The Net Was Never Really Neutral
Shapiro: Why the net was never really neutral anyway and how both sides are missing the point; http://j.mp/dmB7ja
Shapiro: Why the net was never really neutral anyway and how both sides are missing the point; http://j.mp/dmB7ja
WSJ: The end of management. Corporate bureaucracy is becoming obsolete; http://j.mp/c0ANnd (via @heinz)
Schonfeld on Google-Verizon: Wireless is not different. You can not be half-open; http://j.mp/bGw6Ib
Diller on Google-Verizon proposal: Does not preserve net neutrality, full stop, or anything like it; http://j.mp/cJNRyh
Facebook breaks with Google: continues to support net neutrality for landline and wireless networks; http://j.mp/a4Yvzb
Wired: Why Google became a carrier-humping, net neutrality surrender monkey; http://j.mp/9shFsJ (via @Siegfried.Hirsch)
Jarvis on the Google-Verizon framework: Mobile is the Internet, will soon become a meaningless word; http://j.mp/dzpbQP
Google: We have acquired Metaweb, a company that maintains an open database of things in the world; http://j.mp/9PQFi7
Mobile web apps will replace native apps, at the latest when mobile computing power keeps growing; http://j.mp/bQQk2W
Naughton: 9 key steps to understanding the most powerful tool of our age, the Internet; http://j.mp/b7puKP
Naughton: “The strange thing about living through a revolution is that it’s very difficult to see what’s going on. … We’re living through a radical transformation of our communications environment. … Often, these interpretations are compressed into vivid slogans, memes or aphorisms: information ‘wants to be free’; the ‘long tail’ is the future of retailing; ‘Facebook just seized control of the internet’, and so on. … Here’s a radical idea: why not see if there’s anything to be learned from history? … So let’s conduct what the Germans call a Gedankenexperiment – a thought experiment. Imagine that the net represents a similar kind of transformation in our communications environment to that wrought by printing. What would we learn from such an experiment? … The most common – and still surprisingly widespread – misconception is that the internet and the web are the same thing. They’re not. … Disruption is a feature, not a bug. … The internet’s disruptiveness is a consequence of its technical DNA. … Think ecology, not economics. … Complexity is the new reality. … [Common] strategies are unlikely to work in our emerging environment, where intelligence, agility, responsiveness and a willingness to experiment (and fail) provide better strategies for dealing with what the networked environment will throw at you. … The network is now the computer. … The Web is changing. … Huxley and Orwell are the bookends of our future. … Our intellectual property regime is no longer fit for purpose. … The sad fact is that if there is a ‘truth’ about the internet, it’s rather prosaic: to almost every big question about the network’s long-term implications the only rational answer is the one famously given by Mao Zedong’s foreign minister, Zhou Enlai, when asked about the significance of the French Revolution: ‘It’s too early to say.’ It is.“
NYT: “Most media companies have stayed mute on the subject, but in an interview this week, the media mogul Barry Diller called the proposal a sham. … Mr. Diller asserted that the Google-Verizon proposal ‘doesn’t preserve net neutrality, full stop, or anything like it.’ Asked if other media executives were staying quiet because they stand to gain from a less open Internet, he said simply, ‘Yes.’“