Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Art by Annie Gugliotta/GZERO Media
No, the internet isn’t forever. And that’s a bad thing.
It is currently some time in the 23rd century, and a scholar of the future wants to understand what was happening in 2024 in, say, Gaza, Ukraine, or Beijing. Surely she’ll be able to find what she needs — it’ll all be online right?
We are used to thinking that the internet is forever. Sometimes this can seem like a bad thing. Every dumb remark, ill-conceived costume, or bad hot take will be fixed indefinitely in the digital firmament, waiting to be dug up as a cancellable offense. But it’s also a good thing: Every atrocity, corruption scandal, transformative artwork, or major scientific discovery will also be there — forever.
The trouble is -- that's not true. The internet is not forever. In fact, in many cases it isn’t even for 100 days, the average length of time before content is changed on a webpage.
Just how ephemeral is the internet? A recent Pew study found that nearly 40% of web pages viewable in 2013 simply do not exist any more. They’ve evaporated into the digital ether, either because their owners ran out of the money or the interest they needed to maintain them.
Meanwhile, hyperlinks, an essential part of the digital information experience, are also famously flighty. A Harvard study of more than 2.5 million links from New York Times articles published between 1996 and 2020 found that at least a quarter of them were dead. 404. RIP.
To be fair, none of this is necessarily terrible.
There is plenty of crap on the internet. A lot of blogs just aren’t good. And this video of Donald Trump as the Ramones, or this one in which two cats argue about a broken ice cream machine at a McDonalds drive-thru aren’t necessarily essential texts of our time (though to be fair, I am on the fence about the cat one because it’s pretty amazing.)
But this Great Digital Transience doesn’t just affect cat videos or bad blogs. It can also affect public records and, importantly, journalism.
A 2021 report by the Donald W. Reynolds Journalism Institute at the University of Missouri showed that out of two dozen major newspapers, only seven were fully archiving their material, and much of that was only final text, rather than all digital content that was part of each article. And that, of course, is for newspapers that are still in business. Many – in fact an increasing number, as we know – are not. When they go belly up, their digital content often vanishes.
I have some personal experience with this. If you go looking for any of the dozens of articles and profiles that I wrote for FT Tilt, a special project of the Financial Times, in Brazil in 2011, you will find nothing. Nada. When the FT cut the project in 2011, they also scrapped the website. Everything we had investigated, documented, or written – gone. Alas, my findings will be of no use to that future scholar passionately interested in Brazil’s early 20th century “deindustrialization.”
Failing to adequately archive our material is only one problem. Another is that the platforms where we do store much of our content are highly concentrated in the hands of a few powerful companies and countries.
Consider the fact that three vendors – Amazon, Microsoft, and Google – account for two thirds of all cloud storage. That concentration creates efficiency, sure, but also huge risks. What happens if any of those companies goes out of business, is attacked, or goes rogue? A lot could happen between now and the 23rd century.
For an extreme version of the risk here, look at China. There, the Communist Party all but owns the Internet — and as we speak, whole swaths of history are being erased.
There have been efforts to address this problem of internet impermanence. The Internet Archive, with its popular Wayback Machine, is a heroic, decades-old project that aims to copy and store every single web page that has ever been created. It works with governments and media to record particularly important documents for the historical record.
But even that database isn’t capturing everything. And in the end, it too is just another website, beholden to the vagaries of money, space, and electricity like all the others.
To be clear, I am no luddite. Having the internet and digital media — which more or less make the sum total of human knowledge instantly available to… anybody — is way better than not having it.
The problem is that having it depends on keeping it. And that means preserving it in formats that can be flighty, easily changed, or swiftly erased. In a world of polarization, cratering trust, and open lies, it is more essential than ever to care for the drafts of history that we are writing.
I don’t know if this idea or this article will still exist in 2224.
I’d like to think it will. But just in case — print out a hard copy.
Social media's AI wave: Are we in for a “deepfakification” of the entire internet?
In this episode of GZERO AI, Taylor Owen, professor at the Max Bell School of Public Policy at McGill University and director of its Centre for Media, Technology & Democracy, looks into the phenomenon he terms the "deepfakification" of social media. He points out the evolution of our social feeds, which began as platforms primarily for sharing updates with friends, and are now inundated with content generated by artificial intelligence.
So 2024 might just end up being the year of the deepfake. Not some fake Joe Biden video or deepfake pornography of Taylor Swift. Definitely problems, definitely going to be a big thing this year. But what I would see is a bigger problem is what might be called the “deepfakification” of the entire internet and definitely of our social feeds.
Cory Doctorow has called this more broadly the “enshittification” of the internet. And I think the way AI is playing out in our social media is a very good example of this. So what we saw in our social media feeds has been an evolution. It began with information from our friends that they shared. It then merged the content that an algorithm thought we might want to see. It then became clickbait and content designed to target our emotions via these same algorithmic systems. But now, when many people open their Facebook or their Instagram or their talk feeds, what they're seeing is content that's been created by AI. AI Content is flooding Facebook and Instagram.
So what's going on here? Well, in part, these companies are doing what they've always been designed to do, to give us content optimized to keep our attention.
If this content happens to be created by an AI, it might even do that better. It might be designed in a way by the AI to keep our attention. And AI is proving a very useful tool for doing for this. But this has had some crazy consequences. It's led to the rise, for example, of AI influencers rather than real people selling us ideas or products. These are AIs. Companies like Prada and Calvin Klein have hired an AI influencer named Lil Miquela, who has over 2.5 million followers on TikTok. A model agency in Barcelona, created an AI model after having trouble dealing with the schedules and demands of primadonna human models. They say they didn't want to deal with people with egos, so they had their AI model do it for them.
And that AI model brings in as much as €10,000 a month for the agency. But I think this gets at a far bigger issue, and that's that it's increasingly difficult to tell if the things we're seeing are real or if they're fake. If you scroll from the comments of one of these AI influencers like Lil Miquela’s page, it's clear that a good chunk of her followers don't know she's an AI.
Now platforms are starting to deal with this a bit. TikTok requires users themselves to label AI content, and Meta is saying they'll flag AI-generated content, but for this to work, they need a way of signaling this effectively and reliably to us and users. And they just haven't done this. But here's the thing, we can make them do it. The Canadian government in their new Online Harms Act, for example, demands that platforms clearly identify AI or bot generated content. We can do this, but we have to make the platforms do it. And I don't think that can come a moment too soon.
- Why human beings are so easily fooled by AI, psychologist Steven Pinker explains ›
- The geopolitics of AI ›
- AI and Canada's proposed Online Harms Act ›
- AI at the tipping point: danger to information, promise for creativity ›
- Will Taylor Swift's AI deepfake problems prompt Congress to act? ›
- Deepfake porn targets high schoolers ›
"Access is a fundamental right" - Digital activist Vilas Dhar
The world is fast becoming increasingly digital, with 60% of global GDP driven by digital participation, but over two billion people still lack basic connectivity access.
Vilas Dhar, a leading activist for a more equitable tech-enabled world, emphasizes three elements contributing to this divide: connectivity, data gaps, and technical capacity.
“Access is a fundamental right and not something to be solved by delivering a last mile piece of fiber or connectivity.” he commented during a Global Stage livestream event at UN headquarters in New York on September 22, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly.
Dhar also acknowledges the growing concern of artificial intelligence and the question of who will lead regulation.
“We live in a world where AI is in every headline, and we absolutely acknowledge that the vast majority of AI capacity is held in private sector tech companies. This is in and of itself a digital divide.”
The discussion was moderated by Nicholas Thompson of The Atlantic and was held by GZERO Media in collaboration with the United Nations, the Complex Risk Analytics Fund, and the Early Warnings for All initiative.
Watch the full Global Stage conversation: Can data and AI save lives and make the world safer?
- Should internet be free for everyone? A Global Stage debate ›
- The fight to “connect every last person” to the internet ›
- COVID upended the job market & focused employers on skills ›
- 2 billion new internet users joined in 5 years but growth is uneven ›
- US-China tech tensions: the impact on the global digital landscape ›
- The digitalization divide: opportunities and challenges in emerging markets ›
The threat of CEO fraud and one NGO's resilient response
In January 2020, Heidi Kühn, founder and CEO of Roots of Peace, returned from an overseas trip to devastating news: her finance department had unwittingly transferred over $1 million to an unfamiliar bank account. Kühn and her team quickly realized they’d become victims of a CEO fraud cyber attack—cybercriminals had infiltrated the company’s email accounts via spear phishing and impersonated Kühn to trick the finance team into sending funds abroad.
The theft had an enormous impact on Roots of Peace, a nonprofit dedicated to converting minefields into arable farmland in former war zones. Following the attack, Roots of Peace reached out to the CyberPeace Insitute, an organization that provides free cybersecurity assistance, threat detection and analysis to NGOs and other critical sectors. Roots of Peace was able to recover some of the funds, but to date, only $175,000 of the $1.34 million total stolen has been returned.
Roots of Peace is an international humanitarian organization, but their story isn’t unusual: In 2021, CEO fraud caused $2.4 billion in losses to US businesses alone, according to the FBI Internet Crime Report. Kühn’s story is featured in the second episode of “Caught in the Digital Crosshairs: The Human Impact of Cyberattacks,” a new video series on cyber security produced by GZERO in partnership with Microsoft and the CyberPeace Institute. GZERO spoke with Kühn and Derek Pillar, a cyber security expert from Mastercard, to learn more about the threat of CEO fraud, the real-life impact of cyberattacks against the humanitarian sector, and how you can prevent similar attacks from happening to you and your organization.
- Tech innovation can outpace cyber threats, says Microsoft's Brad Smith ›
- Podcast: Cyber Mercenaries and the digital “wild west" ›
- Podcast: Lessons of the SolarWinds attack ›
- Hacked by Pegasus spyware: The human rights lawyer trying to free a princess ›
- Attacked by ransomware: The hospital network brought to a standstill by cybercriminals - GZERO Media ›
- Podcast: How cyber diplomacy is protecting the world from online threats - GZERO Media ›
- Podcast: Foreign Influence, Cyberspace, and Geopolitics - GZERO Media ›
- Podcast: Cyber mercenaries and the global surveillance-for-hire market - GZERO Media ›
- The devastating impact of cyberattacks and how to protect against them - GZERO Media ›
Fighting online hate: Global internet governance through shared values
After a terrorist attack on a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand was live-streamed on the internet in 2019, the Christchurch Call was launched to counter the increasing weaponization of the internet and to ensure that emerging tech is harnessed for good.
In a recent Global Stage livestream, from the sidelines of the 78th UN General Assembly, former New Zealand Prime Minster Dame Jacinda Ardern discussed the challenges and disparities inherent in the ever-evolving digital age, ranging from unrestricted online platforms in liberal democracies to severe content limitations in certain countries.
“If you look beyond just liberal democracies, on the one hand you have the discussion about free speech and the view that some hold around being able to use online platforms to publish just about anything. Then in some countries, the inability to publish anything at all,” said Ardern.
In her new role, as Special Envoy for the Christchurch Call, she advocated for departing from conventional country-centric strategies and proposed a foundation built upon shared values instead, prioritizing the safeguarding of human rights and the preservation of an open internet over national interests. “Let's establish the value set, the common problem identification to bring everyone around the table.”
Watch the full Global Stage Livestream conversation here: Hearing the Christchurch Call
- Hearing the Christchurch Call ›
- Facebook allows "lies laced with anger and hate" to spread faster than facts, says journalist Maria Ressa ›
- What We’re Watching: Ardern's shock exit, sights on Crimea, Bibi’s budding crisis, US debt ceiling chaos ›
- Jacinda Ardern on the Christchurch Call: How New Zealand led a movement ›
Steven Pinker shares his "relentless optimism" about human progress
If you follow the news closely, chances are your view of the state of the world is not super optimistic. From war in Ukraine to a warming planet to global poverty and hunger, there's plenty to get upset about. But what if things are actually getting...better? That's what Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker asks in his interview with Ian Bremmer for the latest episode of GZERO World.
"If you compare the number of wars and the number of people killed in wars in the sixties and the seventies and even the eighties, we're actually much better off today" Pinker argues. "And so if you don't look at data, if you look at headlines, since as long as bad things haven't vanished from the face of the earth, which they never will, you can get the impression that things are unchanged or even are worse than ever, even when they're improving. It's only when you count the number of wars, number of deaths in war, longevity, child mortality, extreme poverty, number of leisure hours, that you see that there actually has been improvement. "
Watch the GZERO World episode: Is life better than ever for the human race?
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld and on US public television. Check local listings.
- Podcast: The case for global optimism with Steven Pinker ›
- Why is America punching below its weight on happiness? ›
- Is life better than ever for the human race? ›
- Why human beings are so easily fooled by AI, psychologist Steven Pinker explains ›
- Ian Explains: Will biotech breakthroughs lead to super humans? - GZERO Media ›
- Podcast: Tracking the rapid rise of human-enhancing biotech with Siddhartha Mukherjee - GZERO Media ›
- From CRISPR to cloning: The science of new humans - GZERO Media ›
- Yuval Noah Harari: AI is a “social weapon of mass destruction” to humanity - GZERO Media ›
2 billion new internet users joined in 5 years but growth is uneven
A whopping two billion new internet users have come online in the past five years. This transformative shift, driven in part by the pandemic, has revolutionized the way people learn and work. But it’s important to note that this growth is not evenly distributed, and significant efforts are required, particularly in Africa, to bridge the digital divide, says Digital Impact Alliance CEO Priya Vora.
Vora emphasizes the importance in addressing issues of trust, individual agency, and data privacy as the digital world continues its rapid expansion. She also touches on the changing landscape of digital commerce, where a few dominant players could translate economic power into political influence. As the conversation and challenges surrounding the digital world evolve, so too should the global response, says Vora.
Vora joined other geotech experts in a GZERO livestream event, presented by Visa, to discuss the challenges and opportunities that nation-states face when it comes to digitization, and how it could shape a more inclusive and resilient future.
Watch the full livestream conversation: What Ukraine's digital revolution teaches the world
Estonia's digital revolution: a global model of efficiency
In a recent GZERO livestream event presented by Visa, Carmen Raal, a digital transformation advisor and expert from e-Estonia, shared some remarkable insights into the nation's digital transformation. Estonia, often hailed as a digital pioneer, has undergone a profound digitalization process that sets it apart on the global stage. Carmen explained that 99.99% of Estonia’s public services are accessible online, which includes a strong collaboration between the nations’ public and private sectors. Raal points out how this unique partnership has created solutions that are versatile and user-friendly. One example is Estonia's electronic identity and signature system which isn't limited to government use; it extends to online banking across all banks in Estonia.
The emphasis on simplicity has been key to encouraging widespread adoption of digital solutions. This also includes the process of setting up a company in Estonia. Raal highlights that it takes less than three hours to establish a company online, and the world record is a just a hair over 15 minutes. According to Raal, this efficiency, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises, has positioned Estonia as an administrative haven, attracting entrepreneurs from around the world under the concept of e-residency, which allows individuals worldwide to obtain a digital identity card, granting them the ability to run an Estonian company without physical presence in the country. This offers access to the European single market, showcasing Estonia's commitment to fostering a global digital community. Raal highlights how Estonia's digital journey underscores the transformative potential of embracing technology, not only for enhancing efficiency but also for fueling economic growth and innovation.
To hear more about the challenges and opportunities that nation-states face when it comes to digitization, and how it could shape a more inclusive and resilient future, watch the full livestream conversation: