The Core Argument: Computation as a Threat
In his 2011 essay, "The Coming War on General Computation," Paul Rosenberg lays out a prescient and unsettling argument: that powerful entities are increasingly viewing general-purpose computation—the ability of a computer to run any program a user can devise—as a fundamental threat. This threat, he posits, is not new, but it is intensifying, driven by the desire of established powers to control information, media, and access.
Rosenberg begins by defining general computation. Unlike specialized devices designed for a single task (like a calculator or a VCR), a general-purpose computer, at its heart, can be programmed to do anything. This flexibility is its greatest strength, enabling innovation and user freedom. However, it is precisely this unfettered capability that makes it dangerous to those who wish to maintain existing power structures. The essay draws a parallel to the historical suppression of the printing press, which democratized information and challenged the authority of the church and state. Similarly, general computation allows individuals to create, share, and consume information in ways that bypass traditional gatekeepers.
The essay identifies several key players who have a vested interest in limiting general computation: content creators (like Hollywood studios), software developers seeking to enforce licensing and prevent piracy, and governments concerned with censorship and control. These entities, Rosenberg argues, are waging a "war" not through overt prohibition, but through a series of incremental restrictions and technological enforcements.
These restrictions manifest in various forms. One of the most significant is the Digital Rights Management (DRM) movement. DRM technologies are designed to prevent users from copying, sharing, or modifying digital content, effectively turning general-purpose devices into specialized ones that can only perform actions sanctioned by the rights holder. Rosenberg highlights how DRM undermines the very nature of digital media, which should be as easily shareable as physical media was. The essay points to the increasing complexity of software licensing, the use of digital watermarks, and the potential for legal action against users who violate these restrictions.
Technological and Legal Fronts of the War
Rosenberg details how this "war" is fought on multiple fronts. Technologically, it involves creating devices and software that are inherently less flexible. This includes the rise of "walled gardens"—closed ecosystems like Apple's App Store—where users can only run applications approved by the platform owner. While these offer convenience and perceived security, they also eliminate the freedom to run any software, a hallmark of general computation.
Legally, the war is waged through legislation and court cases. The DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) in the United States is presented as a prime example of a law that criminalizes the circumvention of technological protection measures, even for legitimate purposes like research or interoperability. This legal framework empowers rights holders to enforce their control over how content is used and how devices function. The essay suggests that this trend is not limited to copyright; it extends to any domain where control over information or functionality is desired.
The author also touches upon the role of hardware in this conflict. He discusses how manufacturers are increasingly embedding limitations into hardware, making it difficult or impossible to install alternative operating systems or run unauthorized software. This shift from user-modifiable hardware to locked-down, appliance-like devices is a critical aspect of the war on general computation. It aims to ensure that devices perform only the functions intended by their creators, thereby preserving existing business models and control mechanisms.
The Implications for Users and Innovation
The essay's core concern is the erosion of user freedom and the stifling of innovation. When computation becomes less general, users lose the ability to adapt devices to their specific needs, to experiment with new ideas, or to participate fully in the digital economy. This restricts the potential for emergent creativity and technological advancement that has historically been fueled by open, general-purpose computing platforms.
Rosenberg expresses a genuine concern that if this trend continues unchecked, we may find ourselves in a future where most computing devices are effectively appliances, incapable of performing tasks beyond those explicitly permitted by their owners. This would represent a significant step backward from the open, empowering vision of computing that characterized its early decades. The essay does not offer simple solutions but rather serves as a stark warning, urging readers to recognize the subtle, pervasive nature of this conflict and its profound implications for the future of technology and society.
The essay anticipates a future where the very concept of a "computer" might shift from a tool of ultimate flexibility to a curated, restricted experience. This transition, driven by economic incentives and control imperatives, poses a fundamental challenge to the open nature of the digital world.