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.
Ok, I've only scanned the headlines of all the comments so I don't know if somebody's said this already, but doesn't this just reek of the Terminator story and an "us versus the robots" theme?
If AOL were to be ported to Linux, the problem of AOL not using NN/Mozilla as it's built-in browser would become nill. With Linux's wild popularity and dazing growth-rate they would no longer have to strictly concern themselves with gaining users through Windows so therefore they could dare to shed the evil cloak of IE.
Slashdot Mirror
I've got my horse, Bessie. She gets me where I wanna go just fine, why would I wanna buy one of them new-fangled autocarriages?
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.
Ok, I've only scanned the headlines of all the comments so I don't know if somebody's said this already, but doesn't this just reek of the Terminator story and an "us versus the robots" theme?
If AOL were to be ported to Linux, the problem of AOL not using NN/Mozilla as it's built-in browser would become nill. With Linux's wild popularity and dazing growth-rate they would no longer have to strictly concern themselves with gaining users through Windows so therefore they could dare to shed the evil cloak of IE.