 |
 |
 |
|
Friday, June 7, 2002
What would AKMA do?  That's a t-shirt I'd like to see. Meanwhile, we'll have to settle for a real good interview of AKMA by the Head Lemur. Unrelated A haunting (or haunted) poem by Chris Locke. I feel safer already David Weinberger: Homeland Security Page Sucks. Survey How about a blog cruise? Can you hand me my arm please? No, I'm not bleeding. Pubdomain Bread: You know you're doing the right thing when studio execs go out of their way to tell the world that "there's nothing to see here, move along." Learning to cook outdoors Dave started a bit of a ruckus yesterday. J.D. responded here. I've got a few things to say too (mostly about the economics of big-J journalism, which to me are the deeper issue and which are far more threatened than they appear); but while I'm busy getting that (and other stuff) together I'll point to Eric Norlin's latest, where he says,
I'm wondering, though: is the whole "media industry" trying to kill the Net? Or is it mostly the MPAA and the RIAA? I think most newspaper publishers don't understand the Net well enough to want to kill it. Magazine publishers are too varied for a single characterization. Commercial television is hostile to the extent it's controlled by the Disneys of the world, but those people don't control it entirely. Cable TV is partly hostile, but not across the board (Cox, my own provider, is possibly the most enlightened among a bad breed). The phone companies are too busy trying to unfuck themselves. Commercial radio is dominated by the Clear Channel, one creepiest companies on the Big Board, but I'm not sure any of the big radio broadcasters, including NPR, have a clue to what the Net is about. Echostar seems to be the only satellite company with any mojo these days, and all they seem to care about is distributing TV. This may seem a bit off-topic, but it isn't: we need to be clear about the difference between real venalities and gargantuan cluelessness. What Eisner, Rosen and Valenti want to do to the Net verges on the satanic. What Knight-Ridder did to their their papers' Web sites, including all their journalists' blogs, was just flat-out fucking clueless. It deserves a corporate Darwin Award. Eisner & friends aren't stupid. They got the DMCA passed, they're controlling more than a few agendas, and their attitude toward the Net is paranoid and murderous. What they're up to is the real story. It'll be interesting to see who covers it, and how. Blogjam I just like that headine and wanted to use it somewhere. Unrelated: Kevin Werbach on The conseusus that no one agrees on:
Externalities Thanks to John Engler for pointing out that there are ways to get Mozilla to respect mail clients other than its own. I haven't tried it (looks pretty ugly), but it's nice to know it can be done. Just a warning Don't mess around with Howard, cuz ya might have to mess with Joe. Or Bobby, though he doesn't look nearly as dangerous. Better now than when I'm there I'm in heavy prep for Munich and London next week, so the blogging might get slow. Part of the prep is trying not to repeat my Earthlink experience the last time I was in Europe — Switzerland, to be exact. None of the numbers worked. Ironically, when I travelled all over the world in the early-mid '90s, Compuserve was extremely handy. It wasn't fast (nothing then was), but it was ubiquitous. I dialed in from New Zealand, Australia, Italy, France, England, Spain, Brazil... it was terrific. Alas, it's long gone. If anybody has specific advice on dialing into Earthlink (or Xo, my main ISP) from Munich and London (or otherwise getting on the Net), lemme know.
There are responses to this message:
|
