Curbing Jihadists: Terror and the Internet

阻止圣战分子：恐怖与互联网

 

Tech firms could do more to help – within limits

科技公司可以提供更多帮助，但要有限度

 

Three jihadist attacks in Britain in as many months have led to a flood of suggestions about how to fight terrorism, from more police and harsher jail sentences to new legal powers. But one idea has gained momentum in both Europe and America – that internet firms are doing the jihadists’ work for them. Technology giants, such as Google and Facebook, are accused of turning a blind eye to violent online propaganda and other platforms of allowing terrorists to communicate with each other out of reach of the intelligence services.

 

英国在三个月内遭受了三次恐怖袭击，大量关于打击恐怖主义的建议随之涌现，包括增加警力、加重刑罚，以及赋予政府新的法律权力。然而有一种看法在欧洲和美国都越来越流行，那就是互联网公司在为伊斯兰圣战主义者帮忙。人们指责谷歌和Facebook这样的科技巨头对网上的暴力宣传视而不见，还有一些平台让恐怖分子得以在情报机构的监控范围之外通信。

 

It is only the latest such charge. The technology firms have also been condemned for allowing the spread of fake news and harbouring bullies, bigots and trolls in the pursuit of profit. In the past they were accused of enabling people to evade copyright and of hosting child pornography.

 

这种批评久已有之。人们还谴责科技公司一心逐利，放任假消息传播并包庇恶棍、偏执狂和网络喷子。过去，这些公司还被指控让人们得以逃避版权责任和传播儿童色情。

 

In all these areas, politicians are demanding that the technology giants take more responsibility for what appears on their networks. Within limits, they are right.

 

在上述所有方面，政客们都要求科技巨头对网络上的问题承担更多责任。在一定范围内，他们的要求是合理的。

 

Shooting the messenger app?

干掉通讯应用？

 

For as long as there have been data networks, people have exploited them to cause harm. The French mechanical telegraph system was subverted in 1834 in a bond-trading scam that went undetected for two years. Cold-callers run cons by telephone. The internet, with billions of users and unlimited processing power, is the most powerful network of all. It was bound to become the focus of wrongdoers.

 

自从有了数据网络，人们就利用它来危害他人。1834年，法国机械电报系统因一个债券交易骗局而崩塌，这一骗局历经两年都未被发现；陌生人通过电话实施诈骗屡见不鲜。拥有数十亿用户和无限处理能力的互联网是所有网络中最强大的，必然会成为坏人作案的聚集地。

 

That does not mean it should be wrapped in red tape. Openness online is especially valuable because it allows “permissionless” innovation. Anyone can publish an article, upload a video or distribute a piece of software to a global audience. Freedom from the responsibilities that burden other media companies has served as a boost for a nascent industry.

 

这并不意味着网络应该受到过多监管。网络的开放特别重要，因为这可以产生“无许可”创新。任何人都可以面向全球用户发表文章、上传视频或发布软件。网络不受其他媒体公司所承担的责任的约束，这成为这一新兴产业的推动力。

 

But the days when the technology firms needed nurturing are long gone. In the past decade they have become the world’s most valuable companies. As their services have reached deeper into every aspect of everyday life, online activity has gained more potential to cause offline harm. For every Spotify there is a WannaCry.

 

但科技公司需要呵护的日子早已过去。在过去十年中，它们已成为世界上最有价值的公司。随着它们的服务深入到日常生活的方方面面，线上活动已经拥有更大的潜力在线下造成危害。有Spotify之类的创新，就会有WannaCry这样的病毒。

 

Technology firms complain that this combination of novelty and commercial success makes them a convenient target for politicians, some of whom seem to regard regulating the internet as a shortcut to solving complex social problems such as hate speech. Eager to protect their special status, technology firms have emphasised that online recruitment is only part of the terrorist threat. Besides, they say, they are platforms, not publishers, and that they cannot possibly monitor everything.

 

科技公司抱怨说，自己是新奇事物，又赚了大钱，很容易就成为政客的攻击目标；有些政客似乎认为监管互联网是个解决仇恨言论等复杂社会问题的捷径。科技公司急于保护自身的特殊地位，强调在线招募恐怖分子只是恐怖威胁的一部分。再者，它们称科技公司是平台而不是出版商，不可能监控一切。

 

Yet the firms can act when they want to. Before Edward Snowden exposed them in a huge leak in 2013, they quietly helped American and British intelligence monitor jihadists. Whenever advertisers withdraw business after their brands ended up alongside pornographic, violent or extremist material, they respond remarkably quickly.

 

然而只要它们愿意，这些科技公司还是可以采取行动的。2013年爱德华·斯诺登在其大揭秘中暴露它们之前，科技公司一直在悄悄地帮助美国和英国的情报机构监视圣战分子。每当广告主因其品牌与色情、暴力或极端主义内容一同出现而取消投放广告时，科技公司的反应雷厉风行。

 

As with car accidents or cyber-attacks, perfect security is unattainable. But an approach based on “defence in depth”, combining technology, policy, education and human oversight, can minimise risk and harm.

 

和车祸或网络攻击一样，绝对的安全是无法实现的。不过，将技术、政策、教育和人力监督结合起来的“纵深防御”法可以将风险和危害降至最低。

 

Often, commercial self-interest gives an incentive for the technology companies to act. Although fake news is popular and engaging, and provides opportunities to fill advertising slots, it is bad for the technology giants’ reputations. Accordingly, Google and Facebook are doing more to cut off fake-news sites from their advertising networks, build new tools to flag dubious stories and warn readers of them, and establish links with fact-checking organisations.

 

通常，自身的商业利益会激励科技公司采取行动。假新闻虽然受欢迎、有吸引力，且有利于卖广告，但对科技巨头的声誉不利。因此，谷歌和Facebook正在做出更多努力，禁止假新闻网站使用它们的广告服务，创造新工具来标记可疑内容及警示读者，还与事实核查机构合作。

 

When self-interest is not enough, governments can prod the firms to tighten up – as German lawmakers have, threatening huge fines. Under a voluntary agreement with European regulators, the big firms have set a target of reviewing (and, when appropriate, removing) within a day at least 50% of content flagged by users as hateful or xenophobic. The latest figures show that Facebook reviewed 58% of flagged items within a day, up from 50% in December. For Twitter, the figure was 39%, up from 24%. (YouTube’s score fell from 61% to 43%.)

 

当自身利益驱动不足时，各国政府可以像德国的立法机构那样，督促科技公司加强管理，以巨额罚款相威胁。根据大型科技公司与欧洲监管机构达成的一项自愿协议，这些公司已经设定了目标，在一天之内审查（并在适当时删除）至少50%被用户标记为涉仇恨或仇外情绪的内容。最新数据显示，Facebook在一天之内审查了58%的已标记内容，高于去年12月的50%。推特的审查率是39%，去年12月则是24%。（YouTube的数字则从61%下降到43%。）

 

The strongest measure is new laws. In 2002, for example, Britain made internet service providers (ISPs) liable for child pornography if they did not take it down “expeditiously”. The ISPs used a charity to compile a list of blocked URLs that it updated twice daily. The charity works closely with law-enforcement agencies in Britain and abroad. Similarly, American lawmakers have clamped down on copyright infringement.

 

最强有力的措施就是制定新法律。例如，2002年英国立法规定，互联网服务提供商（ISP）如不“快速”撤除儿童色情内容，将负法律责任。互联网服务供应商请了一家公益机构来编制应阻止的网址黑名单，每天更新两次。该机构与英国及海外的执法机构有紧密的合作关系。同样，美国立法机构也已在加强打击侵犯版权的行为。

 

It’s no longer 2005

今时今日已非2005年

 

As in the offline world, legislators must strike a balance between security and liberty. Especially after attacks, when governments want to be seen to act, they may be tempted to impose blanket bans on speech. Instead, they should set out to be clear and narrow about what is illegal – which will also help platforms deal with posts quickly and consistently. Even then, the threshold between free speech and incitement will be hard to define. The aim should be to translate offline legal norms into the cyber domain.

 

和线下世界一样，立法者必须在安全与自由之间取得平衡。恐怖袭击事件发生后，政府尤其想让公众看到自己有所行动，可能会想要全面禁止言论。然而，政府该做的其实是明确规定哪些言论属于非法，这也将有助于平台快速而一致地处理相关帖子。但即便如此，自由言论和煽动性言论还是很难界定。目标应该是如何将线下的法律规范转化为线上的规则。

 

Before legislators rush in, they also need to think about unintended consequences. If internet firms are threatened with fines, they may simply remove all flagged content, just in case. Regulation that requires lots of staff to take down offensive posts will most hurt small startups, which can least afford it. Laws mandating cryptographic “back doors” in popular messaging apps would weaken security for innocent users. Bad actors would switch to unregulated alternatives in countries that are unlikely to help Western governments. They would thus become harder for the intelligence services to watch.

 

立法机构匆忙行动之前，还需要考虑意想不到的后果。如果互联网公司有被罚款的可能，它们可能就会把所有标记内容一删了之，以防万一。要求安排大量人力删除攻击性帖子的法规将极大伤害小型创业公司，因为它们最负担不起这种成本。在流行通讯应用中强制安装加密“后门”的法律将削弱无辜用户的安全。有不良企图的人会转而选择那些在不太可能帮助西方政府的国家里使用的不受监管的应用，情报部门追踪起来会更加困难。

 

In the past, internet firms have tended to “build it first, figure out the rules later”. However, the arguments about terrorism and extremist content are a stark reminder that the lawless, freewheeling era of the early internet is over. Technology firms may find that difficult to accept. But accept it they must, as part of the responsibility that comes with their new-found power and as part of the price of their success.

 

过去互联网公司倾向于“先做事，然后再想怎么合规”。但是，关于恐怖主义和极端主义内容的争论明确表明，早期互联网放任自流的自由时代已经结束了。科技公司可能会觉得难以接受，但必须接受——这是伴随它们新发现的权力而需肩负的责任，也是它们获得成功需付出的相应代价。

下载：英文、中文版本