Lately, there has been much written about the forthcoming new independence enabled by the latest enhancements to Internet technology. There seems to be a certain breathless anticipation of a new (virtual) world where all information is free and immediately available. But, the idea of new technology creating new freedom is not new. Every significant technological breakthrough from the discovery of fire to integrated circuits is guaranteed to incite discussion and even expectation of new freedom. The light bulb banished the night; radio connected us all, village and continent; the automobile shrank the world, and the airplane practically miniaturized it. Mankind's constant drive towards understanding his environment has created an unending list of innovations, each in its own way changing the world.



And, each step forward brings new hope that it brings with it a new kind of freedom. Currently, we hope to be freed from the bonds of brick-and-mortar buildings, traffic congestion, and forced separation from our families (i.e. "a day at the office"). At this moment I am sitting in my "home office" drinking tea. By the end of the day I will have participated in two remote meetings (while strolling through my yard enjoying our spring flowers and thinking I really should mow it, but won't), helped a half-dozen or so customers and company representatives work through their particular problem of the day (while dropping my kids off at summer band, running my car through the car wash, and picking up a cappuccino), had lunch with my wife at our favorite restaurant, and written a concise, management-level description of our latest product offering. A few years ago I would have spent the entire day in a cubicle somewhere, but today the Internet and its related technologies allows me the freedom to choose where to work.

But, at what cost? Freedom is never free whether we're speaking of grand-scale freedoms like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness or small-scale freedoms like not having to go into the office today. By giving me the ability to connect to my coworkers and customers alike from wherever I happen to be, the Internet has afforded me greater independence but it has cost me my private time. Because there is the capability to always be connected wherever I go there is now the expectation that I am always available. The question is, is it worth giving up the distinction between when you are at work and when you aren't for greater latitude in how and where we do our work?

In general, the younger you are and the greater a percentage of your life has been spent "plugged in" the more likely you are to answer in the affirmative. Being in constant contact with friends, all day every day, is a phenomenon common to today's youth. Text messages, cell phones, pictures, videos, their own web pages (often several) mean there is scarcely an instant that goes by that they are not in touch. They have and continue to develop a sense that this "connectedness" is not just OK, it's an integral part of the communication medium that defines human interaction. In contrast, the older you are (and perhaps the greater your exposure to the failings of man) the more likely you are to be wary of anything that smacks of a reduction of your rights and especially your privacy.

The iGeneration is likely to have spent a significant fraction of their life on the Internet by the time they reach a point in the generational cycle where they are determining the political structure of the planet. The Internet will become such an integrated and accepted part of our culture that the distinction between what is "online" and what is "offline" will be mainly philosophical. Using the Internet to accomplish things once thought of as too sensitive in nature to be subjected to the potential scrutiny of the public will not only be accepted, it will be assumed.

Indeed, the open forum offered by the Internet could be seen as a platform to promote democracy across the planet. On the surface a seemingly good thing to those of us living in free societies, but true democracy has never worked. The average person is too easily duped, too easily swayed by emotional appeal for a government ruled by the masses to work on a large scale. Many of the founding fathers of our country felt the same way and that is in large part why our government is a form of representative republic instead of a democracy.

I'm all for the idea of giving everyone a vote in the election of their representatives in government. Clearly, the ideal government is one that represents the needs of the people and the surest way to achieve that is to make the members of the government somehow beholden to the people. But, turning the people into the government is not likely to have the desired effect. The politicians will quickly learn to avoid any responsibility for any poor decisions and to take credit for any good ones. Having a government where the majority always wins also means the minority always loses...sometimes the minority is supposed to win. When you were a kid did you ever get picked on by another group of kids? Did the fact there were more of them make it right?

We are quickly approaching a day when the Internet will provide the means to create the first true, large-scale democracy. We may live to see a demonstration of a real government "of the people" where everyone has a say in everything. But, at what price?