Overstated, I think, but an interesting perspective – The Internet is dead: “…cable and satellite networks are now superior to the Internet as platforms for building complex, interactive services…Networks built by telephone companies, like Verizon Communications, and cable companies, like Comcast, do not easily talk to each other, stymieing development of services (like HD video) that require smooth, seamless transport of lots of digital stuff.”
-
‹ Home
Contents
-
Categories
-
Tags
Adoption Articles Blogging Classification/Ontologies Collaboration Community Connectivism Content Content Management Copyright/IP/DRM Design Elearning Evaluation/Assessment/ROI Games/Simulations Information Architecture Innovation Instructional Design Knowledge Management Learning Learning Objects Legal LMS Media Networks Open Source Podcasting Random Thoughts Research Resources ROI Search Semantic Web SNA Social Standards Storytelling Teaching Technology Theories Tools Trends Usability Wiki Wireless/PDAs XML
-
Archives
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- July 2003
- June 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
- March 2003
- February 2003
- January 2003
- December 2002
- November 2002
- October 2002
- September 2002
- August 2002
- July 2002
- June 2002
Blogroll
-
RSS Feeds
-
Meta
3 Comments
If that were indeed the case, I would not have read your post in my RSS aggregator, nor would I be able to click through to your blog, nor would I be typing these words in reply. Some ideas never die quickly enough….
You are too kind to Cuban. As mrsdurff suggests, Web 2.0 is very much alive, and growing. For starters!
Hi Lisa – good points. As mentioned, Cuban overstates “the internet is dead”. In fact, he states it from a very particular perspective – HD.
Bryan – heh, just read your blog post on this about 5 minutes ago…I agree declarations of the internet’s death are overstated. What I found interesting, however, is the point of emphasis of services like HD video. Obviously, with Cuban’s background, the focus of the talk was on broadcasting…and the shortcoming of the internet to achieve a degree of consistent quality in relation to what cable networks are capable of doing with video. Cuban overlooks the social and information dimensions of the internet to focus instead on the (in)ability to handle a certain type of digital content…and the lack of communication between networks being built by different companies (i.e. telephone/cable) There are numerous angles to this, but two in particular stick out: the assumption that interoperability issues is going to favor one “network” over another, and 2) that media/entertainment is alluded as the deciding factor.
While indirect, a networks value is not exclusively determined by what one party can push (as we’ve seen with the internet). True, cable is adding more interactive features, but the internet is built on two-way flow. To what degree will we accept reduced quality of content when the real question is access (i.e. we may be more satisfied with poor video image if it’s a choice between that and nothing else). And then there’s all that discussion of (free) public wi-fi. It’s far easier (and more marketable) for Cuban to say “internet is dead” than to put forward a nuanced consideration of the factors (such as I have NOT done here
).