I guess so, but generally speaking, my house isn't on fire and if it did go up in flames, I'd probably be less concerned about some powerpoint presentation and more concerned about all my stuff that just got destroyed.
If I'm out on a business trip and there's some really important documents I need, I'll carry them on a CD or USB Flash drive as well as the notebook drive. I keep semi-regular backups of my important data at a relatives' house, and I have all my files available online via my Cable modem. (I actually take this another step further, by using DFS Replication to replicate a 400GB share to two friends' houses over a VPN. This isn't a solution for many people, though.)
I tend to trust my own system more then an online service like this, even if it is Google. Besides, like you said, it can end up being very inconvenient to access online data if it's of any significant size, and if you're looking for just disaster recovery, there's online solutions for that that are probably a lot more practical then trying to manage local and remote files yourself.
It all depends on what you need it for, but I can't imagine that storing 200+ GB on an Internet file storage service will ever be truly practical until we get much faster internet connections.
The thing is; people that get into accidents because they're drunk are DRUNK. There's almost never an accident because someone had two beers, and might be over the legal limit, but still NOT DRUNK. Not more then normal accidents, anyways.
Setting the legal limit so that you can't breath in the fumes from Hair Spray without being over the legal limit does nothing to prevent drunk driving - all it does is get more people to pay fines and promote the careers of politicians.
The things that always comes to mind about these types of things are: Some people are bad drivers anyways, some people are slow to respond without any alcohol, and the vast majority of car accidents don't have alcohol involved.
It's not the same thing with Cell Phones - you can put down the phone in a crisis; you can't stop being drunk. Unfortunately, people abuse cell phones so much on the road that even though I hate more regulations and laws, I'm not against a law banning cell phones on the road completely. I wouldn't actively support such a law, but if it passed, I wouldn't be upset.
The difference is that I have the ability now, with current technology, to convert these documents to an open standard pretty easily - unlike 20 years from now where it would cost a whole lot more money to hire a firm to program special converters and filters.
It wouldn't be free, obviously, but thinking past tomorrow it would end up saving any company or government institution that needs long term archival a lot of money and hassle in the future.
And what, are you some kind of weenie that can't handle when someone says "bullshit"?
You do realize that Marijuana is pretty much only illegal because Harry J. Anslinger used his friends in the media to convince everyone that you would become a "murdering crazy man" if you smoked a little weed? And that it was the American newspapers that started using the name "Marijuana" because they figured people would dislike the Mexican sounding name, as being something bad if for no other reason?
Yea, but Media is much worse today...
I will never give up Free Speech, and it's unbelievable that you would. Shame on you.
I agree - we're much better off today. While I hate that the media often focuses on dumb shit like Paris fucking Hilton, there's enough media coverage that most topics can be covered anyways. The thing is, with the communication tools we have today, it's pretty easy to debunk and call out shoddy journalism.
Hah! I'll be 29 in November. My first computer was a C64 (which I still own) and my first PC was an Amstrad 8088. My first game system was an Atari 2600 - although admittedly my parents couldn't afford one until it was far obsolete. I used to be a regular on the local BBS scene (my favorite BBS's were CNet BBS systems running on Amigas. They had the best multi-node and Hack'N'Slash ruled.) Before that I used to logon to Quantum Link on the C64 using a User Port 1200 Baud Modem (1200 Baud was about the limit of what the C64 could do, I guess.)
Prince of Persia in CGA was still amazing. Especially if you owned an Adlib of Soundblaster card.
Anyways, after some time I moved on to a 486sx20 and that's when things got interesting. I stumbled upon overclocking on my own by playing with jumper settings on the board (holy shit! It's running at 33Mhz! Nobody at the computer shows would believe me. Just some dumb kid, they thought I was.) I got a SoundBlaster Pro and I thought it was the best thing in the world - until I got the Ultrasound. I got the GUS because all the new demos (Second Reality; Future Crew) supported or required one. Who knew it was a wavetable sound card! Fired up Doom, and I was shocked!
I've always been amazed with how fast these computers have become in so short a time. Each year they can do more and more and more. Game systems being computers, the same applies there. Honestly, I've never really been a console gamer and I'm still not. The heard lives with gaming on the PC. Shit, my last new game system was the SNES (the used Xbox I got, I got so I could mod and play with Linux and MAME and such.)
Maybe that explains why I like fancy graphics so much. I just dig it. (I'm not alone there - people love fancy graphics.) Of course, nothing will help a game that isn't fun to play, but if you have a fun game with awesome graphics there's just nothing like it.
To comment on Doom 3 again; I wasn't as critical of it, I guess. I thought it was badass. I mean, I haven't been so impressed with a game for a long time before that, and I still haven't been as impressed as I was with that with any new games. Throw on the flashlight, run around dimly lit hallways.. look to the left.. HOLY SHIT! A Zombie! The shadows from the flashlight beaming his shadow on the wall were just great. Considering it was the first game to really say "Enough of this light-map shit, let's do REAL lights" it was damned impressive. Today, they could do better, of course (unfortunately, not enough of them do. Even Half Life 2 makes heavy use of light maps..) Doom 3 suffered from becoming far too difficult in the later levels, but every new area was just fun to look at.
As far as the Wii; it just doesn't have the mustard to make competitive looking 3D FPS games. Even on an SDTV, the games won't look very good. Things aren't like they used to be, where the systems could be stretched to their limits only after years of development experience. They're really just like slightly altered PC's now, and everything is very well documented. Developers can write games for all the new game systems that use all of the available power and quirks, on day one.
I don't disagree with everything you've said but the term 'having fun' is subjective. Would I have fun playing an FPS on the Wii? Probably. Would I have MORE fun if the graphics were a lot more realistic? Definitely.
Ultimately, it is the game that makes it fun; not the graphics or interface. The Wiimote might make some things better, the PS3 graphics might make other things better.
You can't say that graphics haven't improved FPS game play. Would Counter Strike be a fun to play if they couldn't generate good representations of office settings? I don't think so.
I won't say that there's not a long way to go before truly photo-realistic graphics on a game system are a reality. Doom 3 was a giant step forward in realism; whether the walls were too shiny or not. Perfect? No. Awesome: YES. =) When you play Call of Duty for the PS3, with the surround sound kicking and you're playing on a decent HDTV, it's awesome. The rain and thunder, the soldiers yelling, the gunfire and bullets.. it's quite a game. Very realistic feel to it.
The other point you've mixed into your argument, which isn't DIRECTLY related to graphics (but is related) is game physics. When you shoot a barrel of oil, you want it to leak oil, not explode. It comes with the territory. With each new generation of game system or PC performance ratings, we see more of this kind of thing. Without the power to compute and calculate all the possibilities of having realistic physics, it can't be done. We do see more of this coming our way though; the next CryENGINE is supposed to be really superb in this department. Physics also seem to go hand-in-hand with lighting, so that will continue to improve as well.
You don't need to have great graphics to make a fun FPS, but it sure helps. More powerful systems will resolve your "issues" in due time. Unfortunately, none of those types of FPS games will (or should) be made for the Wii. Have you seen Far Cry Vengeance? Wow, they shouldn't even try to make games like that for the system.
But that's so stupid! And not only will you need to pay huge dollars to recover your own documents, you'll need to convert them into something useful. It's so weird that people will defend such a stupid point like this.
Why not use a document format that doesn't require all that bullshit?
Okay, but how about you open up this document I have here that was saved with SpeedScript on my C64 17 years ago?
Who's to say that Windows in 20 years will run Office 97, if it still exists?
Are you telling me that we're also supposed to "archive" all the old computer systems that rely on those closed document formats, too? What happens when those documents aren't just on CD's, but on sophisticated document imaging systems? Should we archive the entire data center, including hardware, every six years?
Dumbass. Rent-control only helps lock in the NEW rent prices. Not everyplace in the city is $300 a month for rent, and if they are, grandma is living there.
Most of the city is NOT rent controlled.
Don't you realize that if they completely abolished all rent controls, only millionaires would be able to live in the city?
I have a hard time counting the Wii because almost everyone I know with either the 360 or PS3 also have one of those. Then there's the people that have the Wii but plan to buy either the 360 or PS3 at some point in the future.
The reasoning, I guess, is that the Wii is fun for awhile, and fun if you want to swing around and stuff, but there's something missing, and they want more. I'm guessing - better graphics, and something that uses their HDTV as an HDTV.
How many Trons can they make before they all look the same? One.
You can say "unrealistic" but you apparently can't differentiate between "fiction" and "realism." In the movie Independence Day, it's obviously fiction; aliens never came here and blew up all the cities. But, it looks damned real up there on the screen.
With each new generation of systems, FPS gaming has become more and more realistic due to advances in graphics technology. Think about Wolf3D; not very real. Fun at the time, sure. Look at Doom 3. You actually feel like you're part of the environment - the lighting and graphics are so good.
The whole idea behind first person shooters is immersion. Better graphics provide better immersion.
There's some instances where graphics won't matter, like Duck Hunt or Tron. For everything else, the Wii won't have because the games will be FAR too outdated and make the whole thing look silly.
The Wii game system is still fun sometimes, sure. Just stop trying to convince people that graphics DON'T MATTER. Because they still do.
Who cares if the DVR thing raises questions? It's a new item, and who knows, it might suck. Ain't nobody forcing me to buy it. It's a fine machine without that, but it might be really cool! I'm patient enough to wait for the details to be released.
Folks like you keep saying "yea all this cool extra stuff is okay but it NEEDS GAMES FIRST." Well, considering how many people and companies are involved with all this, I don't know why you think both can't be done at the same time. From where I sit, there's plenty of games hitting the market. It's a new system; these things take time. I'm happy with the system now. All these free new features just make me even more glad I purchased it.
So to your first point, if "hard to program" is a key to failure, then how come Sony sold 120M+ Playstation 2 systems? That system was actually more difficult according to some sources. Not only that, but they're STILL making games for that system to this day. So there goes that theory.
Your point of the Itanium isn't factual either. Itanium failed because: Too expensive, not compatible with x86 (it could run some code, VERY slowly) and it was targeted at the high-end X86 market - stupid. Yea, the Intel compilers couldn't generate good code. However, the PS3 compilers can. So, with Itanium it just WASN'T POSSIBLE to write fast software. Not true with Cell. Really. Cell ain't that odd.
It's okay if you're unsure about the PS3's future. Don't buy one today. You will eventually, though.
I use mine all the time. It's good enough at all it does to avoid putting a PC under the TV, which I find great. Ohh, and the games I've purchased are great, too.
And I feel like you're spreading FUD. I'm glad they keep making the PS3 better. I was happy when it was just a game console. Now it's a media player, upscaling DVD player, and soon a DVR. How cool is that?
Indeed. The PS3 is pretty small considering all it packs in (namely the PSU.) Mine blows some heat, but even when it was hot in the living room, it just keeps on truckin' - even when running Folding@home for a week straight.
The machine is solid. It might cost a little bit more then other systems, but it's a great piece of hardware. Engineered very well.
Every new platform is difficult if it's not what you've been doing. I don't feel sorry for these people; they're paid to develop titles. And they have been. There's an assload of games being released for Sony's game system.
Exclusives are over-rated; that's why you see a lot less of them these days. I can imagine a world where there's enough room for more then one game console. Why can't you?
ps. Since the PS3 plays games, why not also use it for other things? You know, these things are just fancy looking computers. Why do you rather these things be useless for anything besides playing games?
Microsoft has only sold (to retailers) about 10 million consoles. Considering Sony sold 120+ million PS2's, I'd say there's still quite a market left of people that haven't pulled the trigger on the Xbox or the PS3. Considering that the Xbox isn't exactly cheap, someone could just as easily buy a PS3 over the 360.
Just like you said, a lot of games are released for both platforms, so it's just as easy to assume someone would buy the PS3 over the 360 because it's more feature-rich out of the box.
I love stupid articles like this, because they mean nothing. Arbitrary, vague, nonsense.
The "Internet" is a very ambiguous term. It is what you make of it.
The physical connection doesn't matter. Wireless, mesh, wired, 10Gbit, whatever. It's just a medium change. Sure, faster allows you to do more, but it's just "more."
The protocols can change, and the applications running on it can change. It's still Internet. ISP's can come and go; doesn't matter.
It's already not all that anonymous, and adding special "identity management" just sounds redundant.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess so, but generally speaking, my house isn't on fire and if it did go up in flames, I'd probably be less concerned about some powerpoint presentation and more concerned about all my stuff that just got destroyed.
If I'm out on a business trip and there's some really important documents I need, I'll carry them on a CD or USB Flash drive as well as the notebook drive. I keep semi-regular backups of my important data at a relatives' house, and I have all my files available online via my Cable modem. (I actually take this another step further, by using DFS Replication to replicate a 400GB share to two friends' houses over a VPN. This isn't a solution for many people, though.)
I tend to trust my own system more then an online service like this, even if it is Google. Besides, like you said, it can end up being very inconvenient to access online data if it's of any significant size, and if you're looking for just disaster recovery, there's online solutions for that that are probably a lot more practical then trying to manage local and remote files yourself.
It all depends on what you need it for, but I can't imagine that storing 200+ GB on an Internet file storage service will ever be truly practical until we get much faster internet connections.
Or a spiffy little question like "This begs the question: Will SCO go out of business now?"
The thing is; people that get into accidents because they're drunk are DRUNK. There's almost never an accident because someone had two beers, and might be over the legal limit, but still NOT DRUNK. Not more then normal accidents, anyways.
Setting the legal limit so that you can't breath in the fumes from Hair Spray without being over the legal limit does nothing to prevent drunk driving - all it does is get more people to pay fines and promote the careers of politicians.
The things that always comes to mind about these types of things are: Some people are bad drivers anyways, some people are slow to respond without any alcohol, and the vast majority of car accidents don't have alcohol involved.
It's not the same thing with Cell Phones - you can put down the phone in a crisis; you can't stop being drunk. Unfortunately, people abuse cell phones so much on the road that even though I hate more regulations and laws, I'm not against a law banning cell phones on the road completely. I wouldn't actively support such a law, but if it passed, I wouldn't be upset.
And it says "Blu-Ray" all over the box, every game, every package. It's like not knowing that your computer can play CD's.
Sillyness.
And... x86 has been available since before cell phones and PDA's were available.
Besides, StrongARM processors and such aren't a direct competitor. So your point is completely moot.
The difference is that I have the ability now, with current technology, to convert these documents to an open standard pretty easily - unlike 20 years from now where it would cost a whole lot more money to hire a firm to program special converters and filters.
It wouldn't be free, obviously, but thinking past tomorrow it would end up saving any company or government institution that needs long term archival a lot of money and hassle in the future.
And what, are you some kind of weenie that can't handle when someone says "bullshit"?
You do realize that Marijuana is pretty much only illegal because Harry J. Anslinger used his friends in the media to convince everyone that you would become a "murdering crazy man" if you smoked a little weed? And that it was the American newspapers that started using the name "Marijuana" because they figured people would dislike the Mexican sounding name, as being something bad if for no other reason?
Yea, but Media is much worse today...
I will never give up Free Speech, and it's unbelievable that you would. Shame on you.
I agree - we're much better off today. While I hate that the media often focuses on dumb shit like Paris fucking Hilton, there's enough media coverage that most topics can be covered anyways. The thing is, with the communication tools we have today, it's pretty easy to debunk and call out shoddy journalism.
No. The answer is an open document format.
Simple, huh?
Hah! I'll be 29 in November. My first computer was a C64 (which I still own) and my first PC was an Amstrad 8088. My first game system was an Atari 2600 - although admittedly my parents couldn't afford one until it was far obsolete. I used to be a regular on the local BBS scene (my favorite BBS's were CNet BBS systems running on Amigas. They had the best multi-node and Hack'N'Slash ruled.) Before that I used to logon to Quantum Link on the C64 using a User Port 1200 Baud Modem (1200 Baud was about the limit of what the C64 could do, I guess.)
Prince of Persia in CGA was still amazing. Especially if you owned an Adlib of Soundblaster card.
Anyways, after some time I moved on to a 486sx20 and that's when things got interesting. I stumbled upon overclocking on my own by playing with jumper settings on the board (holy shit! It's running at 33Mhz! Nobody at the computer shows would believe me. Just some dumb kid, they thought I was.) I got a SoundBlaster Pro and I thought it was the best thing in the world - until I got the Ultrasound. I got the GUS because all the new demos (Second Reality; Future Crew) supported or required one. Who knew it was a wavetable sound card! Fired up Doom, and I was shocked!
I've always been amazed with how fast these computers have become in so short a time. Each year they can do more and more and more. Game systems being computers, the same applies there. Honestly, I've never really been a console gamer and I'm still not. The heard lives with gaming on the PC. Shit, my last new game system was the SNES (the used Xbox I got, I got so I could mod and play with Linux and MAME and such.)
Maybe that explains why I like fancy graphics so much. I just dig it. (I'm not alone there - people love fancy graphics.) Of course, nothing will help a game that isn't fun to play, but if you have a fun game with awesome graphics there's just nothing like it.
To comment on Doom 3 again; I wasn't as critical of it, I guess. I thought it was badass. I mean, I haven't been so impressed with a game for a long time before that, and I still haven't been as impressed as I was with that with any new games. Throw on the flashlight, run around dimly lit hallways.. look to the left.. HOLY SHIT! A Zombie! The shadows from the flashlight beaming his shadow on the wall were just great. Considering it was the first game to really say "Enough of this light-map shit, let's do REAL lights" it was damned impressive. Today, they could do better, of course (unfortunately, not enough of them do. Even Half Life 2 makes heavy use of light maps..) Doom 3 suffered from becoming far too difficult in the later levels, but every new area was just fun to look at.
As far as the Wii; it just doesn't have the mustard to make competitive looking 3D FPS games. Even on an SDTV, the games won't look very good. Things aren't like they used to be, where the systems could be stretched to their limits only after years of development experience. They're really just like slightly altered PC's now, and everything is very well documented. Developers can write games for all the new game systems that use all of the available power and quirks, on day one.
I don't disagree with everything you've said but the term 'having fun' is subjective. Would I have fun playing an FPS on the Wii? Probably. Would I have MORE fun if the graphics were a lot more realistic? Definitely.
Ultimately, it is the game that makes it fun; not the graphics or interface. The Wiimote might make some things better, the PS3 graphics might make other things better.
You can't say that graphics haven't improved FPS game play. Would Counter Strike be a fun to play if they couldn't generate good representations of office settings? I don't think so.
I won't say that there's not a long way to go before truly photo-realistic graphics on a game system are a reality. Doom 3 was a giant step forward in realism; whether the walls were too shiny or not. Perfect? No. Awesome: YES. =) When you play Call of Duty for the PS3, with the surround sound kicking and you're playing on a decent HDTV, it's awesome. The rain and thunder, the soldiers yelling, the gunfire and bullets.. it's quite a game. Very realistic feel to it.
The other point you've mixed into your argument, which isn't DIRECTLY related to graphics (but is related) is game physics. When you shoot a barrel of oil, you want it to leak oil, not explode. It comes with the territory. With each new generation of game system or PC performance ratings, we see more of this kind of thing. Without the power to compute and calculate all the possibilities of having realistic physics, it can't be done. We do see more of this coming our way though; the next CryENGINE is supposed to be really superb in this department. Physics also seem to go hand-in-hand with lighting, so that will continue to improve as well.
You don't need to have great graphics to make a fun FPS, but it sure helps. More powerful systems will resolve your "issues" in due time. Unfortunately, none of those types of FPS games will (or should) be made for the Wii. Have you seen Far Cry Vengeance? Wow, they shouldn't even try to make games like that for the system.
But that's so stupid! And not only will you need to pay huge dollars to recover your own documents, you'll need to convert them into something useful. It's so weird that people will defend such a stupid point like this.
Why not use a document format that doesn't require all that bullshit?
Okay, but how about you open up this document I have here that was saved with SpeedScript on my C64 17 years ago?
Who's to say that Windows in 20 years will run Office 97, if it still exists?
Are you telling me that we're also supposed to "archive" all the old computer systems that rely on those closed document formats, too? What happens when those documents aren't just on CD's, but on sophisticated document imaging systems? Should we archive the entire data center, including hardware, every six years?
Dumbass.
Dumbass. Rent-control only helps lock in the NEW rent prices. Not everyplace in the city is $300 a month for rent, and if they are, grandma is living there.
Most of the city is NOT rent controlled.
Don't you realize that if they completely abolished all rent controls, only millionaires would be able to live in the city?
You claim you're not anti-PS3 but everything you write, including the "Yea and I loved my Amiga" are backhanded insults. Ridiculous.
PS. Being behind the 360 in sales is an old stupid argument. They've been selling that system for a lot longer.
I have a hard time counting the Wii because almost everyone I know with either the 360 or PS3 also have one of those. Then there's the people that have the Wii but plan to buy either the 360 or PS3 at some point in the future.
The reasoning, I guess, is that the Wii is fun for awhile, and fun if you want to swing around and stuff, but there's something missing, and they want more. I'm guessing - better graphics, and something that uses their HDTV as an HDTV.
How many Trons can they make before they all look the same? One.
You can say "unrealistic" but you apparently can't differentiate between "fiction" and "realism." In the movie Independence Day, it's obviously fiction; aliens never came here and blew up all the cities. But, it looks damned real up there on the screen.
With each new generation of systems, FPS gaming has become more and more realistic due to advances in graphics technology. Think about Wolf3D; not very real. Fun at the time, sure. Look at Doom 3. You actually feel like you're part of the environment - the lighting and graphics are so good.
The whole idea behind first person shooters is immersion. Better graphics provide better immersion.
There's some instances where graphics won't matter, like Duck Hunt or Tron. For everything else, the Wii won't have because the games will be FAR too outdated and make the whole thing look silly.
The Wii game system is still fun sometimes, sure. Just stop trying to convince people that graphics DON'T MATTER. Because they still do.
Like my wrist need more of a work out after a 10 hour day at the keyboard and mouse..
Who cares if the DVR thing raises questions? It's a new item, and who knows, it might suck. Ain't nobody forcing me to buy it. It's a fine machine without that, but it might be really cool! I'm patient enough to wait for the details to be released.
Folks like you keep saying "yea all this cool extra stuff is okay but it NEEDS GAMES FIRST." Well, considering how many people and companies are involved with all this, I don't know why you think both can't be done at the same time. From where I sit, there's plenty of games hitting the market. It's a new system; these things take time. I'm happy with the system now. All these free new features just make me even more glad I purchased it.
So to your first point, if "hard to program" is a key to failure, then how come Sony sold 120M+ Playstation 2 systems? That system was actually more difficult according to some sources. Not only that, but they're STILL making games for that system to this day. So there goes that theory.
Your point of the Itanium isn't factual either. Itanium failed because: Too expensive, not compatible with x86 (it could run some code, VERY slowly) and it was targeted at the high-end X86 market - stupid. Yea, the Intel compilers couldn't generate good code. However, the PS3 compilers can. So, with Itanium it just WASN'T POSSIBLE to write fast software. Not true with Cell. Really. Cell ain't that odd.
It's okay if you're unsure about the PS3's future. Don't buy one today. You will eventually, though.
Why did you buy it?
I use mine all the time. It's good enough at all it does to avoid putting a PC under the TV, which I find great. Ohh, and the games I've purchased are great, too.
And I feel like you're spreading FUD. I'm glad they keep making the PS3 better. I was happy when it was just a game console. Now it's a media player, upscaling DVD player, and soon a DVR. How cool is that?
Indeed. The PS3 is pretty small considering all it packs in (namely the PSU.) Mine blows some heat, but even when it was hot in the living room, it just keeps on truckin' - even when running Folding@home for a week straight.
The machine is solid. It might cost a little bit more then other systems, but it's a great piece of hardware. Engineered very well.
Blah blah, poor developers.
Every new platform is difficult if it's not what you've been doing. I don't feel sorry for these people; they're paid to develop titles. And they have been. There's an assload of games being released for Sony's game system.
Exclusives are over-rated; that's why you see a lot less of them these days. I can imagine a world where there's enough room for more then one game console. Why can't you?
ps. Since the PS3 plays games, why not also use it for other things? You know, these things are just fancy looking computers. Why do you rather these things be useless for anything besides playing games?
Says.. you?
Microsoft has only sold (to retailers) about 10 million consoles. Considering Sony sold 120+ million PS2's, I'd say there's still quite a market left of people that haven't pulled the trigger on the Xbox or the PS3. Considering that the Xbox isn't exactly cheap, someone could just as easily buy a PS3 over the 360.
Just like you said, a lot of games are released for both platforms, so it's just as easy to assume someone would buy the PS3 over the 360 because it's more feature-rich out of the box.
I love stupid articles like this, because they mean nothing. Arbitrary, vague, nonsense.
The "Internet" is a very ambiguous term. It is what you make of it.
The physical connection doesn't matter. Wireless, mesh, wired, 10Gbit, whatever. It's just a medium change. Sure, faster allows you to do more, but it's just "more."
The protocols can change, and the applications running on it can change. It's still Internet. ISP's can come and go; doesn't matter.
It's already not all that anonymous, and adding special "identity management" just sounds redundant.
All crap.