IMO, the problem is not home users, per se. And the problem is not lame-assed ISP's like AOL either, or even web-tv. The problem is the commercial use of the internet.
The web did not kill the "net as we used to know it" - filling the web with advertising did. Many of the newsgroups that have been abandoned have been abandoned due to spam.
I have little hope for I-2, myself - the corporate sponsor thing is indicative of the intention to use it for the same commercial crap filling up the original internet.
As long as any network allows commercial advertising, the signal-to-noise ratio will suck.
What is relevant is he is suing for a character that is an obvious parody of him.
I don't understand how anyone can think this is OK. Parodies of famous people populate many, many forms of comdey.
If this is OK, then Saturday Night Live owes an awful lot of money to all ex-presidents over the past few years. And just imagine what South Park owes to Barbara Streisand.
I had the same experience. I ordered a LOT from Amazon this year, in several different orders. On the 22nd in the late afternoon, I ordered 3 items, requested overnight delivery, and received everything on the 24th. Twice, I contacted their customer service department - and got extremely prompt, efficient service. Amazon has a damned good, customer-centric attitude - and as a customer I appreicate it (even if as a geek, I may have other issues with them).
It's not JUST about making money. I mean, Amazon looks like that NOW, with selling everything under the sun and all, but that's NOT what it was about when they started.
It's about books, knowledge. It's about going into my local Barnes and Noble and being told they could not get me a specific psychology book from one of the main names in psychology, because their distributor didn't have it. And my library interlibrary loan couldn't get it either.
Censorship doesn't have to be planned or overt to be effective. When Amazon began, it was the antithesis of censorship. Amazon got me any damned book I wanted - if it was in print. And if it wasn't, they'd look for it at used bookstores.
I was a book addict LONG before I got addicted to being online. I thought Amazon was the greatest thing since sliced bread.
I got children's books I remembered from my childhood but couldn't find anywhere else for my nieces. I got books banned for import into Canada for being too pornographic (you try getting a normal bookstore employee to even seriously HEAR that you want a copy of "Macho Sluts," let alone order it for you). I got ANY book I wanted, by clicking and waiting for the package to show up.
I also remember when the net wasn't filled with all these idjits, when it was a place to play and the companies I worked for didn't know it existed. I remember when September happened in September, not all the damned time. And I remember when, as a chemist myself, a geek friend of mine told me about this terribly cool new thing called the hypertext protocol - and how it would make the net "user friendly" and how horrid I thought that was - I foresaw perpetual September and didn't want it. (Ironic as I now work in web development and have spent the past week on the phone with users talking them through filling out a form on our intranet...)
But that doesn't mean Amazon wasn't terribly cool when it started. Sure, it's not nearly as cool now. And I agree that I don't really see Amazon as the accomplishment of the year - maybe a few years back, but not today. But that it's just basically a big old boring mall dedicated to selling any damned thing today doesn't change that it was a terribly cool thing when it began.
Slashdot Mirror
The web did not kill the "net as we used to know it" - filling the web with advertising did. Many of the newsgroups that have been abandoned have been abandoned due to spam.
I have little hope for I-2, myself - the corporate sponsor thing is indicative of the intention to use it for the same commercial crap filling up the original internet.
As long as any network allows commercial advertising, the signal-to-noise ratio will suck.
I don't understand how anyone can think this is OK. Parodies of famous people populate many, many forms of comdey.
If this is OK, then Saturday Night Live owes an awful lot of money to all ex-presidents over the past few years. And just imagine what South Park owes to Barbara Streisand.
IMO, he has no case at all.
I had the same experience. I ordered a LOT from Amazon this year, in several different orders. On the 22nd in the late afternoon, I ordered 3 items, requested overnight delivery, and received everything on the 24th. Twice, I contacted their customer service department - and got extremely prompt, efficient service. Amazon has a damned good, customer-centric attitude - and as a customer I appreicate it (even if as a geek, I may have other issues with them).
I know little history, it's not my field, and I paid little attention in high school.
Yet I terribly enjoyed this essay, thanks for sharing it. Marshall reminds me of a Heinlein character, and I can give no higher compliment.
Thanks.
I have a great deal of respect for power handled responsibly, ethically and honorably.
It's about books, knowledge. It's about going into my local Barnes and Noble and being told they could not get me a specific psychology book from one of the main names in psychology, because their distributor didn't have it. And my library interlibrary loan couldn't get it either.
Censorship doesn't have to be planned or overt to be effective. When Amazon began, it was the antithesis of censorship. Amazon got me any damned book I wanted - if it was in print. And if it wasn't, they'd look for it at used bookstores.
I was a book addict LONG before I got addicted to being online. I thought Amazon was the greatest thing since sliced bread.
I got children's books I remembered from my childhood but couldn't find anywhere else for my nieces. I got books banned for import into Canada for being too pornographic (you try getting a normal bookstore employee to even seriously HEAR that you want a copy of "Macho Sluts," let alone order it for you). I got ANY book I wanted, by clicking and waiting for the package to show up.
I also remember when the net wasn't filled with all these idjits, when it was a place to play and the companies I worked for didn't know it existed. I remember when September happened in September, not all the damned time. And I remember when, as a chemist myself, a geek friend of mine told me about this terribly cool new thing called the hypertext protocol - and how it would make the net "user friendly" and how horrid I thought that was - I foresaw perpetual September and didn't want it. (Ironic as I now work in web development and have spent the past week on the phone with users talking them through filling out a form on our intranet ...)
But that doesn't mean Amazon wasn't terribly cool when it started. Sure, it's not nearly as cool now. And I agree that I don't really see Amazon as the accomplishment of the year - maybe a few years back, but not today. But that it's just basically a big old boring mall dedicated to selling any damned thing today doesn't change that it was a terribly cool thing when it began.