John Hibbs wrote: > At 5:09 AM -0500 1/22/05, Stephen Snow wrote: > >> It is a double-edged sword. Where, on the one edge, a free society is >> based >> on the ability to have unfettered access to information of our >> choosing, on >> the other edge, a free society's longevity is linked to common >> experiences, >> common goals and common understandings, which requires some >> connection to common information. > > ' > In an event centric - and an increasingly nano-second world - isn't it > even more important for those with a crucial message - like access to > the Internet - to find ways to bind themselves with large events that > already have big audiences? (Note the military has not lost the > importance of same; thus taxpayer financed flyovers at the Super Bowl > - all to large applause.) > > What are WE doing to piggyback our message to such events? What Big > Name Messenger carries our cause to the kingpins of very large events? > > If money is the primer - and who can say that it is not? - which among > us has a puncture proof theory why increasing access isn't good for > the bottom line? > It is good for some bottom lines. Consider the cellphone. People without infrastructure of water and dependable electricity can use these. And they are sold, at a decent profit.
They are communications devices of increasing ability. And while I personally hate telephones, I can see that the future will revolve more around that technology than the desktop computer. Connecting people is really what we are talking about, isn't it? -- Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxgazette.com http://www.a42.com http://www.worldchanging.com http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net "Criticize by creating." — Michelangelo _______________________________________________ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
