Slashdot Mirror


World of Ends

epeus writes "At World of Ends, Doc Searls and David Weinberger explain the End-to-End nature of the internet in terms so clear even your manager could understand them. 'The Internet isn't complicated. The Internet isn't a thing. It's an agreement. The Internet is stupid. Adding value to the Internet lowers its value.' and so forth."

6 of 178 comments (clear)

  1. Basically, this is right by Sgs-Cruz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Despite this article's annoying use of absolutes (I know, I know, they're effective, but I hate it when people write an article as if its the last thing that will ever be written on that subject), they're mostly right. Think about it. We can do more on the Net now than 5 years ago, despite the best efforts of the RIAA, MPAA, US Govt, and pretty much every corporate interest out there. I have a feeling this will continue into the future, too.

    --

    Karma: pi (Mostly due to circular reasoning in posts).

  2. Re:Theorem by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So the Internet is destined to fail?

    Yes, Doc & Dave have set themselves up to be misinterpreted with those particular headings.

    It makes sense if you read the text, and see that "improve it" in item 8 doesn't mean modifing the internet in any way- only modifying protocols that use it.

    "Adding value" to the internet, on the other hand, would mean changing the internet itself, which would break old applications, and make it harder to add new apps.

  3. The internet isn't stupid... by CoolVibe · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The Internet is stupid

    Well, I tend to disagree. It tends to make people stupid though, and it's hellishly smart at that as well. Just look at this place :-)

  4. Seems a bit utopian? by cindy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "That's also why the Internet feels to so many of us like a natural resource."

    ...which explains why so many would like to strip mine it without regard for the future or for the rights or best interests of others.

  5. Happened in industrial revolution too by argoff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A lot of people thought that the whole purpose of the industrial revolution was to use inventions like the cotton-gin to expand their plantations for unlimited controll and profits. While most people saw the invention as a great tool to end slavery, for others it was impossible to think of wealth in any other terms other than the size of a plantation, a farm, or estates. These people pushed slavery controlls to the point of civil war and were responsible for the deaths of millions.

    I think today we have the same problem with "intellectual properties". It is impossible for people to think of wealth in any other terms than the number and amount of industires and people they can extract royalties from. It is impossible for them to understand that properties are not just about government edicts, or personal incentive, but natural forces - like everyone not being able to use the same thing at the same time. Well, with information - they can. And that is the real value of the internet.

  6. Re:Theorem by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Think in i.e. Riverworld of P.J.Farmer, you have a river that connects all places in the world, the river is owned by nobody, everyone can use it, and everybody can build whatever they think around and over it, but if you change the river itself (contaminating water, redirecting or trying to stop it, adding to it some drink concentrate to make the water taste better, whatever), all the world loses, they can't use the same river in all the possible ways that they could before (and, if I remember well the book series, you will face a war very soon :)