“Net neutrality” and “freedom to connect” might be loaded or vague terminologies; the label “Open Internet” is clearer, more effective, no way misleading. A group of Internet experts and pioneers submitted a paper to the FCC that defines the Open Internet and explains how it differs from networks that are dedicated to specialized services, and why that distinction is imortant. It’s a general purpose network for all, and can’t be appreciated (or properly regulated) unless this point and its implications are well understood. I signed on (late) to the paper, which is freely available at Scribd, and which is worth reading and disseminating even among people who don’t completely get it. I think the meaning and relevance of the distinction will sink in, even with those who don’t have deep knowledge of the Internet and, more generally, computer networking. The key point is that “the Internet should be delineated from specialized services specifically based on whether network providers treat the transmission of packets in special ways according to the applications those packets support. Transmitting packets without regard for application, in a best efforts manner, is at the very core of how the Internet provides a general purpose platform that is open and conducive to innovation by all end users.”
Press release:
Numerous Internet and technology leaders issued a joint statement last night encouraging the FCC to expand its recent analysis of open Internet policy in a newly fruitful direction.
In the statement, they commend the agency’s recent request for input on “Two Underdeveloped Issues in the Open Internet Proceeding” for its making possible greater recognition of the nature and benefits of the open Internet — in particular, as compared to “specialized services.” In response to the FCC’s request, their submission illustrates how this distinction dispels misconceptions and helps bring about more constructive insight and understanding in the “net neutrality” policy debate.
Longtime network and computer architecture expert David Reed comments in a special blog posting: “It is historic and critical [to] finally recognize the existence of ‘the Open Internet’ as a living entity that is distinct from all of the services and the Bureaus, all of the underlying technologies, and all of the services into which the FCC historically has partitioned little fiefdoms of control.”
Another signer, John Furrier of SiliconANGLE, has publicized the statement, stating “the future Internet needs to remain open in order to preserve entrepreneurship and innovation.”
The statement’s signers are listed below. Please reply to me, Seth Johnson (seth.p.johnson@gmail.com), to request contact information for those available for comment.
Very interesting……Jobs sees the same things as other leaders, but he perceives them differently.
The key to thinking differently is perceiving things differently. To perceive things differently, you must be exposed to divergent ideas, places and people. This forces your brain to make connections it otherwise might miss. Steve Jobs has done this his entire life. He dropped out of college so he could “drop in” to classes that really interested him, such as calligraphy, whose lessons would come back to him years later when he designed the Mac, the first personal computer with beautiful fonts. Jobs wanted the Apple II to be the first personal computer people used in their homes, so he sought inspiration for it in the kitchen appliance aisle at Macy's. And when he hired musicians, artists, poets and historians on the original Macintosh team, he was again exposing himself to new experiences and novel ways of looking at problems.
You have to bombard your brain with new and novel experiences.
Thomas Friedman, the New York Times columnist, recently wrote that America's core competency is its ability to attract, develop and unleash creative talent. He suggested that what America needs if it is to emerge from the Great Recession even stronger than before is more Jobs–Steve Jobs. That sounds good on paper, but how does Steve Jobs do it? How did Apple‘s chief executive pioneer the personal computer, revive the Apple brand in 1997 when it was close to bankruptcy and grow Apple into the most valuable tech company in the world? That's the question I took on in writing my new book, The Innovation Secrets of Steve Jobs.
Billions of people participate in online social activities. Most users participate as readers of discussion boards, searchers of blog posts, or viewers of photos. A fraction of users become contributors of user-generated content by writing consumer product reviews, uploading travel photos, or expressing political opinions. Some users move beyond such individual efforts to become collaborators, forming tightly connected groups with lively discussions whose outcome might be a Wikipedia article or a carefully edited YouTube video. A small fraction of users becomes leaders, who participate in governance by setting and upholding policies, repairing vandalized materials, or mentoring novices. We analyze these activities and offer the Reader-to-Leader Framework with the goal of helping researchers, designers, and managers understand what motivates technology-mediated social participation. This will enable them to improve interface design and social support for their companies, government agencies, and non-governmental organizations. These improvements could reduce the number of failed projects, while accelerating the application of social media for national priorities such as healthcare, energy sustainability, emergency response, economic development, education, and more.
Recommended Citation
Preece, Jennifer and Shneiderman, Ben (2009) “The Reader-to-Leader Framework: Motivating Technology-Mediated Social Participation,” AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction (1) 1, pp. 13-32
Available at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/thci/vol1/iss1/5
Phi Beta Iota: Eugene Garfield gave us citation analysis via the Institute for Scientific Information, and Dick Klavans and company have given us the (fragmented) web of knowledge. Top commercial intelligence practitioners have long known that published experts can lead to unpublished experts without which ground truth cannot be determined. If citations are the “things” that can be measured, “relationships” or “transactions” are the intangibles between the spaces, the Ying of the Yang. This article is important in part because it coincides with MajGen Robert Scales, USA (Ret) view that WWI was about chemistry, WWII was about physics, WWIII was about information, and WWIV is about human factors.
In what i2 called a “multiyear scheme of fraud and industrial espionage,” Palantir knowingly used fraudulently obtained software to design new intelligence products that would help Palantir compete directly and…
One of the most interesting open source information documents in some time….the day will come when the beltway bandits are brought to justice as well, one can only hope that happens before they go bankrupt.
Within those, the two below are the most interesting. The second was used in a discussion between Buckminster Fuller and the Russian leadership, to show how a global electrical grid could be achieved that would eradicate the current 50% loss from source to end-user.
Within those, the two below are the most interesting. The second was used in a discussion between Buckminster Fuller and the Russian leadership, to show how a global electrical grid could be achieved that would eradicate the current 50% loss from source to end-user.
