Where to go Next?

After all this discussion of web 2.0 we have finally come to the question of, is the web dead? This would seem like an odd question after contemplating so many issues surrounding Web 2.0. Yet after reading the article, "The Web is dead. Long Live the Internet" by Chris Anderson, and Michael Wolff, it is the perfect question. I like this article because it gives two sides of the story, one blaming us for why the web is dead, and one blaming them.

"HTML data delivered via the http protocol on port 80 — accounts for less than a quarter of the traffic on the Internet … and it’s shrinking." I found this quote stunning. With all the talk of Web 2.0, when you see this it’s very interesting. People using the web only account for a quarter of the people in total. This means that many more people are only using the internet as a way of transportation and not for the browser itself. Many people are in closed gardens.  "A technology is invented, it spreads, and a thousand flowers bloom, and then someone finds a way to own it, locking out others. It happens every time." This quote is also very interesting because it describes any new technology at its beginnings. This does not exclude Web 2.0. It then questions web 2.0 itself. The way people use the internet is always changing, so will web 2.0 changes to try to capture these closed garden areas.

"We stare at the spinning buffering disks on our YouTube videos rather than accept the Faustian bargain of some Comcast/Google QoS bandwidth deal that we would invariably end up paying more for." It all comes back to Capitalism. This quote is perfect. We would much rather save money and wait half an hour to watch a five minute video than pay for a browser service that is fast and reliable. We try to save money, they try to make money. This is of course human preference. This may be changing though. It seems now like we want service over a free web. The web is not dead; we just need to see the difference between the web and the net. Every time you use an app, you are voting for quality instead of something that is free.

Piracy is Good!

The case of piracy comes alive once again, through the readings of Matt Mason. Chapter 2 and the outro of the pirates Dilemma make it all clear. Matt Mason makes the point that Piracy is a good thing rather than a bad thing. He gives the example of an offshore World War Two platform that was turned into a country. It was pirated. What I found interesting is that America is thought of as a founding country of Piracy. "The Founding Fathers pursued a policy of counterfeiting European inventions, ignoring global patents, and stealing intellectual property wholesale." (Mason 36) This is interesting to me because the United States is now one of the countries that fully try to remove piracy in all forms. The question I would like to ask here is does the United States of America truly know where they come from? I ask this because to know where you’re going you have to know where you came from.

Through these readings I have begun to fully understand why Piracy is so important. It’s a circle that is created when the system of capitalism creates things, and tries to protect them, and then these efforts to protect these things are fully undermined by Pirates. When these pirates do this it creates new markets. "Traditionally society has cut these pirates some slack and accepted that they were adding value to our lives, compromises were reached and enshrined in law, and as a result new industry boomed." (Mason 37). Pirates are always creating new markets because of the "red tape" that otherwise stops them.

We cannot forget though that Piracy has not always been an easy task. "Thanks to advances in technology, people everywhere are running rings around censors and regulators." (Mason 38). I have quoted Mason because before only a select few people could be pirates, but now with the help of web 2.0 is has opened vast amounts of people to the world of piracy. Since we have web 2.0 helping us tremendously with becoming pirates this brings me to a question. If Piracy is a good thing because it opens up new markets and completes the circle, and is as Mason describes "The backbone of public domain" doesn't that mean that Web 2.0 is needed for the advancement of our markets?

The main point made by Mason in these readings is that Piracy completes a vital circle in our economy. It creates new markets that would otherwise be unavailable because of restrictions. Radio, television, and music have all been housing for piracy. It makes the industry stronger because it is always coming up with new ways to get around the pirates, and avoid piracy. In conclusion, Piracy is good!