October 18, 2003
The cultural divide and the Internet’s future:
- “Democracy, disagreement, and accountability are inconvenient, so get out of the way and let business run the net.”
While I certainly think that Verisign rates as about grade B scumbags, where do you get the idea that the Internet has *anything* to do with "democracy and accountability?" I have to give you "disagreement," though.
On the Internet, not only does nobody know you are a dog -- they can't prove that you aren't.
The Internet emerged from the public sector. It would never have been created the way it is by private industry.
And, just to clarify a little more, I ain't suggesting that the Internet is (or should be) run by a Vermont-style town meeting. But the "technologists" that Sclavos so disdains operate in a moral universe in which they have responsibilities to something other than profit.
The Internet was started as a research co-operative, and its values were once those of a co-operative. I think almost everything that makes it worthwhile--much more valuable than the old AOL or Compuserve--comes from the co-operative heritage. I think it would be an utter shame to lose that. I have felt for years it is important to organize to preserve the co-operative internet, and have never figured out how to persuade anyone of it; the ideology of individualism is very strong in the technical community and is working to the undoing of the technical community, despite actual co-operative practices which many people participate in.
And this ass talks about something which broke e-mail as "standards-compliant!" Apparently the whole reason for the existence of the internet as it emerged--satisfying the need for human contact--is subordinate in his mind to making money.
Randolph, that co-operation/individualism thing is tricky. I really think the net was developed by a bunch of people doing what they each bloody well pleased. It's just that what bloody well pleased them was to get together and build something that worked.
I don't know what you mean when you say "organize to preserve the co-operative internet", nor do I know what the people who are making the co-operative internet hear when you say it.
And no, I don't know how to get people to hang on to what's valuable without being too badly distracted by the forms which are supposed to preserve it. I've been chewing on that question for years.
Nancy Leibovitz: I really think the net was developed by a bunch of people doing what they each bloody well pleased. It's just that what bloody well pleased them was to get together and build something that worked.
A lot of the time, though, "what they each bloody well pleased" boiled down to "continue to get funding from DARPA." If they hadn't cooperated and worked together under the direction of the government's central planners, the Internet wouldn't have happened.
I really think the net was developed by a bunch of people doing what they each bloody well pleased.Actually, no. The Internet was built more on the science/research/university model of proposals and peer review. It operated within the constraints of DARPA (some of which were pretty draconian and basically boiled down to: "OMG, what if Sen. Mansfield hears about THIS?" *).
All the Internet standards were developed in this way: TCP/IP, Email, FTP, HTML, etc.
* An early example of this was the establish of the SF-LOVERS mailing list, amusingly enough.
Two points. Liebovitz is correct: it was written by a bunch of people doing what they felt like doing. But it wasn't uncoordinated. Anyone reading an RFC would realize that. (Unless you pick one like RFC 3093 :).
2. After verisign's recent attempt to take default ownership of every unclaimed ".com" alias, they have zero credibility on an issue like this. If it's a verisign "privatization" idea, it almost has to be bad.
Note: sorry about the fake email address, but I get enough junk mail from crawlers as it is.
Sclavos.... Sclavos.
Wasn't he master of the Daleks?
No, Sclavos is master of the Sclaleks. They look almost like Daleks, but they belong to Fox TV instead of BBC, and they say "Fair and balanced!" alternately with "Exterminate!"
Huh. Is that Dave Lebling up there the Dave Lebling, co-author of Zork?
Randolph, what am I being an example of?
p mac, they cared enough about building a network that they developed an appropriate amount of coordination.
My name is Lebovitz. There is only one vowel per syllable. Perhaps I will simplify my life by changing it to Von Goom.
Nancy, the first paragraph of your first post in this thread is phrased as a correction or rebuttal, but contains no actual corrective or rebutting material.
Avram, you may have a point there. On the other hand, it may be worth looking at how people with an ideological commitment to individualism managed to put together one of the more effective cooperative efforts, and whether the individualism actually helped.
It may be the case that when people want to cooperate, they do--and ignore their ideologies, or possibly individualism is more consistant with cooperation than Randolph is allowing for.
Randolph, how do you think the ideology of individualism is working to undo the technical community?
Let's try that again: User Friendly (left off the "").
Hard-Hitting Moderator: Teresa Nielsen Hayden.
Comments on Shorter Stratton Sclavos.: