Futurismic

I’m not sure whether I’m supposed to be proud or ashamed of this one, but apparently Britain has been declared the “designer drugs capital of Europe” by the EU drug agency. [image by Greencolander]

This new generation of online “head shops” is at the centre of a rapidly growing market in highly potent synthetic drugs, such as Spice, that mimic the effects of illegal substances such as cannabis and ecstasy.

European drug agency officials are also alarmed by the way the online retailers are reacting to moves to ban individual “legal highs” by rapidly marketing alternatives. Officials say it is like trying to hit a moving target.

Well, d’uh – do you really expect them to just sit there in the firing line waiting to be picked off? I think what we’re seeing here is something like a singularity for the recreational chemicals industry, whereby the legal machinery of the countries that most want to control such substances moves too slowly to control the exponentially faster response to market demand. It’s a whack-a-mole gig – knock one substance into the ground, and two more pop up to replace it.

I’d hardly be the first to suggest that perhaps this rapid response in the balance of supply and demand is the first nail in the coffin lid of attempts to banish recreational drug-taking, but given the UK government’s laughable unwillingness to heed the suggestions of the drug policy advisors that it appointed, I’m not going to be the first voice they ignore, either.

But I think it’s safe to say that drugs – designer or otherwise – are not going to go away any time soon, legislation or otherwise. So what’s a beleaguered incumbent government to do – quietly admit defeat and lose the vote of the hand-wringing middle classes, or pour away time and resources doing a King Canute impersonation?

Is there anyone among Futurismic’s readership who can say with a straight face that more restrictive legislation will prevent drug abuse, in the UK or anywhere else? If so, tell us how and why in the comments. Feel free to suggest new alternatives to legislation, as well.

Canadian sf author Karl Schroeder brings our attention to an Australian judge who warns that technology has outstripped legislation’s ability to regulate it, and suggests that restrictions of use are best embodied into products themselves:

“The challenges that technology present continue to beat even the best legal minds in the world, Kirby said.

Despite this, lawmakers should attempt to implement checks and balances. Without them, corporations pose an even graver problem for humanity.

“To do nothing is to make a decision to let others go and take technology where they will. There are even more acute questions arising in biotechnology and informatics, such as the hybridization of the human species and other species. Points of no return can be reached,” he said.”

Within this legalese and obfuscation is, essentially, a defence of (and/or advocacy for) DRM-like technologies. Schroeder points out the logic flaws in his reasoning:

“… his idea implies we may have a legal system that operates not according to what’s allowed, but according to what’s possible.  If criminal use of a particular technology is simply not possible, then that’s the same as having a law against that use. 

I think most people would prefer to live in a world where things are possible if not allowed, rather than the nightmare scenario of a world where many things simply can’t be done.

However, Kirby is wrong about one crucial thing.  Laws will not be expressed in their effective form through code; code does and will continue to effectively create law–without reference to the legal system.  Groups like the record companies and the RIAA are finding out this out now.

[snip!]

Technology is legislation, but it can’t be controlled on the level that Kirby is talking about.  Any attempt to do so can only result in Orwellian, and unintentionally hilarious, results (again, the entire current state of the music industry is both).”

Quite so. This will be an ongoing issue until we have people involved in the legal process who actually understand how technologies work. It’s also one of the reasons why Second Life is such a fascinating experiment – because, up until quite recently, it has been arguably the only MMO where code is not law. [Image by K?vanç]