Open Media: Taking Old Fartism Down 195
This youth domination has been true of no other mass medium -- adolescents and post-adolescents shaping an information structure they know more about than almost any sub-set of adults.
A first-rate piece in Brill's Content 's August issue, by writer Austin Bunn, reports on a soon-to-be-released HomeNet study, scheduled for publication this winter in the journal Human Computer Interaction. It documents in society-at-large what's been clear for some time on the most vibrant Open Media websites -- online, the young are shaping information culture. They are the gurus, visionaries, technicians, repairpersons and authorities on the Information Revolution. There are plenty of older Net visionaries and users as well, but they don't dominate open media in the way the middle-aged have always dominated information before.
While politicians and journalists have been clucking about sex, isolation and the decline of Western civilization, younger people -- teens through 30s especially -- have been acquiring and mastering computing technology. So-called "games," messaging systems, and free music and software-sharing sites have served as their universities and career ladders, indoctrinating a generation into the most sophisticated and powerful information systems ever seen. The spread of broadband online access to universities and private homes has been a huge spur, driving younger people online, providing the opportunity to learn and experiment once they got there. Napster is one well-known example. So are ICQ, Gnutella and C-Net, and this site. Lesser-known and more specialized OM sites include chickclickers.com and myvideogames.com, or the pioneeer weblog www.camworld.com.
This adolescent and post-adolescent technical expertise, writes Bunn, has translated into a broader cultural savvy, upending the traditional power balance, inspiring college students to found their own companies, reducing parents, journalists, teachers, CEO's, teachers and other adult authority figures to bystanders. For generations, Dad was the household figure who knew how things worked. Now he and Mom have to ask their kids. For even longer, media was run by aging and imperious white men who decided what was news and what wasn't. Today, these media movers and shakers are desperate, scrambling to find anybody who can tell them what's going on. Usually, the person they're asking is under 30.
These Open Media sites -- weblogs, webpages, messaging systems, software -- sharing and research communities -- are increasingly founded by the young, a trend with mind-boggling implications. These kids have grown up with the Internet; they know intuitively how to use technology. And they have radically different cultural, political, technological and social sensibilities.
According to a May study by the Pew Center for Media Research, roughly half of American families now have Internet access. There are also more Americans turning 18 now than ever before, points out William Strauss, author of "Millenials Rising: The Next Generation." The approximately 78 million Americans aged 21 and younger account for 28 per cent of the population. What TV was to the Boomers, computers are to their children. This evolutionary demographic is behind much of the rise in Open Media.
Whatever their commonality as members of the Open Media, the differences in these emerging sites are striking. Open Media embraces interactivity -- they reflect ideas, commentary and information from a wide range of sources, especially their readers. They don't merely provide the occasional link to other sites on the Web, as traditional sites. Rather, they use the Net infrastructure to make links an organic part of their content. They aggressively ask their readers to help set editorial agendas. Each reader becomes a highly-wired reporter, foraging on his or her own favorite sites, seeking particular kinds of information.
Using mostly digital transmissions, stories get spotted, suggested and linked to by readers. Readers also have access to the editorial figures on the website. Through story input, moderation or discussion forums they have a say in how the site operates.
Rather than divide a site into pay-versus-free areas, revenue comes from advertising, the sale of specialized merchandise, or other sources. But the information itself is almost always free, moving continuously through the site like a river. These young new media entrepeneurs embrace popular culture as strongly as technology. They gather almost continuously to discuss movies, TV shows, certain magazines and books.
Diversity is rarely as big an issue as it is for their parents. Possibly because of the anonymity possible online, or perhaps because of natural social evolution, differences in race, religion and sexual orientation rarely come up. They are comfortable talking about sex. They've experienced almost total freedom of expression online, much more than older Americans have. If this trend continues, this generation may free itself --- and its editorial agenda -- from many of the issues that dominated their parents' lives of their parents.
They are almost totally disconnected from the mainstream political and media system -- the network newscasts, major newspapers, TV talk shows and political events that dominate conventional, closed media. Such subjects rarely surface on Open Media sites. Yet despite the inherently democratic nature of their media creations, their lack of interest in the larger political structure is already posing problems and challenges.
Young Netizens seem flabbergasted when the adult value system collides with and changes their world -- in arguments over copyright and Napster or the passage of laws like the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. They don't seem to grasp that their lack of political acumen and organizing skills not only make such legislation possible but increasingly inevitable in encounters with a legal and political system dominated by those older and non-technologically-centered.
Understandably, the architects of this new media are arrogant. At the epicenter of one of the most revolutionary technological advances ever, they know much more about it than parents, teachers, journalists or politicians. They discovered early on that many of the people who lecture about them and their culture are clueless, and they learned to ignore moral posturing and hectoring. As a result, they'll form their own moral code in their own good time, apart from conventional social, religious and cultural values. As yet, no single value system has emerged beyond some libertarian notions about government and freedom.
They are free-marketeers and democrats. They are comfortable making money, unabashed about taking entrepeneurial risks (the Brill's Content article focuses on 13-year-old Ilya Anopolsky, founder of the Web-design firm Devotion, Inc., as well as Michael Furdyk, 18-year-old founder and business development manager of BuyBuddy.com.
Although today's Net-connected youth are denounced for being technology-addicted or socially isolated, the truth is they use the Net and the Web to communicate with one another, not to disconnect. For them, the Net is a social as well as a technological medium. They gather in chat rooms, on mailing lists and messaging systems and form enduring relationships that frequently last for years.
This generation of media engineers celebrates the accessibility of traditionally out-of-reach information. They have literally grown up downloading music, text, and almost every other conceivable form of intellectual property. Branded "pirates" by corporatists and politicians, they grasp what much of American society hasn't yet comprehended -- they posess the technological skills to gather all the information they want, and no authority has yet amassed an equivalent amount of expertise to slow them down or stop them.
Cliche (Score:5)
Bullshit.
If you still believe this in the year 2000, you are delusioned. Severely. The "old farts" are running the brick-and-mortar institutions that are either kicking the e-tailer's asses or buying them out. How can this be if they are run by stupid "old fart luddites"?
Oh yeah, and look at the brain-drain of employees running from crashing internet start-ups to work at more solid electronics companies or even "old economy" companies. Yeah, if you believe the cliche at the top of this post, you probably thought that XYZ start-up with the 17-23 year old founder was going to skyrocket.
Sorry, but the reality is that age doesn't matter. I know 50 year-old company CEO's/Presidents who are more 'net-savvy than many e-commerce consultants they talk to. If you're intelligent and "have the right stuff" it doesn't matter what your age is, you will rise above your competitors every time.
Break point in the skills (Score:1)
My children won't axiomatically know more about technology than I will, but they will be much more comfortable with the current expression of that technology, because they won't be comparing it with anything else.
People who have stopped learning are the people that say "kids are so clever". Kids are not clever. I have not yet met a "kid" who was clever as regards computing/technology. On the other hand, I've met loads of kids who are enthuiastic and undaunted by initial failure. Perhaps that is because they don't appreciate the consequences. Anyway, they don't let the problem beat them, and they eventually find a solution - whereas many many "adults" just give up.
So perhaps instead of seeing a fundamental shift in favour of youth, we are simply seeing a function of the take-up of new technologies. How many Industrial Revolution adults managed to make sense of their new tasks? How many "kids" were unfased by it all?
Re:Poser, I mix Jolt and espresso (Score:1)
--
Re:Media is media is media (Score:1)
Re:This is especially bad.. (Score:1)
To quote the old folks reasoning: "if you have to ask how much it is you can't afford it"
regards.
Spending time on old farts like Katz (Score:1)
The funny thing is that nobody does this. (At least plenty of people don't). Even though most people disagree with him, the Karma scores, and the number of reples tell that he is one of the most poplular writers on slashdot. It's so nice to have someone to talk about.
Thank you Katz for creating all this fuzz every time you post an article :)
Insightful comment about Open Media (Score:2)
They aggressively ask their readers to help set editorial agendas.
Well, this shows that /. is definitely not Open Media, since the /. staff seem to completely ignore the views of their readers and choose stories based on their own biases.
---
Jon E. Erikson
the old rock and roll myth (Score:2)
bollocks. it was the old guys who sold the records.
it's always the "old farts" who do the rebelling really: they're the ones with the money/business sense/influence/access to mass amounts of mememaking media that make the differences.
The net is just the same. All this groundbreaking teenage open media madness is facilitated by the old farts - without them, their nice backbone making,computer building,satellite launching, venture funding fartiness we'd all be just writing on neighbourhood walls.
Re:I'd like to propose a splinter group (Score:1)
Re:kids today.... (Score:1)
What do these 'hip' young people know (Score:1)
The same arguments apply to users of email who know nothing about computers -- are they wiser than people who use telephones but don't know about electronics?
In the end, Mr. Katz is praising the 'new generation' because they are used to getting exactly what they want and are reaping the benefits of many great engineers of the past couple of generations.
Re:Cliche (Score:1)
Re:Cliche - look at the time (Score:1)
my $0.02
T
Re:I'd like to propose a splinter group (Score:1)
I would like to apologize to America, and also to my family, who has bravely stood by me through this trying time. I look forward to the chance to move on with my life and put this whole ugly incident behind me.
Eh? (Score:2)
You are taking a leap here, acting like every 13-year old with net access is a brilliant little technologist. I suggest you visit chat rooms and web pages made by 13-year olds.
So-called "games," messaging systems, and free music and software-sharing sites have served as their universities and career ladders
Playing Quake, chatting, and downloading mp3s is hardly educating our youth. Kids used to mostly waste time watching TV, now they use computers to goof off. It's more interactive, yeah, but how is this a "university" or "career ladder"?
Using mostly digital transmissions, stories get spotted, suggested and linked to by readers. Readers also have access to the editorial figures on the website. Through story input, moderation or discussion forums they have a say in how the site operates.
I guess this is your take on what a flamewar is.
They are free-marketeers and democrats. They are comfortable making money, unabashed about taking entrepeneurial risks
Yeah, it's fine they make money while they are young, but if they grow up and start corporations, they are the root of all evil, right Jon?
Partly true (Score:1)
Seriously though, marketing is all about feedback. Our clients are giddy when they get email from site visitors. It's just unfortunate that ad banners and spam have coloured everyone's opinion of 'marketing' online... The Internet is a 2-way street, you're right, but I think businesses are more open to that than you're giving them credit for. It's up to us as professional geeks to steer them in the proper direction.
The Divine Creatrix in a Mortal Shell that stays Crunchy in Milk
Score -1 (Offtopic, troll, flamebait, etc. ) (Score:1)
Old vs. Young... an example... (Score:2)
The older group feels the prices shouldn't be included so as to get people to call in, and thus allow our salesmen to hook them.
The younger generation (I'm 24 so I'll include myself) feels that the prices should be included with a "prices subject to change" waiver. This way we save our salesmen's time for potential clients rather than giving out directions, prices, and quotes over the phone. (i.e. they are actually out there selling)
Re:This is new? (Score:1)
Re:new world order? (Score:1)
Most things can be done without ever actually seeing the other parties involved... but always remember that the best thing can't be done that way...
Ben Chadwick - Editor, Zero Future/Post-Collegiate Malaise
Re:Open Fartism (Score:5)
For Katz to imply that old media is doomed (in spite of the wild success of printed magazines targeting every imaginable niche market), and that sites like Teen Movie Critic [dreamagic.com] are the future is so silly that I can't even take it seriously enough to thoughtfully point out how horribly, horribly wrong so much of his column is... so I will just fire off a couple of smart-assed questions.
Does the term "Open Media" imply that we are welcome to take his rough drafts, make a few changes, and sell them as our own under the GPL?
If there is such a thing as "Old Fartism", what exactly does an Old Fartist believe?
Is there also a New Fartism? Or perhaps a Reformed Fartism?
Katz, does it bother you that your whole column is dripping with the same sappy sentiment as the opening lines of "The Greatest Love of All" by Whitney Houston?
Wow, you're really great, Mr. Obvious! (Score:1)
Once again, I find myself wading through screen after screen of breathlessly eloquent Katzian hyperbole, only to find that I've summarized it in my head to a simple sentence or two that should be patently obvious to anyone with enough brain cells to type Slashdot's URL.
Every day we're standing in a wind tunnel
Facing down the future coming fast - Rush
well what do you expect (Score:1)
Re:Next generation (Score:1)
Heheh, so much for Gen-X (Score:1)
So new it's older than time... (Score:1)
A young buck takes on the aging bull
A flurry of horns and fur
There will be a new leader tonight.
Or maybe not.
Be patient with Jon... He's just starting to see the world for the first time.
- antoine
Spelling Nazi must be entagled in the eiderdown... (Score:1)
...'cause it's "aught". Not "ought".
Re:You moderate on crack! (Score:1)
:-)
Thanks!
I think this weekend I'm gonna break some new ground and moderate on inhalants, maybe soem rubber cement, then some toluene, and cap it off with some ether.
Next generation (Score:5)
Change or die time. (Score:1)
Sensemaking in your Open Media? Say wha?
Ironic (Score:1)
Re:Uh. No. (Score:1)
I guess these 'young' babes are creative enough to get my info, but they are still motivated by money, just like the old farts.
blessings,
first ? (Score:1)
man, was this a long text, I almost fell asleep
it's pretty interesting though..
Re:Change or die. (Score:1)
Re:Cliche (Score:1)
Katz has never had a clue in his life and will probably never *ever* get one.
Don't they lock up people like this that just want to gibber to hear themselves 'gibber'?
NFC
--
Trolling Katz (Score:1)
Actually, most of the anti-katz posts here are concieved, developed, and dominated by the young, especially college kids with access to high-speed bandwidth and teenagers with lots of time and expertise.
Watch where you're walking - you might step on a troll!
yep (Score:1)
Re:Media is media is ? not media? (Score:3)
Here's an analogy: Humans live on a planet. But that planet is quite specific, and it forms us a lot. That planet influences who and what we are, to an inordinate amount. Similarly, the medium influences the information it carries.
Katz may make radical comments occasionally. OK, he rants all the time
I don't think that the age divide is "an extremist invention" or "incited hatred". It's entirely natural for people to try to differentiate themselves from their parents and the accepted social order when growing up; this was always so. The rapid change we as a species are experiencing means that it's easier to see those "age divides". It also means that it isn't always necessary to eventually adapt to your parents - the change just catches up on you.
Katz is quite right in suggesting that this may pose problems. The general public's interest in politics is falling... but how should democrasy work without interested individuals? What happens when the existing system impedes change?
I'm not saying that all old people are old farts... heck, my father works in artificial intelligence and alpha infomatica, and my grandfather developed an one of the first functioning solar car and is still a developer in the photovoltaic industry. But we're talking trends here. The trend is that young people know more about computers and such technology than others.
We need to think about that, not stuff it in a closet and pretend it isn't so. We need to make sure that the inevitable age divide doesn't turn into "incited hatred" and social disarray.
Denial is not a solution, merely another problem.
Re: Slashdot's very existence is opposed to you (Score:1)
Why do you read Slashdot?
I read it to scan a vast amount of media aimed at me. Its a clear concise summary of things my peers think would be interesting to me. Everyday it posts a slew of articles at me (Quantity). I read a quick summary of these articles and with the help of the Internet I go DIRECTLY to the source of the news(Quality).
Your problem seems to be that you've read news from Time for so long that you cannot accept the change in media presentation. New media throws everything at me, and I research what I find interesting, STRAIGHT from the source.
Do you really find Time's third person biased summaries of value....of course you do you were raised to believe all of its media. Thanks to the Internet the new generation can go straight to the source with the click of a button(tm). Don't get me wrong Time did everything right. In the day when news needed to be brought to your home it did it. But today, I can get my own news, thanks.
Boiling it all down... (Score:4)
It's this point that old media doesn't get. I've worked in ad agencies for years, and not one of them accepts that to be part of the Net, you've got to play by the Net's rules.
Chris @ chrisworth.com [chrisworth.com]
young vs. old (Score:2)
Here's some new open media (Score:1)
let's get one thing clear .... (Score:2)
No, Jon, I promise you, they are games.
Hey, isn't Jon an Old Fart? (Score:1)
Hey Katz! My father was the one who got me interested in computers in the first place, when I was four. He'd been interested since 1972 or thereabouts, but, of course, he's on Old Fart.
Katz plays to the crowd so much, I feel vaguely... shafted. I want my five minutes back! For Bob's sake, Katz, next time you write an article, here's an idea: include some content! Got that?
Re:This is new? (Score:1)
Right. What exactly do you think a post-adolescent is? As the article states: College students... etc... I think 20 falls well within the scope of that article.
gitm
How much information is there actually on the net? (Score:2)
a) real solid researched information
b) user contributed discussion forums
c) binaries - pr0n, warez, mp3z etc..
d) portals & links to the above
I'm starting to come to the conclusion that it builds up in a sort of triangle formation. There's probably about a megabyte or two or real information, and at the bottom there are 500 million sites all pointing to that.
When I speak nowadays to people starting
Paper media know fine well that the internet, for all it's petabytes of information, is more about peer-to-peer communication than solid hard information. What they dont realise is that more and more the two are becoming interchangable - who here looks to www.deja.com/usenet when they have hardware troubles before looking at the manufacturers website?!
Whippersnappers, con-sarn-it (Score:1)
Dag-nabbit!
Ben Chadwick - Editor, Zero Future/Post-Collegiate Malaise
hrmm.. (Score:2)
wish
---
Re:Open Fartism (Score:1)
Ben Chadwick - Editor, Zero Future/Post-Collegiate Malaise
Re:WHICH "generation" bucko? (Score:1)
As far as assuming I am young based on my alleged stupidity, I will assume you're an asshole based on your post but realize that that may not be the case.
Re:well what do you expect (Score:1)
The New World? (Score:1)
I live in Israel, and if I had watched CNN and other news channels I might have grown to hate Arabic people mainly because I only know them from what I am forced to hear, not what I want to hear. BUT...I don't watch the news channels all day long...I go to mIRC and chat. And guess what, I met other people from supposedly "hostile"(?) countries, and made friends with them... The Internet can change opinions, don't trust everything you hear, don't be passive and just sit in front of the TV all day. The Internet isn't just "news", it can be a window for a whole new way to look at life. well, that's it, yell at me if you like, don't yell if you don't want to
Re:Heheh, so much for Gen-X (Score:2)
Us versus Them ... puuleeaze... (Score:1)
In this case, Katz's article seeks to position the current situation as "old-versus-young". The emphasis on the "versus". Old folks are standing in the way of young folks' progress.
In the real world(tm), emphasizing antagonism between groups never produces progress. So why write articles that seek to popularize these sort of ideas? Is it because Katz was badly mistreated as a child and needs to make sure that he doesn't get along with people of a different age group?
In the new media, 18-year olds are going to have to work with 40-year olds eventually. It's not like everyone under 30 can cut themselves off from society. Who does the accounting and has surplus cash that the younger folks use for their startup money? Who produces the goods that eCommerce sites sell? Do people like Katz really think that the younger generation is so naive that they believe that they can suddenly exist on their own, autonomously, like some weird version of Brave New World?
And before you start flaming, yes, I'm under 30, and yes, I work in the web+new-media industry. Okay, now you can start flaming.
Re:anyone who enjoys jon katz.. (Score:2)
Re:Ceritifed Proof that Jon Katz is an Old Fart (Score:1)
So is a song.
I personally can't take Katz's comments on Napster seriously because he's not willing to put his "art" out there for free.
Re:Media is media is ? not media? (Score:2)
But, as The Doctor points out in "The Mind Robber", fiction is powerless the moment you don't believe in it.
Re:Cliche (Score:4)
so the young are the ones making the most news. that doesn't mean that more people read their "open news" than CNN or the Times (companies that are run by old grey-hairs). yes, the young usually have a better grasp on the technology, and the old grey hairs often hire those young under 30 yuppies, but they also put them in positions where the old grey hairs have the last say because they know how to make money with their product.
That doesn't mean that there aren't times that the young blood doesn't come up with the great idea to make tons of money, or totally replace the old. but just as the old has to learn to move with the young, the young has to learn that there are rules and that sometimes if you play by the rules, you come out much richer.
look at what happened with all of those internet IPO's started up by people that were in their early 20's. Most have gone belly-up or have hired old grey hairs to run their company.
Shows you that BOTH sides have something to learn, that the young won't replace the old, and that if you think Open Media is the next big thing, you're sadly mistaken because for the "New Media" to get recognized, it has to conform to "Old Media" rules and become part of the mainstream media.
Media is media is media (Score:5)
In many ways, it's like TCP/IP. You DON'T need to know all the little settings you can play with in the header to be able to call up a web page, or an FTP site. Even if you do, and you do submit bug fixes back to the TCP/IP stack maintainer, it really won't alter what you see on those web pages.
To hear Jon Katz talk, you'd believe that the Student Union in England never existed. That Radio Caroline and other infamous, long-lasting "pirate radio" were never there. That multicasting had never been developed. That no Special Interest Group has ever written it's own newspaper or run it's own community radio station.
To call anyone older than a teenager an "Old Fart" is not only extremely derogatory (older people were once teenagers themselves, and some are quite capable of matching any teenager on the planet for originality and creativity) but also extremely stupid, divisive, hostile and presumptuous.
The reason the generations don't usually get along is because of incited hatred between them, as if they were factions at war. But when you look at more "primitive" civilisations, you see cultures where there IS no generation war, where people trade and exchange thoughts WITHOUT REGARD for age, gender, or other modern extremist inventions.
And that's what the age divide IS. An extremist invention. It has NO place in a civilised society, bar that which we choose to give it.
IMHO, Jon Katz is becoming as hateful of the imagined enemy as he imagines the enemy to be of those he supports. I suggest seeing a doctor, as that degree of paranoia and hostility rarely does anything but grow. Especially in a mind that has been cultivated for it.
Re:Serious Reply (Score:2)
Huh? No gender? (Score:2)
I have to ask, why is GENDER missing from your list of things we have overcome with the advent of the OPEN MEDIA Katz???? I mean you DID reference chickclicks.com. But on the other hand, I do realize you usually sterotype geeks as being male.
Re:Ceritifed Proof that Jon Katz is an Old Fart (Score:2)
Re:anyone who enjoys jon katz.. (Score:2)
Re:On the nature of online news (Score:2)
Now if you're talking about general news wire services, that market is pretty well sewn up by the AP and the other guys like Reuters and Bloomberg. Our stuff appears online all the time. I don't honestly see a reason to create a strictly online service. Plus the financial overhead in creating such a broad service is just killer.
But if you're talking about original local reporting online, then I'd have to agree wholeheartedly. The Internet would be really great for alternatives to daily newspapers and local TV, but I can't think of anybody who's doing good local online journalism, and that's a shame.
Part of it is the financial model, of course. I think that one can survive as a strictly-content site, but just like traditional media startups, the burn rate is intense. You have to be willing to go at least four or five years, often longer, without profits. That happens with new magazines, newspapers and TV outlets all the time, and is not unique to the Internet.
And finally, I completely agree that there needs to be less press release journalism. But again, that's not a New Media problem. That's a problem for the whole news biz.
He's right (Score:2)
'young people', able to leverage the power of Open Media development will have their bugs continuously fixed - I bet today's under 30's will still be around in 30 years!
Finally, I'd like to make an uncalled for ad hominem attack on Jon Katz:
Jon, you're probably an OK guy and you're not stupid, but you just talk lazy populist crap most of the time. You pseudo reasoning annoys me. I make my living my thinking very precisely and getting things right. You make yours by waffling and making crude emotional appeal disguised as radical thought. Worst of all, you probably earn more than me.
Many Karmas have died to bring you this information.
He's talking about us (Score:2)
Re:He's right (Score:2)
I will now implode.
Thanks.
Dieter's Response to Jon Katz (Score:2)
Katz: ...and this new paradigm is signalling a shift in the demographics of this New Media elite who can...
Dieter: Jon Katz, I cannot parse what you are saying. What is this stream of word-like noise that comes from you?
Katz: ...death-knell of the old guard with the introduction of the freedom which information confers on those who will wield its awesome power...
Dieter: Jon Katz, your noise has become tiresome. Now is the time ven ve DANCE!
Amen to that, Dieter.
Re:Old vs. Young... an example... (Score:2)
Re:anyone who enjoys jon katz..Reasons to keep Jon (Score:2)
Re:What's wrong with old, white people? (Score:2)
While I don't respect Katz enough to attempt to explain his usage (he could ahve a bet on with someone on how often he can say it for all I know.) I will comment that while there is nothing inherently wrong with being any age, gender or race, there could be something wrong with an entire industry, particularly the news industry, being made up of only one demographic. After all, if every publisher and editor in chief of a major newspaper was a black pagan lesbian, would you wonder if your news was slanted? I know my news is slanted, because I occasionally go out and make the news then read how it is reported.
Obviously, there are exceptions to the "old white male" rule, and there are alternative news sources with different slants, but the point is largly valid in mainstream american news.
-Kahuna Burger
Re:kids today.... (Score:2)
Re:Open Fartism (Score:2)
Re:Youth vs. Idiocy (Score:2)
Plus they have "free" T1 connections at school and more time to surf.
Old fartism isn't the problem. (Score:2)
Deadlines and competition have meant this was an ideal more than a reality. News was never that good in the past, and it's nowhere that good now. Balance often comes down to finding somebody, anybody, with an opposing opinion no matter how stupid. Objectivity often boils down to the pretense that the writer has no opinion.
Despite the unattainability of this ideal, it's still important that somebody believes in them. The very point of having values and ideals is to put some kind of break on slavish obedience to pure expedience.
In any case, old fartism isn't the problem. It's the pressure of expedience that any commercial entity feels.
Look at the quality of "news" in slashdot. How often do you read an article that is really, really good? Usually it's just shunting some news from some other source, like a glorified and somewhat biased clipping service. I wouldn't want to live in a world where my only source of information was slashdot articles. It's the noncommercial contributors, the readers who comment, that create 99% of the value of slashdot.
There are niches in the information market like any other. Organizations like the New York Times and the Washington Post create extra value for their product by putting more effort into the ideals of journalism. More sensational papers try to create value by sensationalism, for which there is a certain market.
The thing about new media is that it really reduces the capital investment needed to create "information". Economics tells us that the production of something is determined by the balance of cost to produce and price it will fetch. Traditional journalistic values are expensive, whereas sensationalism is cheap to produce. So, the new media really opens the way for lots of bottom feeders, as well as innovative low budget operations.
Ok, I give up. Just what IS the deal here? (Score:2)
What the hell did Katz have to say in this article that's different from anything he's written since the Hellmouth series?
I've read through the whole damn article (not skimmed, READ), and I can't find a single new thing that he has to say here. There doesn't seem to be a single drop of new content, nothing that he hasn't already posted attacking the DMCA or defending Napster or defending geeks.
Can somebody please let me know what this article has to recommend it? Please? Thanks.
Ceritifed Proof that Jon Katz is an Old Fart (Score:3)
did katz write this about himself? (Score:2)
(3 points and double word score for using the word bucko)
Example: Logistics (Score:2)
My father used to work for the Santa Fe. He worked as an "area sales rep", which meant that he was partially responsible for performing logistics work--that is, figuring out the cheapest way to handle product redistribution. Logistics as a science has reached such a high level of perfection in this country pre-Internet that we can ship millions of tons of rock ore from one point to another that cannot be warehoused, and have the trainloads of material that takes days to move from one part of the country to another show up moments before the ore needs to be dumped into the smelters for processing, without either delaying the smelters or wasting thousands of dollars on an idle train car.
When various web companies were initially started, they started on the extremely brash assumption that they could undercut the traditional "brick and mortar" operations by enough of a margin that they could not only make a larger profit, but be able to offer a larger product selection for a smaller price than any traditional operation. How? Through waving the "magic wand" of the Internet.
The other day my father was watching a news special where they showed order fulfillment through Amazon.com, the leader in this "using high tech to squeeze even more profits than old brick-and-mortar operations." And how were they filling orders? By having individual shoppers walk up and down large isles full of product pushing the equivalent of shopping carts.
My father died laughing! There are tons of ways you can handle order fulfillment--and Amazon picked the single most inefficient mechanism one can possibly use to fill small orders from a large stock selection. Hell, in about an hour doing a quick Internet search on the topic of "warehouse fulfillment logistics" I came up with a half-dozen papers on how to fill these orders which would improve their effectiveness by at least 50%!
An interesting conversation I had with a vulture^H^H^H^H^H^H venture capitalist told me why venture money is pulling out of "pure-play" internet retailers like Amazon.com. The first reason is that frankly, logistics has been brought to such a high art in this country that most companies weren't spending more than a few percent on logistics anyways. That is, for a $25.00 book, perhaps only about $1.00 was spent moving that book from the printers into a box waiting to be shipped by UPS on the loading docks of a mail order warehouse. So even if Amazon could perform it's logistics 20% more efficiently in order fulfillment at it's distribution warehouse, the best they could hope to squeeze out of shipping a $25.00 book is perhaps 10 cents, assuming 50% of the logistics costs is order fulfillment.
Meaning for Amazon to make a million dollars in profit from a 20% increase in efficiency in an already extremely efficient logistics situation, they would have to sell a quarter billion dollars worth of product.
Second, the venture money has realized that many of these "new economy businesses" are comprised of people who frankly think the "old farts" of the "old economy" have nothing to teach them. And so they screw up the very stuff we brought to a very high science in the 1970's! For example, I ordered four products from Amazon.com, and they charged me $10.00 shipping and handling--yet sent me four separate shipments from four separate warehouses (rather than consolidating the order and reducing shipping costs)--for a grand total of $22.00 in overall shipping costs, not counting handling and order picking costs! That is, Amazon, in thier "high-tech order fulfillment efficiency", lost $12.00 on my order because they can't get their logistics shit together!
Now perhaps this was an exceptional situation. And in one sense, I'm glad I got my order earlier than later. And I shouldn't be picking so heavily on Amazon, given that I own about $2K of their stock, and given that Amazon is actually better than most e-commerce sites.
But it does illustrate the fact that a lot of the "new economy gurus" out there are so full of bullshit they can't even pronounce logistics, much less deal with it. It's rather sad, given the fact that the Santa Fe did research more than 30 years ago which shows that logistics can represent as much as 40% of the total operational costs of a typical manufacturing or distribution company. And having good logistics can represent savings of around 15% up to 50% of the overall logistics costs--which for a company the size of Amazon represents hundreds of millions in overall operational costs.
And that's one of the biggest things the "old farts" bring to the table: about 10 to 30 years of experience on the logistics of order fulfillment, manufacturing, redistribution, and all those other things that can quite frankly mean the difference between making a good profit and declaring bankrupcy.
Didn't Toffer predict this in 1980? (Score:2)
I think everyone here ought to reread Alvin Toffler's famous book THE THIRD WAVE, released in 1980. He said that the rapid improvements in communications technology will break the cycle of people depending on a few sources of information from large, centralized media companies--the "demassification" of mass media.
The fact we have rapid growth of specialized magazines, newspapers, 70-plus channel cable TV systems, 200-plus channel personal satellite TV receivers, and the explosive growth of the commercial Internet and its ability to cater information to almost any need (look at the rise of everything the Drudge Report to even Slashdot) means that most people have the ability to get information from a variety of sources that would not have been imaginable even ten years ago.
And the Internet allows us to trade information and goods at a pace that is also unimaginable ten years ago. The rise of Napster has heavily upset the whole idea of "massified" distribution of music through our record companies, and the success of eBay has allowed anyone with a computer to trade any physical good without using a middleman.
In short, the rise of the commercial Internet has given what the Institutional school of economics calls increased choice, because we are no longer dependent on a few choices in terms of buying and selling goods. And our society can barely keep up with the change.
Change or die. (Score:5)
Jon, please don't change.
"Old Fartism"? (Score:2)
--
Open Media CANNOT replace Traditional Media (Score:2)
Whatever their commonality as members of the Open Media, the differences in these emerging sites are striking. Open Media embraces interactivity -- they reflect ideas, commentary and information from a wide range of sources, especially their readers. They don't merely provide the occasional link to other sites on the Web, as traditional sites.
Of course "Open Media" sites are interactive... thats half the fun! However, this is all they provide, since open media sites DO NOT provide news. Katz continues:
They [Open Media Sites] are almost totally disconnected from the mainstream political and media system -- the network newscasts, major newspapers, TV talk shows and political events that dominate conventional, closed media. Such subjects rarely surface on Open Media sites.
This is an outright lie. CNN and the New York Times, for example, are two top closed media journals. On any given day, I'm apt to see articles from their sites referred to on slashdot. The issues that they discuss are precisely the issues for discussion on sites like this one. We happen to use /. as a filter, but we conect to the same "closed media" sources.
"Open Media" will never supplant traditional media. Traditional news outlets have something that "Open Media" can never match --- reporters, and lots of them. These reporters are the people who make it there work to relate to us the happenings of the world, and they will remain for us the primary source of information for a long time.
Why not a Poll? (Score:2)
I strongly agree with you. So, why not a poll?
Look, if we really believe in the UberGeekdom that Jon promotes, we geeks should have the right, nay, the duty, to vote him down.
And, if we just think that we're not in favor of his writing, perhaps because it reminds us of the worst excesses of the Bulwer-Lytton contest "It was a dark and stormy night...", we should still get our say.
That said, I don't think casting aspersions on the man due to any perceived gender attraction is proper. For all I know, I'd like the guy if I met him in person, it's the writing and the twisting of the truth that I object to.
[sigh, here goes another 20 mod points
Re:Old vs. Young... an example... (Score:2)
IBM used to have a policy that they didn't post prices on-line. (I once told one of their sales reps "Get with the program" over this.) Now, you can order just about anything IBM makes short of a mainframe on-line. IBM's people are now doing more system integration and less iron-pushing.
Never send a man to do an artillery shell's job.
stupid Katz (Score:2)
"Old fart" predates punk rock. (Score:2)
Old Fart predates punk rock.
It even predates me (who is one). B-)
new world order? (Score:3)
Sometimes I get really tired of hearing how "big and exciting" the Internet has become. This isn't about the Internet, or Open Source, or e-commerce, or anything like that. We're experiencing a giant shift in our modern philosophy. Thirty years ago, who would have thought that this much information would be free?
This social transformation kicks ass, and I for one am really damn excited about the future.
Serious Reply (Score:4)
The problem is that it is the old geezers who are running the Time magazine, and as such they know how to write, how to formulate an article, etc. What comes out of this Open Media is garbage because it's run by a bunch of kiddies who know nothing of content and quality. It pure-and-simple rubbish - quantity, and not quality.
Of course, this observation isn't as sensationalistic or otherwise hypeable as an Open Media article. There aren't any broad sweeping futuristic predictions in all of this. So, to make this sound more sensationalistic, I'd like to say that JonKatz is a horrible writer. Who taught you how to write?
This is new? (Score:4)
As I recall, the Steves, Jobs and Wozniak were both post-adolescent 30 years ago when they started building their Apple computers. Also, Bill Gates was in a similar position when he went to work designing a DOS for the Altair.
Oh, I'm sorry, maybe I shouldn't mention people that actually made money. :P
Having had a personal computer and been highly involved in the computer 'world' for the last 20 years, it has always been starkly apparent that the young are the main innovators. The only thing that has changed is that the general public is now aware of this, and finds it confusing somehow.
gitm
Re:Dieter's Response to Jon Katz (Score:2)
Does this sound vaguely like the beginning of Tales from Topographic Oceans to anyone else here?
What's wrong with old, white people? (Score:2)
Is there something inherently wrong with being old and white (and male, too)? Yeah, "they don't understand us youngsters". And they're always generalizing and stereotyping people, too!
It reminds me of all those college comedy movies. That darn dean is always ruining all our fun. (like the simpson's episode where homer goes to college, too)
Jon Katz -- Open Media Propagandist (Score:2)
Oh for chrissakes, what is this tripe?
Oh yeah, I remember: it's called Propaganda! [washington.edu]
I spot Name-Calling, Glittering Generalities, Transfer, Plain Folks appeals (if the Plain Folks are geeks), Bandwagon and a bit of the old Unwarranted Extrapolation.
I can stretch and call Testimonial and Fear as well. There are few solid conclusions to be had but I can argue for Bad Logic in a couple spots.
I don't spot Euphemisms, but then again there are no negatives presented about Jon's point of view so I'm not surprised.
Do we really *need* propaganda on Slashdot?
On the nature of online news (Score:2)
This is crucial. Online media don't have people out there snooping around finding the news. News, remember, is something someone doesn't want published. All else is publicity. The print media have problems with this too. Notice how much you read in newspapers and magazines stems from a press release or press conference. But they at least realize it's a problem. And because reporters traditionally start out covering accidents, fires, and crimes, they learn how to get the facts in the field.
The problem is that online media doesn't have a revenue stream. So most of it is either advertising or psuedo-advertising ("Why you should upgrade to Windows 98 / buy vinyl pants / etc.) What we have online is people commenting on stuff others put online. Original material generally is either advertising, self-promotion, or online versions of offline content.
Micropayments have been floated as a solution to this since the Ted Nelson / Xanadu days. But nobody wants to pay micropayments. All the enthusiasm for micropayments is from the collecting side. Other than porno and Consumer Reports [consumerreports.com], there are very few successful pay sites.
Re:Media is media is media (Score:2)
I doubt Mr. Katz genuinely hates his perceived enemy, but he has made a career out of raising the spectre of class warfare, about seeing every banal topic through a "geeks vs. corporatism" lens, out of being the self-appointed spokesperson for the "persecuted geeks" of the world. (Read: milquetoast, middle class, USA, suburbia world. But hey--they are the only ones who "get it" anyway, right?) Why should he abandon a cash cow?
I do have to admit that I may suffer from "OldFartism" myself since I just don't see a need to invent new words for every essay. Does his "New Media" require a new language to accompany it?
Actual Open and Free Media Links (Score:3)
I am putting the finishing touches on a GPL-like Free Media License [openflick.org] and will be licensing an ongoing Novel and Movie Script (entitled Autonomy [openflick.org]) under it shortly. (Just my luck! Now I really wish I hadn't been so lazy about uploading later drafts - I'll try to get the later drafts and additional chapters uploaded tonight - what I've uploaded of my story is weeks old at this point).
Open and Free Media Sites include
(If anyone has more, please respond here and I'll add them to my website as well!)
The goals of these efforts are similar, to promote the free exchange and collaboration of media and entertainment and counter the trends toward draconian copyright restrictions on popular culture.
My own effort takes a GNU GPL approach, others take different approaches (including a BSD-style approach in at least one case).
Katz rhetoric aside, I encourage everyone to check out these sites and consider releasing some of their own work under whatever license/philosophy most comfortably matches their own.
kids today.... (Score:2)
oh well. i guess it's time to quit my rant. damn whippersnappers.....
-Superb0wl
Re:Pepsi vs. Coke! (Score:2)
I'm standing up for my AC brethren
a new elite? (Score:4)
This is intriguing, especially since one of the most frequently-cited reasons Microsoft is in the antitrust quagmire it's in now is because they were very late in getting lobbyists into Congress, presumably due to a hubris that their power over software would be enough. Is it possible that the technology-centric members of society will increasingly allow "the laws of the Net" to be their law, regardless of what their governments say? Will society someday be divided into the law-abiding neo-Luddites and the self-regulating technologists? (And most importantly, will William Gibson or Neal Stephenson publish another novel based on this premise?)
Open Fartism (Score:2)
Does the term "Open Media" imply that we are welcome to take his rough drafts, make a few changes, and sell them as our own under the GPL?
If there is such a thing as "Old Fartism", what exactly does an Old Fartist believe?
Is there also a New Fartism? Or perhaps a Reformed Fartism?
Katz, does it bother you that your whole column is dripping with the same sappy sentiment as the opening lines of "The Greatest Love of All" by Whitney Houston?