An interesting set of distinctions from this great Frank Pasquale paper:
Beneath the surface of Internet policy disputes, there is a deeper, even ontological set of orientations to technology. On one side are advocates of “mastery,” who try to resurrect old legal principles and public values to order cyberspace. On the other are adepts of “attunement,” who caution the legal systematizers. When the “masters” propose a new constraint on the network, the “attuners” tend to parry with calls for humility. Law should adapt itself to the emergent order online, they say, should respect its inner music, its patterns of information exchange and hierarchy.
I’m particularly interested in the final proposition and how this manifests itself in emerging forms of digital social science: the invocation of “online order” naturalises digital capitalism, presenting it as an inexorable reality which is foundational to digital social science, rather than something which can become an object of interrogation and critique through digital social science.