I am mindful of the contribution of pioneers to the promotion of their ideal; they wouldn't be doing it if they didn't believe in it, and see its value for others.
However, I am also mindful of the vast divisions that rend our society, and are reflected in the implementation of any technology. The notion of 'common carrier', once applied to telephones, in an effort to describe a simple means of exchanging information, is no longer applicable when the phone company is a conglomerate, seeking to promote its other divisions.
While individuals may not make money from latecomers, the companies that do business on the internet--and are transforming it structure--do.
Individualization, personalization--and their ilk--are just new ways to market. And the point-to-point nature of the internet is the natural culmination of the political economy of the twentieth century--and corporations are now flexing their muscles.
The use of libraries is dependant upon literacy--an achievement not everywhere plentiful. Even in a time where people read, the things they read may not bring them to libraries.
And depending on the area in which you live, and the magnanimity of the government--since we are surely speaking about areas whose residents cannot afford their own access--any access would never be adequate.
Libraries never have everything one would want to read anyway.
Until something happened(!), I have been an addicted user of Everything2. (I won't try the URL today because it isn't working; that's why I'm here.)
But over the several months there, I've found it to be a community--what I would call an imaginary community, the most positive sense of that word.
The people I know from all over the world, whose comments to my posts I value; whose conversation I value; whose presence I miss--all are the hallmarks of a 'community'.
Slashdot Mirror
However, I am also mindful of the vast divisions that rend our society, and are reflected in the implementation of any technology. The notion of 'common carrier', once applied to telephones, in an effort to describe a simple means of exchanging information, is no longer applicable when the phone company is a conglomerate, seeking to promote its other divisions.
While individuals may not make money from latecomers, the companies that do business on the internet--and are transforming it structure--do.
Individualization, personalization--and their ilk--are just new ways to market. And the point-to-point nature of the internet is the natural culmination of the political economy of the twentieth century--and corporations are now flexing their muscles.
And depending on the area in which you live, and the magnanimity of the government--since we are surely speaking about areas whose residents cannot afford their own access--any access would never be adequate.
Libraries never have everything one would want to read anyway.
I'm sorry, I cannot agree with that. A digital divide always exists, which is itself a reflection of the society out of which the internet grew.
Technology, any technology including the internet, evolves in conformity with the political economy that governs its society. This is not new.
Publics kiosks, any more than universal voting, would not alieviate the situation. There is a cost--always.
But over the several months there, I've found it to be a community--what I would call an imaginary community, the most positive sense of that word.
The people I know from all over the world, whose comments to my posts I value; whose conversation I value; whose presence I miss--all are the hallmarks of a 'community'.
And many of us, even online, are trying to develop an immunity to this infection.