Answer

The Future of the Internet, Its Risks, and Opportunities

The world is rapidly shifting towards ubiquitous or pervasive connectivity that will continue to change where and how people share and gather information, associate, and consume media (Fitzpatrick, 2021). In the presently digitized world, the Internet has become a crucial infrastructure: larger amount of information streams daily indefatigably across the globe relative to times past. For future technologies, like virtual reality and artificial intelligence (AI), among others, interlink is the indispensible basis since digitalization is impossible without networks (Kotevski & Milenkoski, 2018). Thus, there is a great need to concentrate upon the future of the internet.  This paper, therefore, discusses the future of the Internet, the various futures of the structure and governance of the Internet, the risks and opportunities of “Balkanization” of the Internet, and recommendations of how the future of the Internet can be kept secure.

The Future of the Internet

The future of the Internet is predicted to be potently loaded with changes that will significantly impact human life. According to a study that was done by Ergen and Belcastro (2019), an ambient information ecosystem is predicted wherein accessing the Internet will be effortless and a number of people will have ease of tapping into it since it flow in people’s lives “like electricity.” Experts predict that wearable, embedded, and mobile computing will be linked together with the Internet of Things (IoT), thus, will permit people and their environment to tap into AI-enhanced cloud-based data sharing and storage. Secondly, the Internet will serve as a form of improved global connectivity. Improved global connectivity suggests faster, cheaper, and extra efficient and effective ways of communicating and collaborating, notwithstanding one’s geographical location (Fitzpatrick, 2021). This, as Twenge (2017) notes, will spawn new economies of scale in communities previously underdeveloped since any person with an Internet connectivity and signal will have be capable of participating in the expanding global economy.

Additionally, the future of the internet will exhibit IoT, big data, and AI.  Mershad and Wakim (2018) explain that IoT, big data, and AI will make people extra informed of their environment and the world as well as their individual behaviours. IoT and big data will propel the internet of the future and will continue to disrupt businesses and societies on significant scales (Kotevski & Milenkoski, 2018). Currently, there are smart machines, machines trained to use machine learning algorithms and AI to solve problems and make decisions without the involvement of human beings (Twenge, 2017). The future of the internet will also exhibit wearable devices and augmented reality. Ergen and Belcastro (2019) declare that wearable devices and augmented reality will be implemented to help monitor and provide quick feedback regarding a person’s daily life, particularly with regard to their health. Future internet will be harnessed to our personas and bodies in ways unimaginable today and before, and this will give us exiting and new ways of accessing real-time information and interact with the environment. 

Similarly, there will be internet-enabled educational revolutions. More learning opportunities will be spread with less cost expended on teachers and real estate with the internet-enabled educational revolutions. Currently, there is the Massive Open Online Course, with major players being Cousera, edX, Udacity, and Khan Academy among others. However, this space is likely to expand significantly in the future. The future of the internet is likely to cause disruption in communication networks.  With the internet continuing to advance, communication will suffer substantial disruptions in the future. While some organizations and individuals are beginning to appreciate the internet as a massive commercial engine, others are still skeptical about its eventual effect owing to the tsunami of changes that it is and will cause on businesses (Kotevski & Milenkoski, 2018). Their infrastructure, as Fitzpatrick (2021) notes, will be an intricate system of cloud, physical, and virtual systems jointly communicating in sync to offer real time communications. To be competitive, organizations and businesses will have to leverage the latest digital technologies and tools, like IoT, big data, and AI to bring the future internet to the consumers.

Different Futures of the Governance and Structure of the Internet

There are different futures of structure and governance of the internet. First is a principles-based approach. Kotevski and Milenkoski (2018) argue that unfragmented, open internet system will low entry threshold is the foundation for the internet. Attempts at country levels to block connectivity and sieve internet traffic based on security issues is, therefore, condemned under the COMPACT governance model since there is a need to promote diversification of the infrastructures buttressing the internet use and to strengthen the internet’s resilience and promote basic human rights (Twenge, 2017). There are, thus, advocates of creation of extra coherent array of principles that would more widely be backed up by stakeholders.

Second future is a cooperative governance structure. Often, internet governance decisions are made without meaningful involvement of all stakeholders. There is a need for multi-stakeholder decision-making along with policy formulation to be bettered so that full participation of interested parties is warranted, acknowledging the various obligations played by various stakeholders in various issues (Mershad & Wakim, 2018). There is also a need for enhanced cooperation to tackle global public issues relating to the internet to be implemented on consensual and priority bases (Ergen & Belcastro, 2019). Stakeholder representatives that are appointed to multi-stakeholder processes, according to Fitzpatrick (2021), should be chosen via transparent and open processes. Empowerment and enabling capacity building via measures, like adequate funding, remote participation, and access to timely and meaningful information are crucial for fostering effective and inclusive internet governance. Kotevski and Milenkoski 2018) assert that a genuine multi-stakeholder internet governance mode will improve the internet’s legitimacy. In crafting the internet’s policies, the three requirements of accountability, balance and inclusiveness, and transparency are the minimum objectives that should be attained based upon multi-stakeholder model.

Third is globalization of crucial internet decisions. Twenge (2017) argues that while the internet works well minus oversight by foreign governmental agencies, legitimacy is increasable by attaining a greater global balance in existing structures. Ergen and Belcastro (2019) object to exclusionary agreement association as defined in Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Additionally, technical norms that are shaping the internet are other futures of internet structure and governance. Owing to the fact that there are regular instances of technical experts making decisions in the absence of stakeholders or stakeholders’ representatives, there is a need for regular review and comments by stakeholders regarding technical decisions as well as the creation of open standards of the internet.

Further, confidence building is another future of internet governance and structure. There is a need to make the online environment safest as possible. Efforts, like the European Union Cybersecurity  Strategy along with the overhaul of the present data protection reign , show that besides steps being made to craft the internet, determinations are being made curb the rising number of unlawful online activities that invade or encroach fundamental rights (Fitzpatrick, 2021). With mass surveillance activities going across the world, there is a decreasing confidence level in internet stakeholders. Strengthening the worldwide internet governance and structure will assist in rebuilding trust and contributing to a sustainable internet atmosphere. Lastly are conflicts of laws and jurisdictions. There is an unlawful uncertainty that is attributed to extra-territorial application of some national laws, and the inadequate development of conflict of principles which could prove dangerous to the development of some online services, like cloud-computing, which are innately cross-territorial in nature (Twenge, 2017). There is also a need to strengthen internet governance forum and have adequate coordination and communication among task forces, forums, and organizations within the internet governance environment.

Opportunities and Risks of the Balkanization of the Internet

There are various ways balkanization of the internet is defined: (i) ways of discriminating people online in accordance with one’s preferences; (i) various degrees of infrastructure inter-linkage to the internet; (iii) fragments ensuing from cultural and regulatory forces; and (iv) a diplomatic agenda. There are risks and opportunities associated with the balkanization of the internet. On the one hand, balkanization, according to Mershad and Wakim (2018), raises virtual borders in what was originally intended to serve as a vehicle for information and knowledge sharing regardless of national borders. Such borders come with costly and real implications. Restricting information sharing restricts innovation. Among the most exciting facets of the exponentially expanding data volume globally is that it portends the potential for far-reaching insights, technologies, and ideas. Balkanization threatens advancement in innovation since while engineers, scientists, manufacturers, and doctors, among other professionals are gaining greater intuition, making new discoveries, and developing new practices and tools, the amount of data that they need is limited.

Balkanized internet has the risk of breeding inequality. An empowered and educate population is extra strategic productive, and innovative. In accordance with various countries’ mantra, all people are equal before God and deserve equal accessibility to knowledge. However, balkanization will make a population have access to more information and knowledge relative to another, hence inequality. Big data is currently a boon for small and medium businesses that leverage advancements in cloud computing to carry out the type of data analysis that was initially only accessible to large-scale firms with substantial resources (Kotevski & Milenkoski, 2018). Balkanization of the internet could put some important data to businesses out of reach of individuals and companies that are just beginning to appreciate the opportunities of embracing the data revolution. Similarly, nationalized internet connections will warrant abuse of power.

Conversely, balkanization will ensure that national data is secure from external interferences. Internet stewardship will ensure that a country fully and properly make use of their potentials to generate the data needed (Twenge, 2017). Thus, innovation and invention will be enhanced by balkanization of the internet. Balkanization will also reduce international cybersecurity cases.

What to implement to secure the future of the internet

The future of the internet promises serious benefits to humanity. However, measures must be taken to ensure its actual benefits are realized. First countries ought to use trade agreements to tackle barriers to digital trade, like data localization, tariffs, and discriminatory product treatments, among others. According to Mershad and Wakim (2018), an inter-governmental organization has the potential of facilitating bilateral diplomatic structures when disputes linked to free data flows arise. The second thing to implement to secure the future of the internet is with regard to internet governance.  Countries should shift the internet to a multi-stakeholder arrangement. Kotevski and Milenkoski (2018) contend that America can assist to ameliorate worry that it regulates the internet by surrendering control of ICANN, which administers to the international community the internet.

Thirdly, there is a need to buttress privacy safeguards. Updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, according to Mershad and Wakim (2018), would give countries extra trust and confidence in their data’s security. This can minimize political back up for dangerous data localization rules and foster digital trade.  For a number of nations, particularly developing ones, there is a tendency towards protectionist laws to build their economies up.  Internet’s value corresponds directly with the number of utilizers. With the rise in the number of users, there is a need to ensure that users’ privacy is guaranteed.

To conclude, the future of the internet promises both good and bad tidings to humanity. Information sharing through the internet will effortlessly be intertwined into people’s daily lives, the internet spread will improve global connectivity and this will encourage less ignorance and more planetary associations, and AI, IoT, and big data will help people be extra informed about their behaviours and the world, among other good things. Nonetheless, harmful socio-economic stratification of people may expand and this will possibly result in resentment and violence, abusers and abuses (like bullying, dirty tricks, stalking, pornography, and crime) will scale and evolve, and corporations and governments will attempt to assert power, among other bad things that will come as a result of advancements in the using of the internet. To safeguard people’s confidence, trust, and protection, there is a need for amendment of policies associated with the use of the internet.