Things are moving a little faster than I thought so I am trying to compose this quickly this morning. Comments welcome.

In the article U.S. and Russia differ on a treaty for cyberspace in the NYT this morning, written by John Markoff and Andrew E. Kramer, there is a discussion of the wrangling going on between the two nations over security in “cyberspace.”

And Chris Anderson‘s three tweets of 6/27/09 on #iranelection (I only use his tweets because I follow him on twitter. No offense, I hope.) demonstrates the sudden jarring interaction between twitter and the Real World.

I have described in the “about” section how I see a new digital world coalesced out of cyberspace – in some sense, the next model beyond thinking of the Real World and “cyberspace.”

So, IMHO, the discussion on a Real World treaty for security in “cyberspace” can be modeled as a Real World discussion about security in the digital world and Mr. Anderson’s comments on twitter are about what happens when the proto-country of twitter interacts (via communications between its citizens) with the Real World.

The challenge now is that there is no direct response from the digital world to events involving interactions between the digital world and the Real World.

Model one is this:

Suggestions for dealing with issues in “cyberspace,” as evidenced by the NYT article, are made by people in the Real World and the other people who have an interest in “cyberspace” respond to those suggestions.

Real World people use the tools of “cyberspace” to reflect activities in the Real World and there can be conflict when use of those tools affects those people.

A suggested possible model, two, is this:

There exists, supported by a staff organization, a digital world foundation (dwf), headed by a There exists, supported by a staff organization, a digital world council (dwc) formed of Wise People who are Digital Inhabitants.

Responses to suggestions for dealing with issues in the digital world, as evidenced by the NYT article, are formulated by the council foundation and given as input to the Real World people who are trying to make decisions on those issues. This would give an voice to the digital world in the Real World.

The dwc/dwf also formulates, in advance, ideas about the relationships between the digital world and the Real World – I want to say “foreign policies,” but I don’t think that’s quite right – to have, in advance, ideas in place before the digital world/Real World interactions take place so some of this stuff can planned for.

And I am beginning to think there is an urgent need for such a council/foundation.

Reading this over, I think I might write it a little differently but I am trying to do this quickly. And please remember my motto of the moment is “The more I know, the less I know.” Thanks.

UPDATE: 7/7/09 Broadened the post to include the digital world foundation, which I think is a better idea.