Open Media: Taking Old Fartism Down

Unlike any previous information conduits, Open Media are conceived, developed and dominated by the young, especially college kids with access to high-speed bandwidth and teenagers with lots of time and expertise. Change or die time. Third in a series.

This youth domination has been true of no other mass medium -- adolescents and post-adolescents shaping an information structure they know more about than almost any sub-set of adults.

A first-rate piece in Brill's Content 's August issue, by writer Austin Bunn, reports on a soon-to-be-released HomeNet study, scheduled for publication this winter in the journal Human Computer Interaction. It documents in society-at-large what's been clear for some time on the most vibrant Open Media websites -- online, the young are shaping information culture. They are the gurus, visionaries, technicians, repairpersons and authorities on the Information Revolution. There are plenty of older Net visionaries and users as well, but they don't dominate open media in the way the middle-aged have always dominated information before.

While politicians and journalists have been clucking about sex, isolation and the decline of Western civilization, younger people -- teens through 30s especially -- have been acquiring and mastering computing technology. So-called "games," messaging systems, and free music and software-sharing sites have served as their universities and career ladders, indoctrinating a generation into the most sophisticated and powerful information systems ever seen. The spread of broadband online access to universities and private homes has been a huge spur, driving younger people online, providing the opportunity to learn and experiment once they got there. Napster is one well-known example. So are ICQ, Gnutella and C-Net, and this site. Lesser-known and more specialized OM sites include chickclickers.com and myvideogames.com, or the pioneeer weblog www.camworld.com.

This adolescent and post-adolescent technical expertise, writes Bunn, has translated into a broader cultural savvy, upending the traditional power balance, inspiring college students to found their own companies, reducing parents, journalists, teachers, CEO's, teachers and other adult authority figures to bystanders. For generations, Dad was the household figure who knew how things worked. Now he and Mom have to ask their kids. For even longer, media was run by aging and imperious white men who decided what was news and what wasn't. Today, these media movers and shakers are desperate, scrambling to find anybody who can tell them what's going on. Usually, the person they're asking is under 30.

These Open Media sites -- weblogs, webpages, messaging systems, software -- sharing and research communities -- are increasingly founded by the young, a trend with mind-boggling implications. These kids have grown up with the Internet; they know intuitively how to use technology. And they have radically different cultural, political, technological and social sensibilities.

According to a May study by the Pew Center for Media Research, roughly half of American families now have Internet access. There are also more Americans turning 18 now than ever before, points out William Strauss, author of "Millenials Rising: The Next Generation." The approximately 78 million Americans aged 21 and younger account for 28 per cent of the population. What TV was to the Boomers, computers are to their children. This evolutionary demographic is behind much of the rise in Open Media.

Whatever their commonality as members of the Open Media, the differences in these emerging sites are striking. Open Media embraces interactivity -- they reflect ideas, commentary and information from a wide range of sources, especially their readers. They don't merely provide the occasional link to other sites on the Web, as traditional sites. Rather, they use the Net infrastructure to make links an organic part of their content. They aggressively ask their readers to help set editorial agendas. Each reader becomes a highly-wired reporter, foraging on his or her own favorite sites, seeking particular kinds of information.

Using mostly digital transmissions, stories get spotted, suggested and linked to by readers. Readers also have access to the editorial figures on the website. Through story input, moderation or discussion forums they have a say in how the site operates.

Rather than divide a site into pay-versus-free areas, revenue comes from advertising, the sale of specialized merchandise, or other sources. But the information itself is almost always free, moving continuously through the site like a river. These young new media entrepeneurs embrace popular culture as strongly as technology. They gather almost continuously to discuss movies, TV shows, certain magazines and books.

Diversity is rarely as big an issue as it is for their parents. Possibly because of the anonymity possible online, or perhaps because of natural social evolution, differences in race, religion and sexual orientation rarely come up. They are comfortable talking about sex. They've experienced almost total freedom of expression online, much more than older Americans have. If this trend continues, this generation may free itself --- and its editorial agenda -- from many of the issues that dominated their parents' lives of their parents.

They are almost totally disconnected from the mainstream political and media system -- the network newscasts, major newspapers, TV talk shows and political events that dominate conventional, closed media. Such subjects rarely surface on Open Media sites. Yet despite the inherently democratic nature of their media creations, their lack of interest in the larger political structure is already posing problems and challenges.

Young Netizens seem flabbergasted when the adult value system collides with and changes their world -- in arguments over copyright and Napster or the passage of laws like the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. They don't seem to grasp that their lack of political acumen and organizing skills not only make such legislation possible but increasingly inevitable in encounters with a legal and political system dominated by those older and non-technologically-centered.

Understandably, the architects of this new media are arrogant. At the epicenter of one of the most revolutionary technological advances ever, they know much more about it than parents, teachers, journalists or politicians. They discovered early on that many of the people who lecture about them and their culture are clueless, and they learned to ignore moral posturing and hectoring. As a result, they'll form their own moral code in their own good time, apart from conventional social, religious and cultural values. As yet, no single value system has emerged beyond some libertarian notions about government and freedom.

They are free-marketeers and democrats. They are comfortable making money, unabashed about taking entrepeneurial risks (the Brill's Content article focuses on 13-year-old Ilya Anopolsky, founder of the Web-design firm Devotion, Inc., as well as Michael Furdyk, 18-year-old founder and business development manager of BuyBuddy.com.

Although today's Net-connected youth are denounced for being technology-addicted or socially isolated, the truth is they use the Net and the Web to communicate with one another, not to disconnect. For them, the Net is a social as well as a technological medium. They gather in chat rooms, on mailing lists and messaging systems and form enduring relationships that frequently last for years.

This generation of media engineers celebrates the accessibility of traditionally out-of-reach information. They have literally grown up downloading music, text, and almost every other conceivable form of intellectual property. Branded "pirates" by corporatists and politicians, they grasp what much of American society hasn't yet comprehended -- they posess the technological skills to gather all the information they want, and no authority has yet amassed an equivalent amount of expertise to slow them down or stop them.

Comments

Cliche

[NetFu]

This is a good example of the perpetuation of a relatively old internet "cliche" -- the "adolescent internet guru" vs. the "old fart luddite".

Bullshit.

If you still believe this in the year 2000, you are delusioned. Severely. The "old farts" are running the brick-and-mortar institutions that are either kicking the e-tailer's asses or buying them out. How can this be if they are run by stupid "old fart luddites"?

Oh yeah, and look at the brain-drain of employees running from crashing internet start-ups to work at more solid electronics companies or even "old economy" companies. Yeah, if you believe the cliche at the top of this post, you probably thought that XYZ start-up with the 17-23 year old founder was going to skyrocket.

Sorry, but the reality is that age doesn't matter. I know 50 year-old company CEO's/Presidents who are more 'net-savvy than many e-commerce consultants they talk to. If you're intelligent and "have the right stuff" it doesn't matter what your age is, you will rise above your competitors every time.

Re:Cliche

[Dann25]

Fully agree with you that the argument is off base but take it as true. Are the new "ruling" class going to suddenly loose it when they hit 31 and find that the 18 year olds following up are taking over, doubtful. Even if the young of today are taking this power they will want to keep it as they become the grey hairs. Given this, who cares how many 18 year olds are turning of age. The power, if it has changed hands, has already done so and the new leaders are not going to be willing to give it up.

Re:Cliche

[Delphis]

with all of the anonymity the Katz goes on about, how on earth does he know the real age of people on-line?

Katz has never had a clue in his life and will probably never *ever* get one.

Don't they lock up people like this that just want to gibber to hear themselves 'gibber'?

NFC


--

Re:Cliche

[ribone]

I would just like to say "Thank you" for being one of the only people to have pointed this out directly. When people try to draw lines like this, it divides us from the other group. You don't want to ever be like "those people" over there.... somehow I suspect that more than a couple of people are going to fall prey to this, forgetting of course that they were themselves the subject of stereotyping back in high school. (isn't it amazing at how quickly some forget?) On another, related note, I've been watching Katz spew his articles out for some time, and I've never been more convinced that he's one of those people who opens his mouth just so he can hear his own voice... 'nuff said

Re:Cliche

[kootch]

agreed. what Katz seems to be saying, but not realizing or admitting, is that the web gives a platform for every angst ridden, lonely and confused teenager to stand up and tell the world where to stick it in their own way.

so the young are the ones making the most news. that doesn't mean that more people read their "open news" than CNN or the Times (companies that are run by old grey-hairs). yes, the young usually have a better grasp on the technology, and the old grey hairs often hire those young under 30 yuppies, but they also put them in positions where the old grey hairs have the last say because they know how to make money with their product.

That doesn't mean that there aren't times that the young blood doesn't come up with the great idea to make tons of money, or totally replace the old. but just as the old has to learn to move with the young, the young has to learn that there are rules and that sometimes if you play by the rules, you come out much richer.

look at what happened with all of those internet IPO's started up by people that were in their early 20's. Most have gone belly-up or have hired old grey hairs to run their company.

Shows you that BOTH sides have something to learn, that the young won't replace the old, and that if you think Open Media is the next big thing, you're sadly mistaken because for the "New Media" to get recognized, it has to conform to "Old Media" rules and become part of the mainstream media.

Re:Cliche

[SpacePunk]

What people don't seem to get is that the majority of youth are more interested in playing games wheather it be on a PSX, Dreamcast, or PC than learning the technology. I know how to drive a car, but that doesn't make me a mechanic or smart about cars. Knowing how to use a telephone doesn't make anyone smarter than anyone else, and certainly doesn't make them a telecommunication genius. There are more people I know that just know how to use the machine, but don't have any skill at all with the actual technology. Same for the older crowd.

Re:Cliche

[Wah]

is that the web gives a platform for every angst ridden, lonely and confused teenager to stand up and tell the world where to stick it in their own way.

And it allows every angst ridden, lonely and confused teenager a place to go find others like them. That's the power. I don't have to wait for MTV to do their next angst ridden, lonely teenager show, I can go find a real one, who answers e-mail. (hypothetically)

...if you think Open Media is the next big thing, you're sadly mistaken because for the "New Media" to get recognized, it has to conform to "Old Media" rules and become part of the mainstream media.

I disagree with this. I think all the New Media has to do is hang on long enough for that critical mass of folks to find it, and then discover some way to propogate itself. New Media can't conform to the old rules, they just don't work here. The power has shifted to the consumers of media, not the purveyors. That's what defines it as New Media, IMHO.

That being said, the young and old generations must get along to make it successful. Young folks might have ideas, but they call it "old money" for a reason. (I'm 25, for the record)

--

Re:Cliche

[meadowsp]

I fully agree, with all of the anonymity the Katz goes on about, how on earth does he know the real age of people on-line?

Re:Cliche

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, well, be that as it may, me and many of my friends started out being interested only in playing computer games.

Now we're all Internet multi-gazillionaires. Well, OK, some are, some aren't, but we've all got good jobs, and can write our own tickets when we want to play in some new company.

Re:Cliche

[VoodooPIg]

well actually the young will replace the old thats what happens the old die the young grow old.....

Re:Cliche

[helfire57]

Maybe you forgot but once you IPO, you SELL a portion of your company to the public. So your company crashes later; bummer, but YOU are still in (X)illionaire! Its the slow movers that get hosed NOT the 20ish founder. Keep that in mind.

Break point in the skills

[Yojimbo-San]

My children won't axiomatically know more about technology than I will, but they will be much more comfortable with the current expression of that technology, because they won't be comparing it with anything else.

People who have stopped learning are the people that say "kids are so clever". Kids are not clever. I have not yet met a "kid" who was clever as regards computing/technology. On the other hand, I've met loads of kids who are enthuiastic and undaunted by initial failure. Perhaps that is because they don't appreciate the consequences. Anyway, they don't let the problem beat them, and they eventually find a solution - whereas many many "adults" just give up.

So perhaps instead of seeing a fundamental shift in favour of youth, we are simply seeing a function of the take-up of new technologies. How many Industrial Revolution adults managed to make sense of their new tasks? How many "kids" were unfased by it all?

Re:Poser, I mix Jolt and espresso

[Delphis]

What's the view like from the computer-room ceiling? .. care to share?
--

Re:Media is media is media

[Debba]

Yes and right on and amen Bruthuh. When the narrow specialist of any chronological age takes on a specialty-centric mindset it doesn't matter how superduper he/she is at their specialty (unless that is all you do in life)everything else that exists looks insignificant to them IMHO. So their world narrows radically and as it does, so does their mind. And then they appear larger and larger than the "outside" world (to themselves). This has its parallels in religion where the Believers are the few and the chosen; all outsiders are heretics and barbarians. The remedy for this is to make friends with people who have a wide variety of expertises and kinds of intelligence, as well a economic and political backgrounds. Learn the value of disciplines outside your own. If you can't see any worthwhile outside of your own, well - It's called THERAPY. Get some. Peace and love and rock & Roll Debba

Re:This is especially bad..

[ChiaBen]

Yup, I completely agree.

To quote the old folks reasoning: "if you have to ask how much it is you can't afford it" ... how much sense does this make?!!? We aren't selling Rolls Royce's here!!

regards.

Spending time on old farts like Katz

[gnalle]

It's funny how Katz can get such a reaction every time he posts something. I mean the net is full of people saying all sorts of stuff. Some is useful some is not. There lots of old farts are out there, but why bother? If you guys don't like the stuff that Katz writes, you can just click on preferences and turn him off.

The funny thing is that nobody does this. (At least plenty of people don't). Even though most people disagree with him, the Karma scores, and the number of reples tell that he is one of the most poplular writers on slashdot. It's so nice to have someone to talk about.

Thank you Katz for creating all this fuzz every time you post an article :)

Re:Spending time on old farts like Katz

[WillAffleck]

Even though most people disagree with him, the Karma scores, and the number of reples tell that he is one of the most poplular writers on slashdot. It's so nice to have someone to talk about.

Now, hold on. The number of replies are inflated, due to the fact that at least a third of them are people commenting:
a. How bad a writer Jon is
b. How he thinks everything is about Geekdom being close to Godhood
c. How he's distorting reality to match his thesis
d. How he should get a real job and stop writing this carp.

So, why does /. allow him to continue to waste electrons, and get paid doing it?

Insightful comment about Open Media

[Jon Erikson]

They aggressively ask their readers to help set editorial agendas.

Well, this shows that /. is definitely not Open Media, since the /. staff seem to completely ignore the views of their readers and choose stories based on their own biases.

---
Jon E. Erikson

the old rock and roll myth

[BenHmm]

this argument always reminds me of my parent's generation saying they invented rock and roll - being teenagers in the sixties and all.

bollocks. it was the old guys who sold the records.

it's always the "old farts" who do the rebelling really: they're the ones with the money/business sense/influence/access to mass amounts of mememaking media that make the differences.

The net is just the same. All this groundbreaking teenage open media madness is facilitated by the old farts - without them, their nice backbone making,computer building,satellite launching, venture funding fartiness we'd all be just writing on neighbourhood walls.

Re:I'd like to propose a splinter group

[Golias]

We hate the neo-fartists. Bloody splitters!

:)

Re:kids today....

[ocelotbob]

Why, back in my day everyone was a whole lot younger and there weren't so durn many dead people

What do these 'hip' young people know

[ericlj]

How does this story relate to the surveys which show the number of people pursuing technical studies to be steadily decreasing. For years, we have heard how playing video games make people more computer-wise, but I never heard that playing pinball machines made someone into a mechanic. What is the real difference -- both video game players and pinball machine players were simply using artifacts produced by other (generally older) people. (In fact, at least the pinball machines taught you how to manipulate machinery by lifting, hitting and shaking the machines without causing a 'tilt'.)

The same arguments apply to users of email who know nothing about computers -- are they wiser than people who use telephones but don't know about electronics?

In the end, Mr. Katz is praising the 'new generation' because they are used to getting exactly what they want and are reaping the benefits of many great engineers of the past couple of generations.

Re:Cliche - look at the time

[.Tacitus.]

Yes but if you loved driving cars you would become an expert on the mechanics of driving a car and fixing your car and making your car run better. The youth are in love with technology. They obsess over it and become masters over it. With all the time and money their baby-boomer parents provide for them it is easy to see how they can learn more in 1 month then older, much busier people do in 1 year.

my $0.02

T

Re:I'd like to propose a splinter group

[Golias]

I am officially a total nerd for ripping off a Monty Python bit in an online forum.

I would like to apologize to America, and also to my family, who has bravely stood by me through this trying time. I look forward to the chance to move on with my life and put this whole ugly incident behind me.

Eh?

[nphinit]

online, the young are shaping information culture. They are the gurus, visionaries, technicians, repairpersons and authorities on the Information Revolution

You are taking a leap here, acting like every 13-year old with net access is a brilliant little technologist. I suggest you visit chat rooms and web pages made by 13-year olds.

So-called "games," messaging systems, and free music and software-sharing sites have served as their universities and career ladders

Playing Quake, chatting, and downloading mp3s is hardly educating our youth. Kids used to mostly waste time watching TV, now they use computers to goof off. It's more interactive, yeah, but how is this a "university" or "career ladder"?

Using mostly digital transmissions, stories get spotted, suggested and linked to by readers. Readers also have access to the editorial figures on the website. Through story input, moderation or discussion forums they have a say in how the site operates.

I guess this is your take on what a flamewar is.

They are free-marketeers and democrats. They are comfortable making money, unabashed about taking entrepeneurial risks

Yeah, it's fine they make money while they are young, but if they grow up and start corporations, they are the root of all evil, right Jon?

Partly true

[The Queen]

I work in advertising, too...but I'm their web ho. I constantly tell them 'no' and they are starting to learn. ;-)
Seriously though, marketing is all about feedback. Our clients are giddy when they get email from site visitors. It's just unfortunate that ad banners and spam have coloured everyone's opinion of 'marketing' online... The Internet is a 2-way street, you're right, but I think businesses are more open to that than you're giving them credit for. It's up to us as professional geeks to steer them in the proper direction.

The Divine Creatrix in a Mortal Shell that stays Crunchy in Milk

Score -1 (Offtopic, troll, flamebait, etc. )

[Kris Warkentin]

I remember when Katz used to write about his personal experiences (installing Linux, etc.) rather than his opinions. Is it just me or were those articles much more lively and interesting than most of what he writes now?

Old vs. Young... an example...

[ChiaBen]

I was just involved in this discussion a second ago... our small ISP is creating a new brochure.
The older group feels the prices shouldn't be included so as to get people to call in, and thus allow our salesmen to hook them.

The younger generation (I'm 24 so I'll include myself) feels that the prices should be included with a "prices subject to change" waiver. This way we save our salesmen's time for potential clients rather than giving out directions, prices, and quotes over the phone. (i.e. they are actually out there selling)

Re:Old vs. Young... an example...

[astrophysics]

When I'm doing product/service comparisons I normally throw out any options that make it hard for me to get a price. I figure they're likely to be too expensive, and definitely an obnoxious company.

Re:Old vs. Young... an example...

[Animats]

Of course you put prices in the brochure. That's a no-brainer. On the web page, of course, you not only have prices, you accept credit cards on-line.

IBM used to have a policy that they didn't post prices on-line. (I once told one of their sales reps "Get with the program" over this.) Now, you can order just about anything IBM makes short of a mainframe on-line. IBM's people are now doing more system integration and less iron-pushing.

Never send a man to do an artillery shell's job.

Re:This is new?

[VAXman]

Steve Jobs and Bill Gates were 20 when they started their copmpanies. Wozniak was 25.

Re:new world order?

[Benwick]

It is a form of social transformation in that your physical being is not visible to others, only your mind. That, of course, has good points and bad points.

Most things can be done without ever actually seeing the other parties involved... but always remember that the best thing can't be done that way... ;) !

Ben Chadwick - Editor, Zero Future/Post-Collegiate Malaise

Re:Open Fartism

[Golias]

Damn closing link. Trying again:

For Katz to imply that old media is doomed (in spite of the wild success of printed magazines targeting every imaginable niche market), and that sites like Teen Movie Critic are the future is so silly that I can't even take it seriously enough to thoughtfully point out how horribly, horribly wrong so much of his column is... so I will just fire off a couple of smart-assed questions.

Does the term "Open Media" imply that we are welcome to take his rough drafts, make a few changes, and sell them as our own under the GPL?

If there is such a thing as "Old Fartism", what exactly does an Old Fartist believe?

Is there also a New Fartism? Or perhaps a Reformed Fartism?

Katz, does it bother you that your whole column is dripping with the same sappy sentiment as the opening lines of "The Greatest Love of All" by Whitney Houston?

Wow, you're really great, Mr. Obvious!

[Keith Russell]

Stop the press! There's a generation gap!

Once again, I find myself wading through screen after screen of breathlessly eloquent Katzian hyperbole, only to find that I've summarized it in my head to a simple sentence or two that should be patently obvious to anyone with enough brain cells to type Slashdot's URL.

Every day we're standing in a wind tunnel
Facing down the future coming fast - Rush

well what do you expect

[knurr]

there is no suprise here, it happens in every generation, this time, it just happens that our generations has shown some skills, unlike our parents, who only had rock & roll ( not saying thats a bad thing). We are a generation who does not fear the future, we just took it over. Our parents have become afraid of it and are having a hard time dealing with socio-economical changes which are coming about due to the fact that our generation having embraced this new medium ussually end up breaking our parents highest salery before we are 23. The only thing we must realize is that we must break the cycle and not be afraid of the future when we are our parents age...

Re:well what do you expect

[knurr]

Eh think about it, the hate programming VCR's, Computers scare them, and I am not sure they are happy about their impending death. Yeah they are scared to of the future, let me rephrase that, scare to face the future, thats why our genration has so much power now, and it my fucking opinon, I am not smoking shit, I am pulling this from my experiance in life. I work for for a buch of people my parents age, and i have to drag them kicking a screaming into the present, they dont want to even think about the future. I only go from experiance bucky and if you have none, that not my concern...

Re:Next generation

[Hard_Code]

Sorry, I didn't uncheck +1 Bonus. I'll moderate your Hot Grits up next time AC ;)

Heheh, so much for Gen-X

[reenzo]

The title says it all... As one of these 25-35 year old child of the late sixties, I just have to laugh. Were WE not supposed to be the next big thing? Looks like the so-called social and political apathy "my generation" holds so dear (according to stories trumpeted in the last 5 years by all the standard media outlets) has either, a) really been the case and we have already missed the boat in creating social pressure/effect, or b) been so taken to heart by reader/writers/thinkers that we are such a boring topic as to become a non-story. heheh, we'll see... :)

Re:Heheh, so much for Gen-X

[Chris Johnson]

*g* yeah, tell me about it. Still, you can get some good stealth action going from a position of poverty and ignorability ;)

So new it's older than time...

[onelove]

Under cobalt skies
A young buck takes on the aging bull
A flurry of horns and fur
There will be a new leader tonight.

Or maybe not.

Be patient with Jon... He's just starting to see the world for the first time.

- antoine

Spelling Nazi must be entagled in the eiderdown...

[Niko.]

...'cause it's "aught". Not "ought".

Re:You moderate on crack!

[Anonymous Coward]

I've seen you before in M2. Don't worry, I marked you as fair, I mark everything as fair, ever since they changed M2 to deduct karma if you mark too many things unfair.

:-)

Thanks!

I think this weekend I'm gonna break some new ground and moderate on inhalants, maybe soem rubber cement, then some toluene, and cap it off with some ether.

Next generation

[Hard_Code]

Down with Old Fartism! Up with Pop Superficiality! Rah!...er something...I can't concentrate...I think I need a Pepsi...

Change or die time.

[Municipa]

How about quit while your way behind time?

Sensemaking in your Open Media? Say wha?

Ironic

[Far McKon]

It is ironic that at one day there appears an atricle about how people today are working longer and harder, and about how students and young employees are working longer and harder. And everyone cooments. The nex day there is an aricle about how the younger people are "on top" of the new media, and how they are the ones in charge. HMMM. Coincidence. I THINK NOT

Re:Uh. No.

[Master Bait]

Those chickclick bitches promised to send me a free CD if I filled out a survey. Now they got my spam address and I didn't get any free CD or makeup or pantyhose in the mail.

I guess these 'young' babes are creative enough to get my info, but they are still motivated by money, just like the old farts.

blessings,

first ?

[DZign]

just wanted to be first with a comment on an article :-)
man, was this a long text, I almost fell asleep :-(
it's pretty interesting though..

Re:Change or die.

[clever_shark]

That's unkind, you coward. Jon Katz doesn't deserve to be told to die. Reserve your venom for someone who deserves it, like someone who kidnaps or rapes your children.

Trolling Katz

[11223]

Open Media are conceived, developed and dominated by the young, especially college kids with access to high-speed bandwidth and teenagers with lots of time and expertise.

Actually, most of the anti-katz posts here are concieved, developed, and dominated by the young, especially college kids with access to high-speed bandwidth and teenagers with lots of time and expertise.

Watch where you're walking - you might step on a troll!

yep

[ArchieBunker]

Like how zealots like the freedom of which OS to choose, as long as its linux. Since I have a choice why do you get all upset if I use windows? Or how about BeOS or FreeBSD? Its the same information wants to be free argument. Its ok as long as the information isn't about you.

Re:Media is media is ? not media?

[EMN13]

I think its extremely simplistic to simply classify "media" into a group without interest in differentiating between them. Media is media is media... that's great, but the differences between them are staggering. Could something like slashdot exist in another medium? Probably thousands of comments a day, frequently each discussed quickly? Is a book a TV? You can't merely classify media and pretend there all the same.

Here's an analogy: Humans live on a planet. But that planet is quite specific, and it forms us a lot. That planet influences who and what we are, to an inordinate amount. Similarly, the medium influences the information it carries.

Katz may make radical comments occasionally. OK, he rants all the time :-). But the point remains - what with this age divide? I don't think that an age divide is this generation's invention - think of the "hippy culture" versus their parents - but just saying "all people are created equal" and thus concluding that the age divide is imaginary is absurd.

I don't think that the age divide is "an extremist invention" or "incited hatred". It's entirely natural for people to try to differentiate themselves from their parents and the accepted social order when growing up; this was always so. The rapid change we as a species are experiencing means that it's easier to see those "age divides". It also means that it isn't always necessary to eventually adapt to your parents - the change just catches up on you.

Katz is quite right in suggesting that this may pose problems. The general public's interest in politics is falling... but how should democrasy work without interested individuals? What happens when the existing system impedes change?

I'm not saying that all old people are old farts... heck, my father works in artificial intelligence and alpha infomatica, and my grandfather developed an one of the first functioning solar car and is still a developer in the photovoltaic industry. But we're talking trends here. The trend is that young people know more about computers and such technology than others.

We need to think about that, not stuff it in a closet and pretend it isn't so. We need to make sure that the inevitable age divide doesn't turn into "incited hatred" and social disarray.

Denial is not a solution, merely another problem.

Re: Slashdot's very existence is opposed to you

[Umbro2]

What comes out of this Open Media is garbage because it's run by a bunch of kiddies who know nothing of content and quality. It pure-and-simple rubbish - quantity, and not quality.

Why do you read Slashdot?

I read it to scan a vast amount of media aimed at me. Its a clear concise summary of things my peers think would be interesting to me. Everyday it posts a slew of articles at me (Quantity). I read a quick summary of these articles and with the help of the Internet I go DIRECTLY to the source of the news(Quality).

Your problem seems to be that you've read news from Time for so long that you cannot accept the change in media presentation. New media throws everything at me, and I research what I find interesting, STRAIGHT from the source.

Do you really find Time's third person biased summaries of value....of course you do you were raised to believe all of its media. Thanks to the Internet the new generation can go straight to the source with the click of a button(tm). Don't get me wrong Time did everything right. In the day when news needed to be brought to your home it did it. But today, I can get my own news, thanks.

Boiling it all down...

[Chris Worth]

Open Media - and let's face it, the Internet in general - is based on a simple premise: say what you like, but be prepared to have people talk back to you.

It's this point that old media doesn't get. I've worked in ad agencies for years, and not one of them accepts that to be part of the Net, you've got to play by the Net's rules.

Chris @ chrisworth.com

young vs. old

[beau455]

Frankly i'm glad its the younger generation that rules the web. I don't think I'd want to stumble across much more Old Lady pr0n ;)

Here's some new open media

[Anonymous Coward]

Go to www.dumbassandthefag.com to see exactly what he's talking about! These guys have taken film criticism away from the poshy jerks and made it something embarrassingly egaleterian!

let's get one thing clear ....

[streetlawyer]

So-called "games,"

No, Jon, I promise you, they are games.

Hey, isn't Jon an Old Fart?

[Grendel Drago]

Bah! I'd only be less impressed if Jon used the word 'screenager'. First off, he's an Old Fart. But this doesn't stop him from being a Purveyor of Grandiose Yet Vague Predictions, no.

Hey Katz! My father was the one who got me interested in computers in the first place, when I was four. He'd been interested since 1972 or thereabouts, but, of course, he's on Old Fart.

Katz plays to the crowd so much, I feel vaguely... shafted. I want my five minutes back! For Bob's sake, Katz, next time you write an article, here's an idea: include some content! Got that?

Re:Hey, isn't Jon an Old Fart?

[SpacePunk]

He does seem to play to the younger high school/college GiMi WaReZ/I run Linux/FREE ALL SOFTWARE crowd. His writing style does seem to be pretentious enough to appear in that damnable 'Mondo 2000' (whatever it was) book, but that must migh be the gloss and polish on it that makes it seem that way.

Re:This is new?

[gitm_tym]

Right. What exactly do you think a post-adolescent is? As the article states: College students... etc... I think 20 falls well within the scope of that article.

gitm

How much information is there actually on the net?

[grahamsz]

There is all this talk about vast amounts of information but it does seem to break down into about 4 main groups:
a) real solid researched information
b) user contributed discussion forums
c) binaries - pr0n, warez, mp3z etc..
d) portals & links to the above

I'm starting to come to the conclusion that it builds up in a sort of triangle formation. There's probably about a megabyte or two or real information, and at the bottom there are 500 million sites all pointing to that.

When I speak nowadays to people starting .coms no-one expects that they'll have to produce all their 'value-added' content... someone else will supply it of coure!? but who?

Paper media know fine well that the internet, for all it's petabytes of information, is more about peer-to-peer communication than solid hard information. What they dont realise is that more and more the two are becoming interchangable - who here looks to www.deja.com/usenet when they have hardware troubles before looking at the manufacturers website?!

Whippersnappers, con-sarn-it

[Benwick]

The 00's are pronounced "the oughts". The great thing about that is that when we're all ancient fogies we'll be able to say "it was back in ought-one" like grizzled old gold prospectors, gol-durn-it!

Dag-nabbit!

Ben Chadwick - Editor, Zero Future/Post-Collegiate Malaise

Re:Whippersnappers, con-sarn-it

[meadowsp]

It's pretty much the accepted norm in UK to call it the naughties, unless it's just me.

Re:Whippersnappers, con-sarn-it

[waynem77]

The 00's are pronounced "the oughts".

I've been pronouncing it "the naughties".

Yeah, my friends don't think I'm funny either. :(

hrmm..

[wishus]

if napster and icq are the colleges and universities of today, we're in for some serious trouble up ahead..

wish
---

Re:Open Fartism

[Benwick]

Man, what a jerk. Personally I liked having so much screen space on which I could click to visit "Teen Movie Critic" ! None of that carpal-tunnel-inducing careful movement of the pointer for me, no sirree bob! :)

Ben Chadwick - Editor, Zero Future/Post-Collegiate Malaise

Re:WHICH "generation" bucko?

[tensionboy]

HERE is the definition of -generation-. I was using the word as it appears defined in definition 4b.

As far as assuming I am young based on my alleged stupidity, I will assume you're an asshole based on your post but realize that that may not be the case.

The New World?

[HarabecW]

Don't know if this is off-topic or not, but I want to give people an example of the difference between the Internet and the "real world"
I live in Israel, and if I had watched CNN and other news channels I might have grown to hate Arabic people mainly because I only know them from what I am forced to hear, not what I want to hear. BUT...I don't watch the news channels all day long...I go to mIRC and chat. And guess what, I met other people from supposedly "hostile"(?) countries, and made friends with them... The Internet can change opinions, don't trust everything you hear, don't be passive and just sit in front of the TV all day. The Internet isn't just "news", it can be a window for a whole new way to look at life. well, that's it, yell at me if you like, don't yell if you don't want to :)

Us versus Them ... puuleeaze...

[dsyu]

Articles like this really annoy me, because they give the appearance of delivering the "truth" to the masses, when, in actuality, they're only serving up "hype".

In this case, Katz's article seeks to position the current situation as "old-versus-young". The emphasis on the "versus". Old folks are standing in the way of young folks' progress.

In the real world(tm), emphasizing antagonism between groups never produces progress. So why write articles that seek to popularize these sort of ideas? Is it because Katz was badly mistreated as a child and needs to make sure that he doesn't get along with people of a different age group?

In the new media, 18-year olds are going to have to work with 40-year olds eventually. It's not like everyone under 30 can cut themselves off from society. Who does the accounting and has surplus cash that the younger folks use for their startup money? Who produces the goods that eCommerce sites sell? Do people like Katz really think that the younger generation is so naive that they believe that they can suddenly exist on their own, autonomously, like some weird version of Brave New World?

And before you start flaming, yes, I'm under 30, and yes, I work in the web+new-media industry. Okay, now you can start flaming.

Re:anyone who enjoys jon katz..

[Chris Johnson]

It would be nice if you'd quit with the 'homo' as a term of abuse. Jon is _not_ homosexual so far as I know, and his articles are, well, Jon Katz articles. By contrast, you could call me a homo with much greater accuracy, and the slashdot article that I wrote (posted by Roblimo) was much clearer and more interesting. I think you should find something else to call Katz if you want to abuse him. And yeah, it's not really my business as you weren't calling _me_ anything, but ya get sick of seeing it after a while, you know? *shrug*

Re:Ceritifed Proof that Jon Katz is an Old Fart

[ucblockhead]

As to publishing books online: A book is a serious investment. It deserves some form of return - yet the internet can hardly give this

So is a song.

I personally can't take Katz's comments on Napster seriously because he's not willing to put his "art" out there for free.

Re:Media is media is media

[Far McKon]

Althought i agree with most of the post, i do not agree with There =IS= no "new media" or "old media". A medium is simply the method by which information is transferred. Who does the transferring, and how, is utterly irrelevent, in the end. The medium shapes what is said and how it reaches it's audiance, as well as the ideas of the people dealing with the media. The medium is not the message, but influences the message in subtle, but sometimes improtant ways. There are difinate differences in media, and the messages best convayed by thise media's. Things do not simply translate to new media's. Simply look at all the good books that have made horriable movies, or good movies that have made horriable books. Media shapes the message, and the messages shape the media.

Re:Serious Reply

[ucblockhead]

Shit, I wish I hadn't just posted a comment. I'd have moderated this up in a second.

(And it was a lame comment. Mine, that is.)

Re:Ceritifed Proof that Jon Katz is an Old Fart

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody will ever curl up in bed with a cut of tea and a monitor.

I curl up in my bed with my laptop. And in the cold winters, it doubles as an effecient heater too ;)
br-dk-

Re:new world order?

[Benwick]

Soon there will be something better than shitting available online... www.e-Shit.com, or iShit, or a sewage system called napShit... Eventually all bodily functions will be subsumed by the Internet...

Ben Chadwick - Editor, Zero Future/Post-Collegiate Malaise

Dual Cultures

[Prontai]

There are two problems I see in this article: 1)it seems to insinuate that the pre-existing culture that existed before and during the rising of the internet is archaic, unworthy compared to the Internet culture, and useless; 2) it also seems to suggest people born into this new social paradigm are automatically entered into the "open media" existince and could not thrive in both of the cultures.

The internet would not have arisen were it not for the social and government climate that existed in the 60's, 70's, and 80's, largely the very same social and government climate that exists today and that the new culture is battling so hard. Without the military's, and then business's, interest in technological advancement no one would've even conceived of any sort of forum similar to Slashdot.

Secondly, not all people under 18 are automatically entering into the "open media" paradigm and adopting it's forming value-set. It also suggests that no one has the capacity to exist and suceed in both. That is kind of ironic since so many of us are starting companies, automatically subjecting themselves to the regulation and review of the culture they claim not to be of. I myself am an example of someone who sucessfully participates in both cultures and gladly so. I can in one minute be arguing with people on here about whether using Apache on a *nix system is better than IIS on WiNTel and then the next moment go and argue whether Nero or Caligula was the worst Roman emperor with the history professor who lives next door. So please, consider that not all things that aren't open source and online aren't bad.

Re:Media is media is ? not media?

[jd]

I would agree with that, except for the following points:

• I'm just an average guy, nothing special, but I can associate with just about any generation without being "out of place", either in my eyes or theirs. As the only difference between me and any other person of my age is that I reject the age divide (I don't need to "differentiate"), it follows that the "age divide" HAS to be fiction. It exists because we believe in it.

  But, as The Doctor points out in "The Mind Robber", fiction is powerless the moment you don't believe in it.

• Slashdot -does- exist in other media. Don't get so caught up in timescales. The speed is a product of the mechanism, not the format. Slashdot (the essence) has existed ever since people exchanged gossip in the Bazaars of the ancient world, that news spread through references (virtually all oral traditions operate this way - stories of this kind were never self-contained).
• Television -could- replace books, but it won't whilst TV executives are more interested in profit margins than quality. I'd challange anyone to say that some of the Classics done by the BBC (before they sold the sound & constume departments) were not faithful to the books.
• In the end, all media ARE the same, as they all go into your brain to be processed, and what you "perceive" is what you interpret from these inputs. In other words, your brain does NOT listen to sounds, or see visual images, it processes input data streams. Synaesthesia is a good example of what happens when input streams bleed into each other. It's not because the sound has some light photons mixed in, it's because the sound and light hve no meaning to the brain, but the signals those generate do.

Re:Ceritifed Proof that Jon Katz is an Old Fart

[EMN13]

Somewhat hypocritical, he is, is he? Well, in his defense, I'ld like to say, better a idealistic thought and interesting thing to say, than nothing to say. As to publishing books online: A book is a serious investment. It deserves some form of return - yet the internet can hardly give this. Also, a book allows in-depth expansion and extrapolation of thoughts, not merely a shallow comment here and a short essay there. I have never read nearly a full length book online, and from a practical point of view I don't want to. Books have there purpose, and the advent of the internet doesn't mean you should catagorically shun them :-).

I do agree, however, that at least extracts of the book online might prove sappy bits, perhaps even act as advertisement.

Old Fartism?

[dirtyboot]

Sorry, I ordinarily enjoy Katz's articles, but this one is a stretch. Youth has dominated American pop culture since the 1950s-- we worship youth. Sure, there's been constant reactionary vein underneath (rock and roll is the devil's music; rap is the devil's music, etc.), but more and more pop culture is targetted towards a younger audience.

Going, going, gone

[MilesBennell]

man, was this a long text, I almost fell asleep :-(

Yeah, that ol' attention span thing really gets in the way, doesn't it?

Whooo! Punk Rock!

[streetlawyer]

Basically, Jon's saying that there's a whole new movement, creating their own media, breaking free of conventions. brushing the Old Farts aside .... remind you of anything? Even the phrase "Old Fart" is a punk rock coinage.

"Open Media" are setting out to change the world, just like punk. And I am sure that they will have at least as much of a lasting effect on the world as punk rock did ... how much was that again?

In any case, I rather fear that Jon is doomed to be the Glenn Matlock of the Open Media revolution; the square fucker who did loads of stuff, but who, fundamentally, nobody liked.

Oh yeh, and this series of puff pieces for "Slashdot versus the Old Media" is still coming out without any note or disclaimer pointing out that, as shareholders in VA Linux, a company whose financial future depends on being able to convince the equity market that they are "the future", Katz, Taco et al have a huge financial interest in the story they are trying to sell us here. Or is "integrity" a "closed media" value?

Media is media is media

[jd]

There =IS= no "new media" or "old media". A medium is simply the method by which information is transferred. Who does the transferring, and how, is utterly irrelevent, in the end.

In many ways, it's like TCP/IP. You DON'T need to know all the little settings you can play with in the header to be able to call up a web page, or an FTP site. Even if you do, and you do submit bug fixes back to the TCP/IP stack maintainer, it really won't alter what you see on those web pages.

To hear Jon Katz talk, you'd believe that the Student Union in England never existed. That Radio Caroline and other infamous, long-lasting "pirate radio" were never there. That multicasting had never been developed. That no Special Interest Group has ever written it's own newspaper or run it's own community radio station.

To call anyone older than a teenager an "Old Fart" is not only extremely derogatory (older people were once teenagers themselves, and some are quite capable of matching any teenager on the planet for originality and creativity) but also extremely stupid, divisive, hostile and presumptuous.

The reason the generations don't usually get along is because of incited hatred between them, as if they were factions at war. But when you look at more "primitive" civilisations, you see cultures where there IS no generation war, where people trade and exchange thoughts WITHOUT REGARD for age, gender, or other modern extremist inventions.

And that's what the age divide IS. An extremist invention. It has NO place in a civilised society, bar that which we choose to give it.

IMHO, Jon Katz is becoming as hateful of the imagined enemy as he imagines the enemy to be of those he supports. I suggest seeing a doctor, as that degree of paranoia and hostility rarely does anything but grow. Especially in a mind that has been cultivated for it.

Re:Media is media is media

[dingbat_hp]

There =IS= no "new media" or "old media".

If there's no "New Meejah", why have my glasses got smaller, the sleeves fell off my fleece and I seem to have sprouted a little pointy goatee ?

Re:Media is media is media

[Claudius]

Well stated.

I doubt Mr. Katz genuinely hates his perceived enemy, but he has made a career out of raising the spectre of class warfare, about seeing every banal topic through a "geeks vs. corporatism" lens, out of being the self-appointed spokesperson for the "persecuted geeks" of the world. (Read: milquetoast, middle class, USA, suburbia world. But hey--they are the only ones who "get it" anyway, right?) Why should he abandon a cash cow?

I do have to admit that I may suffer from "OldFartism" myself since I just don't see a need to invent new words for every essay. Does his "New Media" require a new language to accompany it?

A Premise

[IGnatius T Foobar]

A friend of mine observed many years ago that the primary appeal of alternative media is that it bypasses the traditional hierarchy . At the time he was speaking of 'zines, and also of BBS's (in fact, he made this comment on UNCENSORED! BBS, a small online community which I still operate today). This sentiment holds just as true today for the Internet -- perhaps even moreso. Everyone is a potential publisher. When more bandwidth becomes available, everyone will be a potential broadcaster as well.

Bypassing the traditional hierarchy. That's what it's all about. Undoubtedly this scares the daylights out of those who control the traditional hierarchy.
--

Re:Serious Reply

[Golias]

I found it particularilly amusing that he wrote a coulumn about young people taking over the new media, and the only web link in his entire article was to Brill's Content, a media watchdog magazine put out by the producer of CourtTV.

Huh? No gender?

[yankeehack]

Diversity is rarely as big an issue as it is for their parents. Possibly because of the anonymity possible online, or perhaps because of natural social evolution, differences in race, religion and sexual orientation rarely come up.

I have to ask, why is GENDER missing from your list of things we have overcome with the advent of the OPEN MEDIA Katz???? I mean you DID reference chickclicks.com. But on the other hand, I do realize you usually sterotype geeks as being male.

Re:Ceritifed Proof that Jon Katz is an Old Fart

[Hard_Code]

Oh shaddup. Nobody will ever curl up in bed with a cut of tea and a monitor. Katz's book was more for everybody ELSE than it was for geeks. There are some things that are just worth shelling money out for. In any case a book is not Open Media in any sense. You buy it, you read it. I think they made a good decision judging that most sane people would rather shell out a few bucks for a good book than go blind being cheap-asses reading it on their CRT.

This is a a Future Shock

[sometwo]

I recently did an oral book report on the book "Future Shock" by Alvin Toffler, so I am very familiar with it. This is exactly what he is talking about and he wrote it in 1970! He says that people will experience a "future shock" which is analogous to a "culture shock". Those who do not adapt will be left behind. Here are the links at amazon, Borders, and BN

Re:anyone who enjoys jon katz..

[(cubework)$]

yeah well ok Im stupid, and I am very sorry for my statement, its just gotten to be such a regular thing that everyone says and doesnt mean in *that* sense even though it blatantly looks like it. this is probably one of the leading causes of homophobia and stuff.. oh well sorry dude :(

Re:A warning to "youngsters"

[(cubework)$]

ahahah! dont make me laugh!
*pries at his iron cufflink and scratches the cubicle walls, gathering cotton fluff for nourishment

pfft, I dont overwork, I underwork! there should be an EXTRA hour in every day since I can only fit in 24

Re:So what do old farts do?

[nihilistcoder]

As an 31 year "old fart" I have to totally agree with you here. I'm much more interested in taking the time to deeply understand the fundamentals of whatever technology I'm curretly using or learning. Plus, I've learned to be very careful in what I invest my time in learning, instead of always trying to learn the "latest and the greatest". Besides, from most of what I've read and heard it seems as though because of all the technological innovations going on (especially in the biotech industry) we are going to live longer than before. Thus, even though I'm 31 now, due to the expected rise in life expectancy, I'm probably eqivalent in age to a 21 year old! Plus it seems as though our popular media is far too facinated with so called child prodigy techno "whiz kids" rather than on people who make a real significant contribution to technology, who are actually in the older age brackets (Knuth, Stroupstroup, Kernnigen, etc.). But I guess this should be no suprise given that our culture is mostly obessed with star athletes and pop entertainers in the same young age groups.

Re:Bravo Jon Katz

[(cubework)$]

if you look ^ up kids, you will notice the rabid mormon, an artifact of society, our "sore thumb" if you will. If you catch him in the morning you may notice he doesnt consume caffeine products such as "coffee" and is therefore grumpy the whole day. They also dont believe in drugs, so they are constantly pissed off from headaches and getting their asses beat by people like me.

Re:young vs. old - But what HAPPENS?

[RobertAG]

Answer: Young people BECOME old farts!!! The flower children of the 60's became the stockbrokers of the 80's. This discussions rears its head every ten years - with the SAME outcome.

Re:anyone who enjoys jon katz..

[Chris Johnson]

Thanks man- I'm not trying to harsh on you, just speaking up, you know? I don't mean to imply that you're some kind of bad person. No :( necessary ;)

Re:Spelling Nazi must be entagled in the eiderdown

[Benwick]

...'cause it's "aught". Not "ought".

Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it. --Gandhi

Wow, you really take your Gandhi seriously!! :)

Ben Chadwick - Editor, Zero Future/Post-Collegiate Malaise

Re:Nicely done.

[(cubework)$]

bob Ill meet you in the parking lot..

Jon Katz is great! FOR ME TO POOP ON!!

Logan's Run

[xtheunknown]

It seems to me that the whole idea of the Internet and "Open Media" (whatever that is) is that everyone gets to voice an opinion. Previously, only the rich and powerful had a venue to disseminate their opinions, and thus, the masses were swayed by what the establishment wanted them to hear.

The only problem is this. The Internet is not an egalitarian medium. It is the medium of the intellectuals (look where it started, i.e. ARPANet), it is the medium of the rich (how many open media sites are started by 13 year old kids from backwoods Appalachia), it is the medium of the literate (just because you can voice an opinion on the Internet doesn't mean that the opinion is well spoken).

Let's not divide this "Open Media" debate along generational lines, let's divide it along the lines that it, and almost everything else, divides along: economics.

The opinions you see on "Open Media" sites are not those of the young masses, they are the opinions of the mostly well-to-do "Digerati".

Keep this in mind when you read anything on Slashdot or any other "Open Media" site.

Brill's Content

[Raffy]

Too bad the article Katz basically rehashed here wasn't simply quoted in toto instead of, well, rehashed. It was clearer, more concise. . . . less Katzian. And it's been up for a week.

Rafe

V^^^^V

Re:On the nature of online news

[Mike@AP]

(Full disclosure: I'm a journalist working for the AP. Take with grain of salt to taste.) Interesting and insightful post, but a few things I have to disagree with. There are some very, very good online reporters out there. CNET, which sends its people out and about all the time, is practically a tech wire service all its own. They even have a distribution deal with The Associated Press. Most of the highest-traffic sites have dedicated reporting staffs, including CNN, MSNBC, ABCNEWS.com (more disclosure: I used to work there) and others.

Now if you're talking about general news wire services, that market is pretty well sewn up by the AP and the other guys like Reuters and Bloomberg. Our stuff appears online all the time. I don't honestly see a reason to create a strictly online service. Plus the financial overhead in creating such a broad service is just killer.

But if you're talking about original local reporting online, then I'd have to agree wholeheartedly. The Internet would be really great for alternatives to daily newspapers and local TV, but I can't think of anybody who's doing good local online journalism, and that's a shame.

Part of it is the financial model, of course. I think that one can survive as a strictly-content site, but just like traditional media startups, the burn rate is intense. You have to be willing to go at least four or five years, often longer, without profits. That happens with new magazines, newspapers and TV outlets all the time, and is not unique to the Internet.

And finally, I completely agree that there needs to be less press release journalism. But again, that's not a New Media problem. That's a problem for the whole news biz.

A little too much hot air?

[gravityZ]

Once again I agree with some of Jon's ideas and doubt most of them. I'd bet that the current royal court of heavily-trafficked hipster internet companies probably have more in common with the older corporate culture that Katz denigrates than the AOL-chat rooms that he fetes. Good business sense and prudent organization will beat a sloppily organized company, no matter how cool its product is, any day. And business organization and operation isn't something easily grasped when you're a 17-year. And don't tell me that the old model is going to go down the tubes: though the internet lowers the costs of production, it doesn't eliminate them. You still have server/access infrastructure and salaries to contend with. Enter the legion of gray-hairs.

Two things to think about:

• Katz thinks that "adolescent and post-adolescent technical expertise ... upend[s] the traditional power balance." People over-25 comprise the overwhelming majority of owners in Western society, and that includes common stock in internet companies. I fail to see how it empowers kids to yack about Britney Spears or ignore the issues of "aging, imperious white men." Soundscan registered an increase in music sales last quarter, despite all the flibbertigibet about Napster. People from the under-25 demographic are VERY MUCH still consumers of stuff owned by the over-25 demographic -- and perhaps even more so in this era of cheaply produced and heavily marketed technology. Don't tell me a cellphone empowers teens when they're paying $30 a month to some publicly-traded company.
• Kids can somehow reclaim this nebulous "editorial agenda" that was held from them in pre-net times. How long has MTV been around? How long have Seventeen magazine and skateboarding mags been around. Katz seems to think that before 1996 kids were force-fed a steady diet of Wall Street Journal and New Yorker. Blech. What the net has done is shorten the marketing feedback loop to real time. What better way to give kids what they want (and sell more crap) than to give them control over what they see. And if "[t]hey gather almost continuously to discuss movies, TV shows, certain magazines and books" then they're internalizing the marketing themselves. What a wet dream for ad people. Not only will people digest your line, they'll sell it to other people for you. Kind of like the whole world is one big just-got-out-of-the-movie ad.

• Mind you, I don't hate the internet :P. I think it's done some way cool stuff that is unique to the medium and ultra-empowering (ie linux and OSS). I just think that as net-connected machines achieve greater and greater penetration it will more and more reflect the real-world cultural situation in terms of quality, volume and type of information desired.

  gravityZ

Old v. New or Corporate v. Non-corporate

[vergil]

Not sure I agree with Katz's Old v. New dichotomy

. I see the media in terms of its dependence of advertising -- or corporate media v. non-corporate media. Although this may seem to be a nebulous and futile distinction, I believe that the quality, depth, and sincerity of a media source is dependent on how beholden it is to the corporate logic of profit.

Take the devolution (in my opinion) of Time Magazine as an example. Once a forum of consequential issues, Time has become a glossy hodgepodge of cartoony charts, 150-word celebrity interviews, and cheery product reviews that blur the line between advertising and editorial content.

Television "News" exemplifies the mutual exclusivity of advertising and meaningfull content. TV News devotes far more time to patter, human-interest stories and weather than actual news.

There's a word that describes the drivel spewed forth by corporate media. Pabulum, which essentially means baby food -- a homogenous mush of finely ground, easily digesitable slop.

Sincerely,
Vergil

Re:So what do old farts do?

[anothersmith]

> At 34, I suppose I'm an old fart. The rate of
> change is accelerating faster than an old fart
> like me can keep up with anymore. Sure, I can
> learn new technologies -- the problem is I can't > learn them ALL. The younger folks certainly
> have me at a disadvantage.

I'm not sure about this. From my point of view it's not so much inability to keep up as you get older (up to the point where you get so old you're only fit for jobs in law or politics of course) as shifting priorities and demands on your time making it harder or less important to do so.

When you're 20 spending a day reading say stacks of RFCs may be feasible. By 35 the demands on time and other responsibilities can make it impossible for many people or you place different values and priorities on your time.

Also no one truly learns ALL technologies in any depth, unless you've used them in anger all this 'book learning' is of dubious value. One key to career success is picking the right technologies at the right time and specialising in the right things.

> All those college students reading this should
> tone down the laughter a bit and remember... in > just ten short years, you'll be an old fart too.

This I agree with!

Also remember that experience is valuable, you get to avoid old mistakes and make new ones.

Re:kids today....

[Rand Race]

That would be 'oughts'. I can't wait till I'm an old white male (well, older) just 'cause I'll be able to tell young whipersnappers "Why I remember back in ought 7...".

Yes my goal in life is to be able to credibly sound like a grizled old '49er.

Re:"Old Fartism"?

[misleb]

Ummm, by that definition, aren't we all in danger of becoming old farts? Or is it only people from the sixties that have a choice about becoming and old fart. Are us younger people somehow free to age without worry? -matthew

Re:Serious Reply

[MarkKomus]

I have to agree. I've come across more then one fan news site that has had cases of petty bickering flame up totally throwing off any professionalism there was. Even online most of the news I read comes right from cnn.com, not from some "new media" website.

What I do agree with though is the old media is ran by a lot of older white guys, who censor things as they see fit. For a good book that talks and shows how some of this happens look up Adventures in TV Nation by Michael Moore.

Re:"Old Fartism"?

[Anonymous Coward]

How did I know that this HAD to be Jon Katz, before I even looked at the by line. Only Jon could use the phrase "Old Fartism" with a straight face.

And yet you knew precisely what he meant by that, and it caught your eye. That is the mark of effective writing.

He's right

[Jon Peterson]

It's obvious that young people are much better than old people. I mean, in 30 years time how many of those 'old people' are still going to be around, eh? Hardly any, and that's because they are badly designed, and frankly obsolete.

'young people', able to leverage the power of Open Media development will have their bugs continuously fixed - I bet today's under 30's will still be around in 30 years!

Finally, I'd like to make an uncalled for ad hominem attack on Jon Katz:

Jon, you're probably an OK guy and you're not stupid, but you just talk lazy populist crap most of the time. You pseudo reasoning annoys me. I make my living my thinking very precisely and getting things right. You make yours by waffling and making crude emotional appeal disguised as radical thought. Worst of all, you probably earn more than me.

Many Karmas have died to bring you this information.

Re:He's right

[Jon Peterson]

Reading your article has impaired not only my ability to type and spell, but also inhibited my instict to review and check what I write. As you can see your lazy attitude to human communication and reasoned argument is spreading like an evil disease.

I will now implode.

Thanks.

Re:What's wrong with old, white people?

[Hard_Code]

I fart in your general direction Snooty House.

You forgot the most important pages!

[Superb0wl]

The 5th and 6th categories:

5) shitty homepages that read:
I am so and so, i'm 14 and i go to such and such a school. i am kewl because i have a homepage on the "internet" (insert Dr. Evil style air quotes here). My ICQ number is 985774123, e-mail me if you live in the new york area! we'll hook up!

6) Ads and 404s

ps - visit my very shitty homepage i wrote about 3 years ago. It's on xoom. Remember, this is from back when i was a geek. it's simply horrid, conan.
-Superb0wl

water cooler

[demaria]

Yeah, nothing I like more than to get my news from places with
1) No journalistic styling.
2) Even more bias reporting than normal media.
3) No integrity.
4) Scounging around multiple places to find stuff.

And added onto that, a discussion forum with lots of people who don't understand the concepts but instead just want to spout out stuff, and it doesn't matter if they know what is being talked about.

This is what slashdot basically is. Slashdot is NOT a news or media site. It's a glorified message board. Slashdot produces no news articles, everything is grabbed from other places - with lots from 'old' media places like nbc or cnn. Each article has little editorials attached to them, which usually dictates the angle of the discussion forum. Look at any YRO article, there's almost always an editorial in there. And then the discussion area is usually one sided.

Moderators go against their own opinions. People with different opinions are repressed on slashdot. If I post a pro NT comment in a linux article, it'll be modded down, called FUD, or flamed.

The main point, slashdot is not a media source. It's an office water cooler.

Re:water cooler

[Heathen_Bastard]

So why the fuck are you bothering to read it?

To paraphrase you, "Slashdot sucks 'cause they aren't really journalists, and they hate and repress anything that isn't about Linux and Open Source, but I can't resist adding my commentary."

Honestly, why do you bother with it? Why do even care what moderation your posts recieve? it's not as if you're reputation is at stake here. I imagine you could find many other constructive things to do with your time than read articles on a site you despise.

Re:water cooler

[demaria]

I'm saying Slashdot is not a media source. I'm not necessarily saying it 'sucks'.

I view slashdot as a giant funky message board. I don't think I'm alone in the applicational flaws associated with moderation (Katz mentions moderating in the article).

Slashdot is an interesting place to find opinions and ideas on news stories. I use it to keep tabs on what the next generation of techies, the people who will be directly after me and I may be managing, are thinking and how their thought patterns work. It's also a nice place to bounce ideas around and see how much praise or flames an idea can attract. But to call it a media source is to give too much credit.

He's talking about us

[Junks Jerzey]

You're talking to a bunch of people using an operating system designed in the early 1970s. *We* are the old farts.

do you know why the young innovate?

[ebbv]

because they grew up with what the old have made and the old are happy with it, because of course, they made it, so the young want new things.

when an old person innovates it's simply because it took him a very long time to do it. ;D
...dave

Re:kids today....

[LiRM35]

You bet. The trouble with the kids today is... They're too young.

The Jon Katz Drinking Game,

[angelo]

Had this been the real JonKatz Drinking Game, you would have taken 4-23 drinks for the following, depeding if you count by article or incident:

• 1 for the creation of the term old-fartism.
• It was obviously not necessary to define this, hence no drink.
• 1 drink for using the word open not in reference to software
• 1 for re-using an old term from a previous article.
• 1 for mentioning the "revolution"

if you counted by incident, he uses the term revolution in some form twice, and the word open appears 10 times in the wrong context. He re-uses the term open media (a double whammy) a total of 9 times, so make sure those drinks are beer, and make sure they are small sips if you are playing the long game. Also, remember to use a chaperone.

I will be posting this game on my web site later. Salut!

Leave it to Katz...

[Anonymous Coward]

Fighting the establishment even after it went out of style.

Perhaps he thinks he'll get a core of devout followers...

Rise, The Geek Militia!

Not So Serious Reply

[digitalmind]

open media has created many opportunities too. You're clearly the geezer. I'm 15 with my own website to put my thoughts on, and no adult can tell me what I can or can't put on it. It would be much different if I were trying to write a book. So stop being a geezer.



Kris
botboy60@hotmail.com
Nerdnetwork.net

anyone who enjoys jon katz..

[(cubework)$]

Seriously, do not mod this down, this is on topic. Anyone who enjoys Jon Katz's articles reply to this and say "I like Jon Katz" or something. Anyone who hates this either a) reply to this and say your comments or b) flame the people who like Jon Katz. I want to really know if people read that buzzword filled "geek oriented" bullshit that spews from that fat bastard's mouth. I strongly dislike and do not enjoy the articles written by Jon Katz, they are like a regular article, minus the relevant information, minus the interesting information, injected with buzzwords and "geek propaganda." I bet this homo sits at his computer and never reads the comments, and just thinks "wow, all those tens of thousands of slashdot readers LOVE my stories! I should write more! Maybe even some books, which everyone will also love! Then I might have credibility! My english teacher said I should be in the slowest class because I couldnt write anything relevant or interesting, but now I sure showed her!" Bah, wtf, why cant we vote katz off. Im not even sure if I should read slashdot anymore, with all the stupid news, the new backwash (which is similar to the nasty liquid in the bottom of a can if you share it with your friends) crap, and the errors all over the place, Im surprised we dont have more troll converts or just less population.

Dieter's Response to Jon Katz

[hojo]

Dieter: My guest today is Jon Katz, a talking head from an online news and discussion forum. He embodies all that I find irresistable about the dot-commune mentality. Down with ze corporatism, ja?

Katz: ...and this new paradigm is signalling a shift in the demographics of this New Media elite who can...

Dieter: Jon Katz, I cannot parse what you are saying. What is this stream of word-like noise that comes from you?

Katz: ...death-knell of the old guard with the introduction of the freedom which information confers on those who will wield its awesome power...

Dieter: Jon Katz, your noise has become tiresome. Now is the time ven ve DANCE!

Amen to that, Dieter.

Re:Dieter's Response to Jon Katz

[Squid]

death-knell of the old guard with the introduction of the freedom which information confers on those who will wield its awesome power

Does this sound vaguely like the beginning of Tales from Topographic Oceans to anyone else here? :-)

Re:So what do old farts do?

[warpSpeed]

Plus, I've learned to be very careful in what I invest my time in learning, instead of always trying to learn the "latest and the greatest".

As a 34.75 year old, I have to agree with this. I do not have much extra time to learn the latest and greatest of the "new tech" out there. So I spend my precious time concentrating on refining what I do know and some time on some selected new tech. I would love to learn about a half a dozen different languages right now, among other things. If I tried to keep up with everything out there (even a part of that) I would be divorced and never see my kids.

As a younger man I had the time to invest crazy amounts of time to learn technology, but as I got a little older with different responsibilities I do not have that kind of time any more.

This leads me to wonder where I'll be in another 10 years... I hear managment is pretty easy and does not require many qualifications :-)

~Sean

I thought Timothy Leary was Dead!

[taytot]

Like, tune in, turn on, ummm...it's the youth, man, that's where it's at...

Re:anyone who enjoys jon katz..Reasons to keep Jon

[Rodney L Caston]

If it wasn't for Katz, this place would be too one-sided.. I like him, I don't normally agree with him, but his posts beats the hell out of seeing 1,000 messages that go something like this.. "Linux Rules!" "BSD Sucks!" "MS Sucks!" "Hot grits down my pants!" at least with Katz's posts, you get the following instead... "Katz Rulez!" "Die Katz!" "Hot grits down my pants!" see the difference?

Re:Cliche vs smart mice and Newton

[Stonefish]

Its may not be delusional. The recently genengineered smart mice are created simple by reactivating a gene which is usually switched off in adults. Another pointer may be found in revolutionary science Newton, Einstien and the quantum germans whose name eludes me at the moment. Weren't they all remarkably young when they made their greatest contribution? Now try to name a few old scientists who revolutionised science .........

Re:Open Fartism

[sugarman]

Well, I Had a problem with some Post-Fartist's being over during a house party, but I just opened the window.

Re:What's wrong with old, white people?

[KahunaBurger]

Is there something inherently wrong with being old and white (and male, too)? Yeah, "they don't understand us youngsters". And they're always generalizing and stereotyping people, too!

While I don't respect Katz enough to attempt to explain his usage (he could ahve a bet on with someone on how often he can say it for all I know.) I will comment that while there is nothing inherently wrong with being any age, gender or race, there could be something wrong with an entire industry, particularly the news industry, being made up of only one demographic. After all, if every publisher and editor in chief of a major newspaper was a black pagan lesbian, would you wonder if your news was slanted? I know my news is slanted, because I occasionally go out and make the news then read how it is reported.

Obviously, there are exceptions to the "old white male" rule, and there are alternative news sources with different slants, but the point is largly valid in mainstream american news.

-Kahuna Burger

Re:kids today....

[Hard_Code]

The 00 generation has Britney Spears and ADD.

A few obvious blindpots...

[cthlptlk]

"New media" content developers don't own the delivery apparatus any more than the old media reporters do. A large new media company can always take its football and play elsewhere if it (or its sponsors) don't care for the content that reporters provide. Sure, you can create your own site, it's hard to create a wide reader base without competing against better-funded sites with marketing and editorial staffs.

Journalism is (at least) partly about distilling information, fact-checking and prioritizing information. Collabarative/networked approaches may be good a democratizing the prioritizing part (which is good!) but not so good at distilling and fact-checking.

Every sector--including very-old-school manufactoring and retailing, as well as new media--looks to save money, and the easiest way to do that is replace experienced workers (who get paid a lot) with young, fresh, iconoclasts (who don't get paid nearly as much.) Ask your parents and grandparents...there's nothing "new media" or even "new" about it.

Re:Open Fartism

[Hard_Code]

I think it is the Orthodox Farts we have the most to fear from.

Re:Youth vs. Idiocy

[Junks Jerzey]

I think the reason Open Media is dominated by youth probably has as much to do with younger folks' higher learning curve, as it does with the fact they don't have the money to buy all the stuff they get for free.

Plus they have "free" T1 connections at school and more time to surf.

Old fartism isn't the problem.

[hey!]

The old school had a number of very important values: checking the provenance of information, looking for possible bias in sources, balancing one opinion with another opinion fairly.

Deadlines and competition have meant this was an ideal more than a reality. News was never that good in the past, and it's nowhere that good now. Balance often comes down to finding somebody, anybody, with an opposing opinion no matter how stupid. Objectivity often boils down to the pretense that the writer has no opinion.

Despite the unattainability of this ideal, it's still important that somebody believes in them. The very point of having values and ideals is to put some kind of break on slavish obedience to pure expedience.

In any case, old fartism isn't the problem. It's the pressure of expedience that any commercial entity feels.

Look at the quality of "news" in slashdot. How often do you read an article that is really, really good? Usually it's just shunting some news from some other source, like a glorified and somewhat biased clipping service. I wouldn't want to live in a world where my only source of information was slashdot articles. It's the noncommercial contributors, the readers who comment, that create 99% of the value of slashdot.

There are niches in the information market like any other. Organizations like the New York Times and the Washington Post create extra value for their product by putting more effort into the ideals of journalism. More sensational papers try to create value by sensationalism, for which there is a certain market.

The thing about new media is that it really reduces the capital investment needed to create "information". Economics tells us that the production of something is determined by the balance of cost to produce and price it will fetch. Traditional journalistic values are expensive, whereas sensationalism is cheap to produce. So, the new media really opens the way for lots of bottom feeders, as well as innovative low budget operations.

The pros and cons of fartism

[biomech]

" Young Netizens seem flabbergasted when the adult value system collides with and changes their world -- in arguments over copyright and Napster or the passage of laws like the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. They don't seem to grasp that their lack of political acumen and organizing skills not only make such legislation possible but increasingly inevitable in encounters with a legal and political system dominated by those older and non-technologically-centered."

I don't mind being delegated to the O.F. status for which I am qualified, but political and organizing skills are going to have as much to do with shaping the culture of the future as the technical skills of certain netizens. I can fairly cheerfully stand being lectured by someone who's obnoxious, arrogant, and right about technical issues (and I am still quite the LINUX newbie), but that's not entirely what another, older group would call real politik.

My baptism in such cultural awareness came when my government, my personal objections not withstanding, was determined to ship my rearend and the rest of me off to beautiful downtown asia. The only advantage to that situation was that daily body count on the evening news is as hard to ignore as is your place in it. A powerful incentive to polish those political and organizing skills.

I suppose what I wish is that I had a sense that some of these same brilliant (and I honestly don't say that facetiously) people were collectively working to deal with corporatism, UCITA, and other current issues that effect all of us. I mean, when the same guy/girl that righteously flames me for not knowing how to hack a config file sends a short post about UCITA that consists entirely of the enlightening words, "..that sux", you can't blame me for wondering about the future.

And please keep the flames low - a lot of people think I'm half-baked already.

Incorrectly Generalized

[jsz]

First, I agree with NetFu...that the ability to "get it" (in this context) has less to do with age, and more to do with your ability as an individual to absorb yourself into the medium/reality that you are trying to understand/work with.

Admittedly, Katz has created a difficult task, trying to defend and describe an overarching, generalized theory of behavioral patterns.

But I think it is a big step to say that, "Young Netizens seem flabbergasted when the adult value system collides with and changes their world" -- flabbergasted? Be realistic, Jon, nobody is flabbergasted or surprised -- it's not that Young Netizens are flabbergasted by this "adult value system", but like you said, they form their own moral code, based upon what's practical, reasonable, fair. To this end, Young Netizens are not out to screw their favorite artists out of copyright-dividends, but they're smart enough to know the whole industry is rigged anyway, that as long as they financially support the artists they like, then the system will survive (that's why most people who have Gigs of MP3s still purchase CDs).

In addition, calling Young Netizens "free-marketers and democrats" because a couple of young kids made some money off of web-design and business-development? It's not a good argument, because maybe these attitudes have more to do with booming economic times than spread of IT and "Open Media".

But overall, not bad article (takes a little liberty, but not bad).

News

[quintessent]

"...in other news the backstreet boys have decided to split up and accept lucrative offers from several new, but promising Internet $tartup$. When contacted, the group refused to comment, but their agent told us companies have been calling night and day..."

This is especially bad..

[angelo]

This is really bad in the PC/104 development. They want to get your address and send you a brochure before they will discuss pricing on most sites. This habit shoots them in the foot by wasting the VAR's time in excess manouevers, as well as possibly costing the vendor a sale. Make it just as easy as when you go to a local store. You don't have to ask "how much is this sack-o-spuds" because the price is on the rack.

Ok, I give up. Just what IS the deal here?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm normally something of a Katz apologist, but I'm giving up entirely here. I just have one question:

What the hell did Katz have to say in this article that's different from anything he's written since the Hellmouth series?

I've read through the whole damn article (not skimmed, READ), and I can't find a single new thing that he has to say here. There doesn't seem to be a single drop of new content, nothing that he hasn't already posted attacking the DMCA or defending Napster or defending geeks.

Can somebody please let me know what this article has to recommend it? Please? Thanks.

Re:Ok, I give up. Just what IS the deal here?

[Bilbo]

> What the hell did Katz have to say in this article that's different from anything he's written ...

I'd leave it at that.

Honestly, I got to the end of the article and asked myself, "so, what's his point?" Like you, I try to cut Katz some slack (He has come up with a few interesting insights), but this article was relatively content-free.

What I got was:

• Online culture is spreading
• Online culture is dominated by young (teen - 30) people
• "Old farts" are clueless about young people.
• Young people are clueless about "Old farts".
• Online media ("information") is disconnected from conventional information sources.
• Young people are disconnected from conventional society and information sources.
• Young people are connected with each other across the Internet.
• The Internet blurs conventional distinctions between peope of different race, gender and "sexual orientation".

Actually, I think the last point is what Katz is getting at, however this is where I disagree with him. It is true that the Internet blurs the old differences we used to form our cultures around, such as race and gender, but that's not to say that the Internet creates the Utopian classless society! Rather, we see new "classes" springing up, such as economic position and access to/knowledge of technology. There are the Phreaks, the d00d2, the geeks, the hacker eletes, the crackers, the Microsofties. Most important of all, there are those connected, and those on the outside who are not.

The Internet may be changing everything, but it has not ushered in the Age of Aquarious.

-- Your Servant,

Ceritifed Proof that Jon Katz is an Old Fart

[VAXman]

Jon Katz - why isn't your book on line? If you think the new media is the way to go and the way of vsionaries, why don't you publish your book on line? You promise to, but why didn't you release it simultaneously with the print version? You are PRECISELY the kushy old guard media person who are railing against. You reap massive profits, millions of dollars per year, from your book, charging for nothing more than bound paper, which (you believe) should be distributed for free. If you want to be taken anything close to seriously on this topic, you need to put your book online, and the fact that you didn't release it with the print version shows that wanted to reap massive profits from the print version. How does this make you different from what you are decrying?

did katz write this about himself?

[tensionboy]

and is he trying to say he's old media or new? just because your words appear in slashdot doesn't make you part of this generation, bucko

(3 points and double word score for using the word bucko)

Example: Logistics

[w3woody]

Here's an example for you.

My father used to work for the Santa Fe. He worked as an "area sales rep", which meant that he was partially responsible for performing logistics work--that is, figuring out the cheapest way to handle product redistribution. Logistics as a science has reached such a high level of perfection in this country pre-Internet that we can ship millions of tons of rock ore from one point to another that cannot be warehoused, and have the trainloads of material that takes days to move from one part of the country to another show up moments before the ore needs to be dumped into the smelters for processing, without either delaying the smelters or wasting thousands of dollars on an idle train car.

When various web companies were initially started, they started on the extremely brash assumption that they could undercut the traditional "brick and mortar" operations by enough of a margin that they could not only make a larger profit, but be able to offer a larger product selection for a smaller price than any traditional operation. How? Through waving the "magic wand" of the Internet.

The other day my father was watching a news special where they showed order fulfillment through Amazon.com, the leader in this "using high tech to squeeze even more profits than old brick-and-mortar operations." And how were they filling orders? By having individual shoppers walk up and down large isles full of product pushing the equivalent of shopping carts.

My father died laughing! There are tons of ways you can handle order fulfillment--and Amazon picked the single most inefficient mechanism one can possibly use to fill small orders from a large stock selection. Hell, in about an hour doing a quick Internet search on the topic of "warehouse fulfillment logistics" I came up with a half-dozen papers on how to fill these orders which would improve their effectiveness by at least 50%!

An interesting conversation I had with a vulture^H^H^H^H^H^H venture capitalist told me why venture money is pulling out of "pure-play" internet retailers like Amazon.com. The first reason is that frankly, logistics has been brought to such a high art in this country that most companies weren't spending more than a few percent on logistics anyways. That is, for a $25.00 book, perhaps only about $1.00 was spent moving that book from the printers into a box waiting to be shipped by UPS on the loading docks of a mail order warehouse. So even if Amazon could perform it's logistics 20% more efficiently in order fulfillment at it's distribution warehouse, the best they could hope to squeeze out of shipping a $25.00 book is perhaps 10 cents, assuming 50% of the logistics costs is order fulfillment.

Meaning for Amazon to make a million dollars in profit from a 20% increase in efficiency in an already extremely efficient logistics situation, they would have to sell a quarter billion dollars worth of product.

Second, the venture money has realized that many of these "new economy businesses" are comprised of people who frankly think the "old farts" of the "old economy" have nothing to teach them. And so they screw up the very stuff we brought to a very high science in the 1970's! For example, I ordered four products from Amazon.com, and they charged me $10.00 shipping and handling--yet sent me four separate shipments from four separate warehouses (rather than consolidating the order and reducing shipping costs)--for a grand total of $22.00 in overall shipping costs, not counting handling and order picking costs! That is, Amazon, in thier "high-tech order fulfillment efficiency", lost $12.00 on my order because they can't get their logistics shit together!

Now perhaps this was an exceptional situation. And in one sense, I'm glad I got my order earlier than later. And I shouldn't be picking so heavily on Amazon, given that I own about $2K of their stock, and given that Amazon is actually better than most e-commerce sites.

But it does illustrate the fact that a lot of the "new economy gurus" out there are so full of bullshit they can't even pronounce logistics, much less deal with it. It's rather sad, given the fact that the Santa Fe did research more than 30 years ago which shows that logistics can represent as much as 40% of the total operational costs of a typical manufacturing or distribution company. And having good logistics can represent savings of around 15% up to 50% of the overall logistics costs--which for a company the size of Amazon represents hundreds of millions in overall operational costs.

And that's one of the biggest things the "old farts" bring to the table: about 10 to 30 years of experience on the logistics of order fulfillment, manufacturing, redistribution, and all those other things that can quite frankly mean the difference between making a good profit and declaring bankrupcy.

Didn't Toffer predict this in 1980?

[RayChuang]

It appears that people are kind of missing the point of what the increasingly easy access to rapid content distribution is doing to our society.

I think everyone here ought to reread Alvin Toffler's famous book THE THIRD WAVE, released in 1980. He said that the rapid improvements in communications technology will break the cycle of people depending on a few sources of information from large, centralized media companies--the "demassification" of mass media.

The fact we have rapid growth of specialized magazines, newspapers, 70-plus channel cable TV systems, 200-plus channel personal satellite TV receivers, and the explosive growth of the commercial Internet and its ability to cater information to almost any need (look at the rise of everything the Drudge Report to even Slashdot) means that most people have the ability to get information from a variety of sources that would not have been imaginable even ten years ago.

And the Internet allows us to trade information and goods at a pace that is also unimaginable ten years ago. The rise of Napster has heavily upset the whole idea of "massified" distribution of music through our record companies, and the success of eBay has allowed anyone with a computer to trade any physical good without using a middleman.

In short, the rise of the commercial Internet has given what the Institutional school of economics calls increased choice, because we are no longer dependent on a few choices in terms of buying and selling goods. And our society can barely keep up with the change.

Vote

[Sherman Peabody]

No one here cares how old you are. That irrelevant, and 'Old Fart' is troll bait if I ever saw it.

But he does talk around a good point. The internet can be the mast radical grass-roots politicizing force of the next 100 years. Any information can flow anonymously to everyone. This is a huge fear in places like China, that the people will figure out how to talk amongst themselves while they are well neigh invulnerable to physical coersion at home in front of their computer. The Chinese know they won't be able to put the genie back in the bottle.

It's ironic that the most democratising force on the planet is rife with young people who don't vote. And Silicon Valley is full of people who don't use their wealth to advance their political agenda. Actually, maybe the problem is they don't have a political agenda. The freedom we need to protect and to fight for is being taken from us little by little. Meanwhile, our grandparents vote in droves to protect their Social Security.

So the point JK makes that is worthwhile is that we all remember that there are people out there fighting change because they were comfortably making money under the old system. It doesn't matter about the age or the race or whatever, it's about self-interest and $$$.

Change or die.

[Anonymous Coward]

Change or die.
Jon, please don't change.

WELL DONE KATZ!!

[Jimithing DMB]

After totally shooting you down on the whole frenchman thing, I will definitely say that this article is very good. I especially like this part:

Although today's Net-connected youth are denounced for being technology-addicted or socially isolated, the truth is they use the Net and the Web to communicate with one another, not to disconnect. For them, the Net is a social as well as a technological medium. They gather in chat rooms, on mailing lists and messaging systems and form enduring relationships that frequently last for years.

I was talking to my mom about this only a couple weeks ago. Her long-time friend from high-school said the very stereotypical "Technology is isolating everyone". Her argument was exactly yours.. technology isn't isolating people, it's bringing them together. My mom and I chat on ICQ often. My mom and her cousin also chat on ICQ all the time. Technology is actually bringing the people who use it closer together. It's unfortunate that most people don't understand this.

In about a month my mom will be selling her house here and moving to retire with my dad. I'll still be able to talk with her through ICQ just like I do now. She'll still be able to talk to her cousin, and her friends up here, even though she'll be miles away.

I now ask anyone to even think about saying that technology is destroying our social interactions. In my opinion, it's improving them!

"Old Fartism"?

[Amphigory]

How did I know that this HAD to be Jon Katz, before I even looked at the by line. Only Jon could use the phrase "Old Fartism" with a straight face. Alert! The Sixties are over. Don't trust anyone over thirty -- and you're over thirty. You're in serious danger of becoming an old fart yourself!

--

Is the establishment worried ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does all the social transformation worry the establishment ?

The 'boys in black' got pretty uptight over places like waco, ruby ridge, oklahoma city, little havana. All of these were civil disobidience of one ilk or another. Napster is a much bigger sign of the mood of the populace towards 'the old world order'. The population wants things to change.

Old farts (like me) would use the term: 'a sea change' (go look it up).

If there was a meaningful candidate(s), things would be changing. I don't see one.

I'm outta here.

Open Media CANNOT replace Traditional Media

[J. Chrysostom]

I made the same comments the last time Katz posted an "Open Media" article, but my point bears repeating. Katz writes:

Whatever their commonality as members of the Open Media, the differences in these emerging sites are striking. Open Media embraces interactivity -- they reflect ideas, commentary and information from a wide range of sources, especially their readers. They don't merely provide the occasional link to other sites on the Web, as traditional sites.

Of course "Open Media" sites are interactive... thats half the fun! However, this is all they provide, since open media sites DO NOT provide news. Katz continues:

They [Open Media Sites] are almost totally disconnected from the mainstream political and media system -- the network newscasts, major newspapers, TV talk shows and political events that dominate conventional, closed media. Such subjects rarely surface on Open Media sites.

This is an outright lie. CNN and the New York Times, for example, are two top closed media journals. On any given day, I'm apt to see articles from their sites referred to on slashdot. The issues that they discuss are precisely the issues for discussion on sites like this one. We happen to use /. as a filter, but we conect to the same "closed media" sources.

"Open Media" will never supplant traditional media. Traditional news outlets have something that "Open Media" can never match --- reporters, and lots of them. These reporters are the people who make it there work to relate to us the happenings of the world, and they will remain for us the primary source of information for a long time.

Re:This is new?

[leereyno]

Actually Gates helped write a version of Basic for the Altair. Gary Kildall of Digital Research was the one behind CP/M, which was the primary operating system for Altairs, Imsai's, and other 8080/Z80 based systems. Dos itself was originally nothing but a reverse engineered clone of CP/M for the 8086. Tim Patterson wrote DOS for Seattle computer, which made altair clones, and then Microsoft bought it from him before turning around and licensing a modified version of it for the PC.

As for the rest of what you said about the young being the primary innovators and the general public being clueless about it. That is right on the money.

Lee

The new world.

[Fortuna Wolf]

I have finished writing this post, it is long, yes, sorry, it meanders and digresses, again, I am sorry. It is late, I must go, so walk though this the best you can. I digress a bit from the response of the post... ok, I digress a whole lot. But I still hope the message is taken. Enjoy. Its a brave new world. My age, my name, anything I say does not matter. I have been online since I was 11, actually, on a BBS. I was often told I was one of the youngest and most active users on the BBSes I frequented and I guess I was. I was a shy kid then, I didn't talk with my classmates much, I acted a bit weird, in 5th grade I would get bored with the teacher and pick up the encylopedia and start reading it. I knew about gluons and tried to explain it to my teacher. AHHAHAHA. What the BBS taught me was that people would talk to me, treat me as a peer regardless of my physical appearance. My age was not a barrier to me except by my maturity. I could often be mature, I could often be immature, I was inexperienced but eager to learn, eager to show the world who I was. I still am. I'd often chat with sysops late into the night just asking questions or talking, about what I can't remember. What I'm trying to get at here is this: online, age does not matter, sex does not matter, appearance does not matter, if you are to be treated the same in an intellectual forum. If you want to be an amaetuer porn freak, yes, sex and age and appearance does matter, if you want to get into the jocksonline.com site what you say you are matters. Your credit card matters. While you still do not require a deep caucasian male voice to be an equal online, it is rapidly become a place where age and sex does matter. having my forumlative years take place on a free BBS I am extremely offended by this, but I always remember that I can put down what I wish. I still wish to see the net as a place where it is pure information, where your -self- is a sexless ageless collection of packets that form into what seems to be an entity. I also wish to see the public's internet, what this place is now becoming, to be separated, two internets. But this is a vision that is not ready now. I digress. I would like to point out we, the geeks, the computer users, the online intellectuals, we are freed from our physical form online, I am without sex and body , I am not male, I am not female, I am not any other sex, I am not any age, I am not beautiful, cute, ugly, homely. Do remember this, we are minds here, we have interests, we have our dimentias of what our sex and age and name is in the corporal realm. What do I mean by this? Katz pointed out that we do not have much codes of ethics, us geeks, we require them, yes. At what price do ethics come at? freedom of the mind? In a sense, yes, with ethics we feel we are required to perform a certain way, but this is for the community's benefit in the end, and hopefully, our benefit though the community. If this free world that we have which as we all know is in danger is to continue to exist we must unite, we must show ourselves and the outside that we are united and responsible enough to not be a threat, to propagate ourselves, and to become the old guards of the information age and the new pioneers of the information culture. There is much more which I do not say, but do not forget them. I digress too much. Look, we are all here, how many other groups are there, almost as large as slashdot, some smaller, that comprise of most of us? The intellectuals, the outcasts, the wisened, the eggs of a new world. How can we unite geekdom within a single forum, The Forum? How can we speak with a single voice? How can we create a way to safeguard our culture and our ways? We must always allow for progress in how we execute our vision, but our vision is our reason for existing. So I ask you, what is our vision? How are we to do it? I really what to see more ethics and morals than the hazy libertarian and communist ideas that exist among us. Voice, and flesh out these thoughts, let ALL of the geeks have a say in creating them, let us all say how they should function. Can we create a geek bible? Us? All of us? Slashdotters and non, everyone who is part of the internet, who knows it, who believes in open source and information? Can we at least build the foundations for a culture, which with our input, may or may not exist, which may exist in many different forms depending on our own actions at this moment in time? This is what I want, Bring Us together. Let us decide our goals and motivations and dreams. Let us voice them, and voice the ethics and morals we shall uphold and use to accomplish and guard them. Let us decide how to use these morals and how they will fit into the information net as we know them. No single person should speak for us, I want to somehow bring us together and let us all speak. Of course, we need to be organized. This is the dawn of a new age, the sun has been rising for over 4 decades, and it is still rising. It is possible for us to choose the path of all humanity until the end of people and machines. Do you not wish to participate? Every person counts, respond, discuss, talk. Figure out who your leaders are, but first we have to bring us together. I have to go, talk and let me see what you do.

Re:The new world.

[Fortuna Wolf]

Uhh... ok, maybe I'll just clean up this rant, and submit it to slashdot to post on the main page. I don't think it'll get the coverage here it deserves.

This article is too shortsighted

[browser_war_pow]

I think Katz is missing the point that first off, 2/3 of the 30's and under crowd knows next to nothing about computers and 2nd those of us who do know how to use them will be parents one day and it will be back to square one with the parents knowing more than their kids. Basically the fun of being the smart kids on the block is going to last only for the current teen generation.

Why not a Poll?

[WillAffleck]

I strongly dislike and do not enjoy the articles written by Jon Katz, they are like a regular article, minus the relevant information, minus the interesting information, injected with buzzwords and "geek propaganda."

I strongly agree with you. So, why not a poll?

Look, if we really believe in the UberGeekdom that Jon promotes, we geeks should have the right, nay, the duty, to vote him down.

And, if we just think that we're not in favor of his writing, perhaps because it reminds us of the worst excesses of the Bulwer-Lytton contest "It was a dark and stormy night...", we should still get our say.

That said, I don't think casting aspersions on the man due to any perceived gender attraction is proper. For all I know, I'd like the guy if I met him in person, it's the writing and the twisting of the truth that I object to.

[sigh, here goes another 20 mod points ...]

stupid Katz

[briancarnell]

Saying it's just about young vs. old makes about as much sense as saying its white vs. black (after all most of the stuff Katz is raving about is the domain largely of young white males).

Re:new world order?

[Fist Prost]

but always remember that the best thing can't be done that way... ;) !

I don't know about that. Whenever I poop I always let my mind wander as far from the smell as possible

Here is what I use:

[Byteme]

Beano® it works all the time!

Actualy, no...

[Bensari]

I have yet to see one web site that offers me the quality of information and in-depth reporting that my hard copy of Time magazine does...
http://www.time.com
http://www.cnn.com
http://www.newsweek.com
http://www.NYtimes.com

Here is four, and there is plenty more out there. Your broad generalizations are uninformed and blatantly wrong. Not all young people online spend their time downloading "pr0n," and not all good writers are "old geezers." Perhaps you should spend less time trying to make Katz look bad and worry about your own writing--it is far worse.


Which way now? Down.

Re:Actualy, no...

[11223]

Hey - I'm not writing an essay here, I was trying to get in as soon as possible because the moderators tend to browse on Highest Scores First.

All of those you mentioned are online conversions of a hard-copy media. You just reinforced my point - find me a non-conversion site that does the same thing!

A warning to "youngsters"

[SandsOfTime]

This is meant as a friendly warning, not an insult ...

Tech employers tend to like young gurus and visionaries better than old gurus and visionaries. Why? Because young gurus and visionaries are often more gullible and more easily manipulated. They are more willing to work more hours for the same pay, work under stressful conditions, and give up "having a life" for putting everything into their job. See the book "Net Slaves" for examples.

So be careful out there. Don't get too cocky. There are skilled tech people of all ages, and if the older ones aren't found doing a certain kind of job, possibly they are avoiding it because they are crafty and wise, not because they don't get it.

Next Generation

[Tedwardut]

Must remember that even though the net is a social as well as communication driven medium. There are a lot of underpending problems with people spending all their time online and not socializing in traditional ways. As far as political activism, what can we do really. Besides an all out revolt( which would not be a bad thing), the government is so corupt that even voting is unlikly to change things.

Bravo Jon Katz

[Goblin80]

Its about time that some one recognizes the young generation and the impact on society that we have. Old Media has developed a stereotype about youth of today and its because the youth aren't allowed to participate in developing this media. We aren't a bunch of lazy, drunks who spend their lives like a character on the Real World. We are trying to shape our world and figure out our own place in it. If people would listen to youth with an open mind, they might actually understand us.

"Old fart" predates punk rock.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Even the phrase "Old Fart" is a punk rock coinage.

Old Fart predates punk rock.

It even predates me (who is one). B-)

20 years from now

[crazy_speeder]

when this generation of kids takes over in about 20 years or so, it seems that intellectual property laws will have changed. most young people today feel that it is okay to trade freely almost anything with anyone. people will still want to make money, so i'm sure they'll find a way to make a living.

Re:So what do old farts do?

[ratbag]

The rate of change is accelerating faster than an old fart like me can keep up with anymore. Sure, I can learn new technologies -- the problem is I can't learn them ALL. The younger folks certainly have me at a disadvantage.

Um, I think you're being too kind to youngsters. As a fellow thirty-something I feel I'm keeping up-to-date with as much useful tech as I was in my twenties. I also realise they I didn't "go deep" back then, prefering to pile up the nerd-points with more and more languages/tool-kits etc.

Recently I've started interviewing people to join the company I work for (a UK university) and I'm seeing the same sort of thing in other young applicants. The older applicants may not have "the latest craze" (tm) on their CV, but you can bet your bottom dollar that their understanding of important technologies will be far better than the youngsters.

Rob.

I guess it's 'die' then

[fleener]

Change or die? Gimme a break. That's the oldest and most unproven tag line of the 'information age.' Please tell us what to change into, given that very few workable models exist. Old media are not in any danger. In fact, they are higher profile than any new media will ever be. Web sites die by the rule of "out of sight, out of mind." New media rely on old media to thrive.

Why I choose closed media over open media...

[Raunchola]

I'm no stranger to journalism, both online and offline, it's part of my job. But just having your own news site running Slashcode doesn't make you a journalist Jon. Sure, you can babble on about how these youngsters are full of ideas and energy and everything else, but if it's one thing they aren't full of is EXPERIENCE and a GOOD REPUTATION. Who would you pick as your news source...someone like Walter Cronkite, who has had years of experience reporting the news and has built up a reputation as someone who knows what they're talking about, or some news site run by some teenager that merely talks about why Napster rules and why you should watch Star Wars?

Face it Jon, these open media sites you rant about don't have ANYTHING to do with media reporting. With the occasional editorial or book review not withstanding, all places like Slashdot do is merely link to some story on places like CNN or MSNBC, throw in a few extra comments, and then let the posters and the trolls take over. That isn't news reporting at all, it's just "Yeah, what they said!" reporting! And need I mention bias? When it comes down to it, if I want coverage of the Microsoft anti-trust trial, I'll turn to a site like CNN that will give me the entire story and leave me to formulate an opinion, rather than Slashdot, which is openly biased against Microsoft and only tells me what they want people to hear. When it comes down to it, I want news, not noise.

Get your heads out of the clouds Jon, you aren't fooling anyone.

--

So what do old farts do?

[Anonymous Coward]

At 34, I suppose I'm an old fart. The rate of change is accelerating faster than an old fart like me can keep up with anymore. Sure, I can learn new technologies -- the problem is I can't learn them ALL. The younger folks certainly have me at a disadvantage.

So what the crap do all us old farts do??? There aren't *that* many Wal-Mart greeter jobs... should we all go out to a field somewhere and wait to die? Or shall we do what old farts throughout the ages have done -- plot to keep the young ones under our boot?

This sure is a brave new world, no doubt about that. But if there isn't room for everyone, our society is due for some very violent times ahead.

All those college students reading this should tone down the laughter a bit and remember... in just ten short years, you'll be an old fart too.

Freedom of information underlies all other freedom

[leereyno]

When the printing press was invented, the Catholic church banned its use. In particular they didn't want the bible to be disseminated. Why? Because then people might read it and form their own conclusions about theological matters instead of believing as they were told. This was a direct threat to the church's power.

The freedom of information and the freedom of humanity go hand in hand. People who have access to information cannot be as easily fooled as those whose access is limited or non-existant.

One of the things that Katz is saying is that the young now have access to information, much of which their elders would rather hide from them. Because of this our culture is changing and evolving. The undermining of the "establishment" that the counterculture types in the 60's and 70's worked so hard to achieve, is now being idly accomplished by millions of youngsters, most of whom don't even know they're doing it.

Old prejudices, old biases, old bullshit... these things are on their way out. Perhaps only to be replaced by new prejudices, new biases, and new bullshit. But then again maybe not.

Lee

new world order?

[session]

I think that this article simply brushed upon something that is much bigger than simply a 13-year-old's .com business or parents asking their kids for help. What we're seeing is a complete transformation of human expression -- with every human being able to "show themselves off" with the same ease as everyone else.

Sometimes I get really tired of hearing how "big and exciting" the Internet has become. This isn't about the Internet, or Open Source, or e-commerce, or anything like that. We're experiencing a giant shift in our modern philosophy. Thirty years ago, who would have thought that this much information would be free?

This social transformation kicks ass, and I for one am really damn excited about the future.

Product/service comparisons

[Turing Machine]

When I'm doing product/service comparisons I normally throw out any options that make it hard for me to get a price.

Absolutely, especially the reprehensible "call for pricing" scam. A fair translation of "call for pricing" is "call so our salesdroid can decide how far he can stick it in, and whether or not lubricants will be required". It's annoying anywhere, but when it's on a web page.... why would I want to "call for pricing" when I'm searching for something on the web? If I wanted to deal over the phone, wouldn't I use the phone in the first place? And what about all the people who're accessing the web over their only phone line? Does the company really think the customers will terminate their connection to call some high-pressure salescritter sitting in a boiler room? It ain't happenin', bucko.

Sales and marketing types need to learn to take this stuff into account if they're going to sell online. The customer they just alienated doesn't have to drive to a different store. He doesn't even have to pick up the phone and call a different store. Generally there's another vendor with a real web page that's selling what the customer wants, and the search engines are only a click away.
--
WordSocket Voice BBS Software

Serious Reply

[11223]

Sure, these kids can download any content they want, but what's the worth of it? If all they're downloading is pr0n, what's the point of all of it? The problem is that this Open Media has grasped quantity, but not yet quality. I have yet to see one web site that offers me the quality of information and in-depth reporting that my hard-copy of Time magazine does - and that's not saying much, given how Time acts lately.

The problem is that it is the old geezers who are running the Time magazine, and as such they know how to write, how to formulate an article, etc. What comes out of this Open Media is garbage because it's run by a bunch of kiddies who know nothing of content and quality. It pure-and-simple rubbish - quantity, and not quality.

Of course, this observation isn't as sensationalistic or otherwise hypeable as an Open Media article. There aren't any broad sweeping futuristic predictions in all of this. So, to make this sound more sensationalistic, I'd like to say that JonKatz is a horrible writer. Who taught you how to write?

Re:Serious Reply

[TOTKChief]

The problem is that it is the old geezers who are running the Time magazine, and as such they know how to write, how to formulate an article, etc. What comes out of this Open Media is garbage because it's run by a bunch of kiddies who know nothing of content and quality. It pure-and-simple rubbish - quantity, and not quality.

Funny; running a family of ezines myself -- and being a youngster to boot -- I fully recognize that quality kicks quantity's ass to heck and back. Why? Because of the quantity.

Look at the realm I work in: sports commentary. Everyone is an expert about sports: just ask them. If they're kooky, though, it's like the guy you leave at the bar instead of doing what you want (which is applying a significant amount of force to his temple with an empty beer bottle). Simply put, you go find someone else to talk to.

The Interenet publishing (I refuse to use the cutesy e-publishing term) revolution has lowered costs and barriers to entry. The million monkeys axiom has indeed been proven false, yet there are scads of quality sites out there.

Anyone who doesn't believe in quality should see what happens to Top Of The Key 's unsubs when our articles stink that week. You are only as good as your most recent screed.

But then, doesn't that apply to posting here?

--
<><

About time...

[Satsuki Yatoji]

It's about time someone recognized that the younger generations aren't a bunch of stoners and trend-hounds. *And* it's about time that they figured out that our brains aren't in our asses because we're young. Older may be wiser, but a younger mind is more flexible, more open to new ideas, and closer to those new ideas. Ever see a forty-something try to figure out a computer with no prior knowledge? My mom thinks she has to be on AOL when she scans pictures. And Gods forbid anything doesn't work for her..But my lil brother was learning HTML within a month of our getting the comp, and he's 12. You *can't* teach an old dog new tricks, with some exceptions of course.

Those older people who aren't already into technology are afraid of it. But the younger people are born into it. They don't remember anything else.

This is new?

[gitm_tym]

As I recall, the Steves, Jobs and Wozniak were both post-adolescent 30 years ago when they started building their Apple computers. Also, Bill Gates was in a similar position when he went to work designing a DOS for the Altair.

Oh, I'm sorry, maybe I shouldn't mention people that actually made money. :P

Having had a personal computer and been highly involved in the computer 'world' for the last 20 years, it has always been starkly apparent that the young are the main innovators. The only thing that has changed is that the general public is now aware of this, and finds it confusing somehow.

gitm

What's wrong with old, white people?

[GRAMMERSoft]

Why are so many people here picking on old people? In one of the recent Napster articles, someone commented that the RIAA and the record companies were controlled by old, fat, white guys. Now, we are being told that "closed media" are run by aging (and "imperious") white men.

Is there something inherently wrong with being old and white (and male, too)? Yeah, "they don't understand us youngsters". And they're always generalizing and stereotyping people, too!

It reminds me of all those college comedy movies. That darn dean is always ruining all our fun. (like the simpson's episode where homer goes to college, too)

Re:What's wrong with old, white people?

[vinay]

I think Jon is looking for friends: he's hoping to appeal to our oppressed livelihoods. Down with da Man!!

If Jon thinks it's bad, it's being run by old white dudes.

-V

Re:Open Fartism

[Mr_Ceebs]

New Farts, In the UK try William Hague he was 40 by the time he was 16

You are absolutely right

[donstenk]

I could not have said it better.

I would like to ad that that the internet is just the latest in a line of technologies that enable mankind to communicate accross the world such as radio, tv, telefone etc.

With the advent of a new technology there are always persons that:
a) embrace, advocate and expect to much from it, perhaps a way of defining themselves and what group they belong to
b) are afraid if the changes it might bring, hate it, try to stop, exagerate it etc
c) just use it where it is usefull.

It is not so strange that teenagers are the quickest to adopt a new technology when it becomes readily available as you have plenty of time and hopefully an open mind but it is important to remember that you can learn Perl of C in a couple of years in a basement or loft but learning to live as an individual in society takes a lot longer and respect is due to the wisdom accumulated over the years. And conventional wisdom and ethics are neccessary in the digital age as well!

Don (28yrs)

Re:Media is media is ? not media?

[EMN13]

Essentially where I disagree with you is that all media are the same. I'll expand a bit on the TV vs. book issue.

Have you ever tried to take a TV on a trip?

More fundamentally though, a book is a linear medium that does _not_ dictate the speed at which you read it. This means that you can adapt your reading speed however you want to to what it is your reading. That's important. When I try to understand the proof behind fourier transformations, I need to slow down some times, bu some other things are just really obvious. This is in general an advantage of printed text over any fixed-speed medium.

Much more practically though, it's obvious that the type of information available in different media differs significantly. Those differences are caused - big suprise - by differences in the media. Have you ever seen anything approaching Lord of the Rings in Film? Lord of the Rings takes you on a detailed trip that lasts for at least two full days. There is nothing like that on TV. There can't be - TV requires full attention all the time. If you don't pay attention, well, you miss something. In a book, you merely slow down.

Books force you to absorb every detail. Generally, you need to read everything. In a film, most of what happens on screen is backdrop. These are important differences to me.

--EMN

What's really happening

[WillAffleck]

What Jon fails to mention is this:

25% of the youth in Africa have aids and are dying. They can't get access to a computer, they aren't on the Net, and they probably won't live till they're 30.

Face it, it's an American UberGeekdom that Jon promotes as "taking control". One that has no wars to fight, one that is tired with the cynicism of the X-Gens (they're the Y-Gens). One that wants people to do something and stop talking about doing something.

At least, those are the ones I see around here.

Jon Katz -- Open Media Propagandist

[pholus]

Oh for chrissakes, what is this tripe?

Oh yeah, I remember: it's called Propaganda!

I spot Name-Calling, Glittering Generalities, Transfer, Plain Folks appeals (if the Plain Folks are geeks), Bandwagon and a bit of the old Unwarranted Extrapolation.

I can stretch and call Testimonial and Fear as well. There are few solid conclusions to be had but I can argue for Bad Logic in a couple spots.

I don't spot Euphemisms, but then again there are no negatives presented about Jon's point of view so I'm not surprised.

Do we really *need* propaganda on Slashdot?

I'd like to propose a splinter group

[pwhysall]

of Neo-Fartists.

We hark back to when Fartism was something to be proud of.

We also polish our boots a lot.
--

On the nature of online news

[Animats]

The online news industry doesn't have reporters. It has only pundits and columnists, like Katz. There's nothing like a newspaper's city desk, sending out reporters to cover incidents. Online media haven't created anything like the Associated Press, or even the equivalent of a local TV news operation. There's no technical obstacle. But it's not happening. You'd think that LA or NY would have a local online news site where full-time reporters go out, photograph and record events, find out what happened, and the results are edited down into a news stream with hyperlinks for those who want to know more. Doesn't exist.

This is crucial. Online media don't have people out there snooping around finding the news. News, remember, is something someone doesn't want published. All else is publicity. The print media have problems with this too. Notice how much you read in newspapers and magazines stems from a press release or press conference. But they at least realize it's a problem. And because reporters traditionally start out covering accidents, fires, and crimes, they learn how to get the facts in the field.

The problem is that online media doesn't have a revenue stream. So most of it is either advertising or psuedo-advertising ("Why you should upgrade to Windows 98 / buy vinyl pants / etc.) What we have online is people commenting on stuff others put online. Original material generally is either advertising, self-promotion, or online versions of offline content.

Micropayments have been floated as a solution to this since the Ted Nelson / Xanadu days. But nobody wants to pay micropayments. All the enthusiasm for micropayments is from the collecting side. Other than porno and Consumer Reports, there are very few successful pay sites.

Actual Open and Free Media Links

[FreeUser]

There are a number of Open and Free Media efforts underway.

I am putting the finishing touches on a GPL-like Free Media License and will be licensing an ongoing Novel and Movie Script (entitled Autonomy) under it shortly. (Just my luck! Now I really wish I hadn't been so lazy about uploading later drafts - I'll try to get the later drafts and additional chapters uploaded tonight - what I've uploaded of my story is weeks old at this point).

Open and Free Media Sites include

• My own OpenFlick.Org site
• The Open Content site
• The Copyright Commons effort.
• The Internet Public Media Project
  

(If anyone has more, please respond here and I'll add them to my website as well!)

The goals of these efforts are similar, to promote the free exchange and collaboration of media and entertainment and counter the trends toward draconian copyright restrictions on popular culture.

My own effort takes a GNU GPL approach, others take different approaches (including a BSD-style approach in at least one case).

Katz rhetoric aside, I encourage everyone to check out these sites and consider releasing some of their own work under whatever license/philosophy most comfortably matches their own.

Ummmm.. Duh!.

[Bilbo]

The examples you give are not "Open Media" as Katz so lovingly gushes over, but simple electronic versions of the "Old Fart" closed media.

One point, however, about these forums is that they are opened to some extent by allowing reader feedback, but I would still hardly call then truly "Open" forums, since the "expert" opinion is still closely controlled by the "Old White Male" owners of the publication.

-- Your Servant,

Re:Open Fartism

[Golias]

Heh heh. Thanks. Now I don't feel so bad for neglecting the preview button.

Youth vs. Idiocy

[Benwick]

Problem with an article like this is that it makes a huge set of generalizations... I think the reason Open Media is dominated by youth probably has as much to do with younger folks' higher learning curve, as it does with the fact they don't have the money to buy all the stuff they get for free. (Not to say that, at age 22, I've relinquished the piracy I was so gung ho about at 13.)

In any case it certainly suggests that by the time I'm 50 maybe something useful will happen in government and they'll stop dicking around worrying about drugs and communists! (I'll be throwing a party when Strom Thurmond and/or Jesse Helms finally shuffles off the mortal coil...)

Ben Chadwick - Editor, Zero Future/Post-Collegiate Malaise

Age

[Error 404]

Jon, I think you could do well by examining age issues in online communication.

Most of my recreational online time is spent with people older than myself (and I'm a couple weeks short of 40) and I notice that there are some major differences between online styles between the older and the younger.

The people older than myself with whom I communicate tend to use plain text media a great deal. Email lists, and, to a lesser degree, IRC. Some of them create web sites, but those are typicaly highly targeted. They exist primarily to display graphics to a very particular audience. By "particular" I mean that the author can probably list the names (at least online nicknames) of the intended viewers, with possibly an email list or two as secondary targets, and any others somewhere between nice bonus hits and unwelcome.

The signal/noise ratio tends to be extremely high.

The attraction of cool technology tends to be minimal. They use what they find works, and are not easily swayed by advertizing.

The bottom line, though, is that these people are using technology very effectively, and on their own terms. It could be something for you to take a look at.

Our secret is gamma-irradiated cow manure
Mitsubishi ad

kids today....

[Superb0wl]

Kids in the 00's (how is that pronouced again? :)had better excel at something. The 60's had drugs, 70's had disco, 80's had.....shitty music and 90s were the MTV Generation. 2000 is the online decade. Kids have to have something to do since they can't just sit around and smoke pot and reminisce about "the good old days." So they are forced into the internet. I don't think this is good. Kids are already discrespectful. I remmeber when i was like 8 if i saw someone is high school i was in awe. and one my friends brothers was in college! he didn't even live at home! wow. but now all kids do is live in their virtual worlds. My little bro has more virtual friends than real friends. sorta sad.

oh well. i guess it's time to quit my rant. damn whippersnappers.....
-Superb0wl

Re:Pepsi vs. Coke!

[Hard_Code]

Ok, what wiseguy moderated this down as off topic? Being a reply to a pretty frivolous post I consider it on-topic ;p

I'm standing up for my AC brethren

History repeats itself

[Canar]

The 00's have drugs _AND_ disco, they just call 'em raves. ;) They also have shitty music and watch MTV lots. I dunno, they seem to be more like a hybridization of all that went before.

First Bazillion

[Hendershot]

Yeah I remember when I made my first million. I was sixteen and ripe out of sophmore year.

I just don't know what to do with myself now that my global expansion has just taken off I don't know how I'm going to finish my homework

Oh well, maybe I'll download my senior research project online...

a new elite?

[mblase]

[Young Netizens] don't seem to grasp that their lack of political acumen and organizing skills not only make such legislation possible but increasingly inevitable in encounters with a legal and political system dominated by those older and non-technologically-centered.

This is intriguing, especially since one of the most frequently-cited reasons Microsoft is in the antitrust quagmire it's in now is because they were very late in getting lobbyists into Congress, presumably due to a hubris that their power over software would be enough. Is it possible that the technology-centric members of society will increasingly allow "the laws of the Net" to be their law, regardless of what their governments say? Will society someday be divided into the law-abiding neo-Luddites and the self-regulating technologists? (And most importantly, will William Gibson or Neal Stephenson publish another novel based on this premise?)

Open Fartism

[Golias]

For Katz to imply that old media is doomed (in spite of the wild success of printed magazines targeting every imaginable niche market), and that sites like Teen Movie Critic are the future is so silly that I can't even take it seriously enough to thoughtfully point out how horribly, horribly wrong so much of his column is... so I will just fire off a couple of smart-assed questions.

Does the term "Open Media" imply that we are welcome to take his rough drafts, make a few changes, and sell them as our own under the GPL?

If there is such a thing as "Old Fartism", what exactly does an Old Fartist believe?

Is there also a New Fartism? Or perhaps a Reformed Fartism?

Katz, does it bother you that your whole column is dripping with the same sappy sentiment as the opening lines of "The Greatest Love of All" by Whitney Houston?