Slashdot Mirror


How the Internet Didn't Fail As Predicted

Lord Byron Eee PC writes "Newsweek is carrying a navel-gazing piece on how wrong they were when in 1995 they published a story about how the Internet would fail. The original article states, 'Nicholas Negroponte, director of the MIT Media Lab, predicts that we'll soon buy books and newspapers straight over the Intenet. Uh, sure.' The article continues to say that online shopping will never happen, that airline tickets won't be purchased over the web, and that newspapers have nothing to fear. It's an interesting look back at a time when the Internet was still a novelty and not yet a necessity."

16 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. It's all about the Editor by Cytotoxic · · Score: 4, Insightful
    from the original article

    What the Internet hucksters won't tell you is that the Internet is one big ocean of unedited data, without any pretense of completeness. Lacking editors, reviewers or critics, the Internet has become a wasteland of unfiltered data. You don't know what to ignore and what's worth reading.

    And along comes Slashdot et al with moderation and meta-moderation schemes to allow the crowd to edit the stream. Problem solved (sort of). Hard to imagine that it was impossible to see lack of editing as anything other than an insurmountable obstacle. But the article was written by journalists with editors, so maybe that explains their limited vision.

  2. Wow, he really missed the opportunity by Cytotoxic · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the original internet criticism:

    What's missing from this electronic wonderland? Human contact. Discount the fawning techno-burble about virtual communities. Computers and networks isolate us from one another.

    So he was able to see that human contact was the thing that was missing from the internet - and then blew it. Because of his lack of vision, he's still eating Ramen Noodles. Meanwhile Zuckerberg and Tom Anderson and many others made billions on Facebook and Myspace etc. solving exactly those problems.

    Actually, that's a nice lesson for the Slashdot crowd. Remember that idea you were just panning as stupid and unworkable because of xyz flaw that only you could spot? Yep, that's opportunity knocking.

    1. Re:Wow, he really missed the opportunity by Marcika · · Score: 3, Insightful

      From the original internet criticism:

      What's missing from this electronic wonderland? Human contact. Discount the fawning techno-burble about virtual communities. Computers and networks isolate us from one another.

      So he was able to see that human contact was the thing that was missing from the internet - and then blew it. Because of his lack of vision, he's still eating Ramen Noodles. Meanwhile Zuckerberg and Tom Anderson and many others made billions on Facebook and Myspace etc. solving exactly those problems.

      Actually, that's a nice lesson for the Slashdot crowd. Remember that idea you were just panning as stupid and unworkable because of xyz flaw that only you could spot? Yep, that's opportunity knocking.

      And he didn't have much of an excuse to bemoan the lack of human contact and virtual communities either... Cliff Stoll back then was a net guru and quite active on usenet, so it's not like he wouldn't have imagined how the net connects people...

    2. Re:Wow, he really missed the opportunity by characterZer0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Zuckerberg and Anderson are not rich because they had vision to bring human contact to the internet.

      Zuckerberg and Anderson are rich because they realized that most internet users cannot or will not learn to use use their computers well enough to handle an email application, an IM application, a news reader, and a web browser, and that most internet users are not online for content but for mindless entertainment.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
  3. What makes it really ironic by MikeRT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As I said on my blog****, the irony was that within 1 year of his article JavaScript was released in Netscape Navigator 2.0 and Brin and Page began Google. The former played a key role in enabling a lot of the usefulness in the web and the latter played a key role in organizing it effectively from the viewpoint of the public, especially to the extent that his point about how hard it was to find useful data was negated by Google.

    I have to agree with Newsweek's writer who criticized him by saying that his problem wasn't in stating what the problems were, but his blithe assumption that they would never be overcome. That, right there, was the fatal flaw as it assumed that the computer industry was not invested in the Internet's future. That's almost like assuming that the established auto companies have no interest in the electric car market and would gladly let Tesla take it over unmolested.

    ****Just an ironic dig since he figured that blogging would never become mainstream, let alone that some bloggers (myself excluded) would become powerful players in the media.

  4. Re:Computers Were Supposed To Fail Big Too by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of my favorites was from Danny Hillis, a pioneer in parallel computing. "I went to my first computer conference at the New York Hilton about 20 years ago. When somebody there predicted the market for microprocessors would eventually be in the millions, someone else asked, 'Where are they all going to go? It's not like you need a computer in every doorknob!"

    Years later, Hillis went back to the same hotel. He noticed that the room keys had been replaced by electronic cards you slide into slots in the doors. There was indeed a computer in every doorknob..

    --
    Stale pastry is hollow succor to one who is bereft of ostrich.
  5. Re:Interesting by dunezone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The iPod was pretty lame when it was introduced. Only worked on Apple, limited space, limited features, pretty much set the stage for most Apple products.

    It was only until several years later when increased the storage, added color, and allowed it to work on PC did it take off.

  6. Re:The interwebs! by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I think the quote that gets me is: " It's an interesting look back at a time when the Internet was still a novelty and not yet a necessity."

    Don't get me wrong, I tend to go into withdrawls if my connections go down for an extended period of time, but, the internet being a necessity? I dunno. There are plenty of people out there that live and breathe and make money with no connection or need to the internet whatsoever. I don't think it is truly a necessity like shelter and food.

    While *I* would not want to live without it, people still can pretty easily these days.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  7. Re:Government crackdowns by Tanktalus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nah. That was predicted back in 1949. Though he was off by a few years on the actual timeline.

  8. Re:Interesting by jedrek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It also "won" because of the interface, something everybody on slashdot keeps ignoring. Do you remember what the interfaces of pre-ipod mp3 players were like? No comparison.

  9. Re:The interwebs! by timster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But in modern industrialized societies, hypothetically turning off the entire Internet would have secondary effects on those who don't use it in their daily lives or work. Not that people would die in large numbers or anything.

    --
    I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
  10. Re:Things Change at a Rapid Rate by rubycodez · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and since it existed when they were born, my children will think there was always an internet and that it was always big, and that people always had a computer or four in their homes.

  11. Re:The interwebs! by Bakkster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For example, don't you think that the automated and streamlined ordering systems that corporations use to reduce costs on necessary goods used by the poor would suffer?

    It's necessary in the same way that roads and highways are necessary for the developed world. Sure, we could do without, but there would be a discernable difference if you removed either.

    --
    Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
  12. Re:Interesting by Juln · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Like the way they didn't even have a power button?

    I spent some time playing with my friends original b/w iPod a few years back and actually, I couldn't figure out how to do anything. Then I spent three minutes trying to find the damn power button. Wow, that was an amazing design.

    --
    Juln
  13. He did get some things right. by plopez · · Score: 3, Insightful

    *"What the Internet hucksters won't tell you is tht the Internet is one big ocean of unedited data, without any pretense of completeness. Lacking editors, reviewers or critics, the Internet has become a wasteland of unfiltered data."*

    That hasn't changed.

    *"What's missing from this electronic wonderland? Human contact."*
    Still no real change. Despite social networking sites. It just isn't the same.

    His point about teachers is still true. Technology is secondary to good teachers.

    I love this quote:
    *"But today, I'm uneasy about this most trendy and oversold community."*

    The interweb is still trendy and oversold.

    So, somethings have not changed. Not at the core anyway.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  14. Re:The interwebs! by Patch86 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I disagree. You could say the same about the paved road network.

    Yes, life would go on if we had to revert to 30mph single lane dirt tracks. Yes, you would be quite able to live your life individually by avoiding the road network (not own a car, not ride the bus). Yes there are alternatives to the road (rail, aircraft, canals, etc.).

    But that doesn't mean the road network isn't a necessity. If it were ripped up right now today then there would be serious repercussions- even for the minority who doggedly never use it. Businesses would crumble, quality of life would drop.

    If the internet were switched off tomorrow, there would be repercussions. Even if you never use it yourself, it would still effect you.