| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 法律學研究所 === 107 === The Internet, as a revolutionary communication technology, reconstructs the way of communicating in contemporary society, creates a huge system accommodating various heterogeneous individuals and ideas, and enables people from all over the world to share information with each other immediately. It seems that the Internet holds the emancipatory power of liberating individuals from social rules and expanding the scale of self-government and self-fulfillment, and its intrinsically resistant to social control and authority. However, the existence of the Internet could also contribute to the increasing integration between individuals and the social networks they engage with. How the traditional centralized authority and institution adjust and transform their social control upon members of society therefore deserves more attention and analysis.
To answer this question, this thesis firstly introduces the technical structure of the Internet and examine the difference between different topology of network, such as centralized network and distributed network, to illustrate the basic technical operation of the Internet. Then this thesis shifts the focus to one of the core components of the Internet: Communication Protocols. After examining the structure and logic behind the protocols, this thesis attempts to explain why the seemingly chaotic distributed network is capable of carrying out communication orderly, and to clarify the duality between chaos and order inside the Internet by examining the technical details of TCP, IP and DNS.
After examining the structure of protocol, this thesis attempts to view protocol as a kind of "architecture" independently existing in physical world, and illustrates the normative nature of protocol as normative architecture. The way the Internet, as a normative architecture, enforces itself is different from other kinds of architecture. This difference is clarified and contextualized by the comparison between Foucault’s discipline society and Deleuze''s control society. This thesis then attempts to use Internet regulations and policies in China as an example to illustrate how the traditional centralized power institution is able to intervene and control the behavior of the Internet and its users through the strictness and order from protocols.
Lastly, this thesis examines the two possible strategies proposed by Deleuze to resist the tyranny of arborescent thinking: Rhizome and Normad. After criticizing these strategies, this thesis attempts to propose other viable strategy for resistance. Between individuation and individuality, deterritorization and reterritorization, this thesis advocates that continuous guerrilla warfare between individual and society is a potentially viable way to maintain subjectivity of individual.
|
|---|
