’ve tried to counter this by developing their workgroup collaboration tools, but are losing money because there are other, better solutions for that.

In some ways, these can be good, for all the reasons laid out above: having a bank account with a debit card is extremely convenient. But they could, at any point, just decide my account is closed, and I get nothing. I don’t have physical cash to back that up, and the bank doesn’t have to either. It’s just cell data in a database. To be fair, if I thought that having my account cancelled were a likely possibility, I wouldn’t do it. I’ve had people try to drain my account by forging my debit card info. And the fact that the bank profiles and records all my spending habits (to protect me!) doesn’t fill me with joy. But that’s the price I pay to have that level of convenience.

Even automobiles are becoming service-driven commodities. It won’t be long before cars will be shipped with everything in firmware that you have to “unlock” before you can use it. (See: Tesla Motors. Are you buying a car, or are you paying just to be able to use the “drive” feature?) The new “connected” cars can be remotely controlled, and therefore shut down (restricting you from using it), without your consent.

The non-ownership of everything is problematic for many reasons, not the least of which is it’s an entryway to Socialism. Ideally, everyone sharing everything would work where everyone has exactly the same footing and permissions. But in reality (on the internet and in the real world) there are only a handful of people who control the flow of “things.” This is why Socialism and Communism (and by extension, Corporate Capitalism) don’t work, because any powerful controlling body will always- always- eventually become corrupted. ALWAYS.

Digital Or Physical Ownership?

So now the question is, “what do we do about this?” I’ve started using my own Cloud server, which runs on a computer I physically own using free software. I still have CD’s and records, though admittedly I mostly use digital media. There are still things I use as a service, though- things like banks, youtube, facebook, and so on.

But the longer I deal with it, and the more these services encroach on my life and my autonomy, the less enamored I am with comfort and convenience. To me, it has spawned an entire generation of laziness, and instead of a seductive temptress, comfort is becoming more of a demanding harpy.

Things like books, photographs, money, videos, and music (tapes, records, CD’s) are being “virtualized” and physically depreciated under the excuse of Convenience. But what this sets us up for is control, de-ownership, manipulation, and eventual restriction of these things.

Like in Fahrenheit 451, removing physical copies doesn’t remove people’s memories of them, nor does it eliminate the idea (and natural right) of ownership.

Minimalism and Ownership

As you know, I’m mostly okay with digital media, as long as it doesn’t involve DRM. It contributes to the elimination of “stuff.” But as much as I like minimalism, I still have a lot of digital “stuff” I manage. Files, music, videos, documents, photos, etc. But they reside on my hard drives, in my house. Protected with my passwords and encryption, and I have “ownership” of them, insomuch as I can “own” a binary magnetic image of something.

I’m okay with converting my files to digital format: but I’m not okay with someone else dictating what I can and can’t do with them.

This is the beauty of the Analog world: it’s free in ways that digital isn’t. It’s restricted in that you can only make so many copies of a copy, but other than that, anything goes. It also requires storing of the analog copies.

Decreasing prices and increasing capacities of storage means it’s easier than ever to run your own, practically unlimited, file server. Even using USB-connected hard drives (or flash/thumb drives), and carrying them with you, is better than giving up ownership of all of your data to leave it in the hands of a company that could one day decide to just quit. (Don’t laugh- this has actually happened to me, and millions of other people!)

Ultimately, you have to decide where your “things” are, who they belong to, and how much ownership you are willing to trade for convenience.

Dying To Self

In the Spiritual world though, why own anything at all? Doesn’t Jesus tell the Rich Young Man to sell everything he owns, give the money to the poor, and follow Jesus? What’s the problem with “non-ownership” then?

There’s guys (like my co-worker) who hoards everything he can get his hands on- physically or digitally. He’s made it clear he values ownership highly, to the point where he illegally copies things he knows he’ll never even use!

And there’s other people who want to criminalize ownership for the sake of a utopia that can never exist.

For me, there’s 3 reasons why I think taking control of your data’s ownership is important, especially for Believers, in the end times:

  1. Your personal information can be used against you-
    Everything you do online can be traced back to you. It only takes a few minutes for someone to completely destroy your life if they wanted to, using information you willingly handed over. Hackers can (and do) use your information to ruin credit scores, take advantage, and to steal from you. If someone had to impersonate you online, how hard would it be?
  2. Your personal information can be taken from you-
    Unless you have a backup of your information, a provider can just simply make it disappear. They can go out of business, decide you’re not worth the risk, or can delete your info based on lies from someone who doesn’t like you (or who disagrees with your faith).
  3. Your information is being used as currency by companies to support things you hate-
    Everything you do online is being analyzed, marketed, and sold to fund huge companies that support things that Scripture specifically speaks against. And you give them this info willingly, continually, every day. Oppression, abortion, theft, homosexual agendas, indoctrination of humanism, you name it. These companies fund it, but you’re giving them the currency.
    (Note: I am not talking about physical goods, although you’ll still have to exercise your own conscience on that.)

Is it possible to completely break free of Big Data? I don’t know- but I do know you can limit what you give them. If you’re in control of your own data, you don’t need to use products and services from them. You can selectively choose what you want to use, and cut off the rest as best you can. Use different emails for each service. Resist the urge to conglomerate everything. That convenience comes at a cost.

How Then Shall We Live?

Should we be digital hermits, then? I’ve discussed this in the past. Multiple times.

But ultimately, we do the best we can, and try to honor God as best we can. Removing distractions is good; removing self is better. If we obsess over minimizing (or materialism), then we’re not focusing our attention where it needs to be: glorifying God.