Slashdot Mirror

OK you're right and I'm wrong!

UK Online says I'm wrong so I'll go back under my rock...

The problem is that the All Party Parliamentary Internet Group has nothing to do with the UK Government. It is not even an official UK parliamentary select committee, which would at least get it listened to. It is rather more ad-hoc, and its only noticable fact is that it has members from more than one political party. Don't expect it to have any real influence.

Nope, Parliament is not part of the government. The government is made up of all central government (run by government ministers) and local government (run by local authorities.)
Read the FAQs I put a link to in my previous post.

Nope, Parliament is not part of the government. The government is made up of all central government (run by government ministers) and local government (run by local authorities.)
Read the FAQs I put a link to in my previous post.

The Internet's greatest impact has been on the the voice it gives the public. Business is just using it as a tool, people use it to invoke change in the systems that regulate their lives.

That's pretty arguable. I mean, name one major social change that has happened as a result of the Internet. Sure, we're communicating faster, but has it actually provided a clear social change?

And why isn't faster communications a clear social change? Would you have cried out "name one major social change as a result of telephones!" if you were around in the early 1900s?

These days I can bank online, buy food online, pay rent online, communicate in almost-real-time with overseas relatives, find communities in my local area with similar hobbies/interests, or buy and sell things with people I've never met. How is this anything other than a social change?

Government services are increasingly online. The government is nothing more than the organised administrators of society. If the Internet is helping the government then it is directly helping society as well.

Linux is built by online communities that wouldn't exist without the Internet, and Linux is definitely helping poorer countries that wouldn't have had any options without free software. This is leading to real social changes by giving poor schools access to "expensive" software.

The physically disabled can work from home. Poorer countries with intelligent citizens can now compete directly with foreign superpowers.

The Internet is to the 21st century what the phone was to the 20th century. Initially only in the hands of the rich, then in the hands of the middle class, then in the hands of everybody and taken for granted. Sure, most of the improvements are evolutionary instead of revolutionary. The Internet has improved existing practises: there are Internet equivalents for postal mail, telephones, television, radio, and community halls. But isn't this enough? Isn't a gradual improvement enough to be called a "clear social change"? I say it is.

Why do I think "drugs" when I look at this?

The UK government portal allows you to register a username that has a password the same as the username. This is appalling, considering the portal might be used for personal information.