“Instead [the internet’s] protean identity is reproduced by a mix of fandom, community, commerce and business, linked by technologies that are both private and publicly owned and variously regulated. In other words the Internet came into existence as the rest of numerous factors, accidents, passions, collisions and tensions. ” (Lister et al, 2009, p.163)
Once upon a time… “numerous factors” included a US Defence agency and education institutions who used a network to communicate. It was so large, that the directory book of all the users’ addresses amounted to several pages…..
Images sourced from an original copy of the Arpanet Directory circa 1982. It was quite a thing to behold.
Lister, M. … [et al.], (2009) “Chapter 3. Networks, users and economics” from Martin Lister … [et al.], New media: a critical introduction pp.163-236, London: Routledge
I posted this tweet from back of reading Jeremy’s paper in the reading list for this block
“The drive for technologies that facilitate our ‘community learning’ have simultaneously embroiled education in a Silicon Valley culture, motivated by data acquisition and profit. ” Knox (2015, p.2)
Knox, J. 2015. Community Cultures. Excerpt from Critical Education and Digital Cultures. In Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory. M. A. Peters (ed.). DOI 10.1007/978-981-287-532-7_124-
I think a huge part of any anti-social/illegal sub-culture is part of the connection with like-minds. The internet makes it even easier to connect with people, so in some regards the web is an enabler for a group exploting vulnerability in online software in more than one way.
Is this a question that has come from this block’s reading? I’m settling down to them this weekend.
from Comments for Matthew’s EDC blog http://ift.tt/2lvaPNL