Since nobody answered Brad's questions to the list, I'll jump in:
On Sun, 04 Feb 2001, Brad McCormick wrote:
> I forgot Cisco Systems in my list of corporate dependencies of the
> Internet. I believe that far more than half (perhaps almost all?)
> of all the "IP packets" (the little bundles of bits that are the building
> blocks of all Internet communication) go through Cisco routers.
The clou is that Cisco doesn't control (much less produce) the *content* --
unlike AOL, M$ and the various old media corporations.
> Populist communication media? How about Ham and CB radio?
Nah... that's just a hobby of a few geeks or truckers.
(and the 'baud rate' is way too low anyway)
> I am not an expert. So I'll ask some questions and see what I
> can learn from others:
>
> + To what extent do you think the Internet is dependent
> on big business and big government?
As I mentioned above, it makes sense to distinguish between content and
carrier. For content, the dependency is virtually inexistant (unless you
choose AOL or some such -- motto: "where do we want you to go today?").
For carrier (technical infrastructure), the dependency exists to some
extent (telephone lines, DNS etc.), but this poses no problems for most
practical purposes/people.
Both may change in the future, though. --> carpe diem!
> + What effects if any do you think such dependency or
> lack of dependency has on the role of the Internet
> in the lives of middle class and working class persons
> in the USA, Australia, Canada, etc.?
IMHO the effect is only limited by the amount of time and knowledge that
a user has at their hands. As it is, most of the potential time is being
sucked away by the 'old' media and the treadmill (selling one's workforce
in more or less involuntary activities) -- with the (not unintented) side-
effect that the large majority is practically *prevented* from discovering
this fascinating new world, and from realizing the potential of different
societies/politics, which would enable them to "make a difference" IRL. :-(
So we have the paradox situation that "in theory", people have the
opportunity to access 'life-changing' information, but "in practice"
they don't (at least not in sufficient numbers to turn the tide in a
"democracy"). Not yet ?
Yours in cyberspace,
Chris
