March 2005 - Air-L - lists.aoir.org

"network of networks" - origin of
by Barry Wellman 21 Mar '05

21 Mar '05

In a recent post, Neil Randall referred to the internet as a "network of networks." In case anyone is interested, Paul Craven and I invented that term in our 1973 article "The Network City." (in _Sociological Inquiry_ 43 (Winter): 57-88. [Reprinted in _The Community_, edited by Marcia Effrat. New York: Free Press, 1974.] Way back then, we were referring to social networks, but the concept was the same as was later ported over to the internet (or independently re-invented). In short, we claim terminological priority! Barry _____________________________________________________________________ Barry Wellman Professor of Sociology NetLab Director wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 To network is to live; to live is to network _____________________________________________________________________

2 1

IJCLP - Issue 9, Part II
by Rotenberg, Boris 21 Mar '05

21 Mar '05

Issue 9, Part II - Special Issue on Cybercrime - 2004-2005 The International Journal of Communications Law & Policy and the Yale Journal of Law & Technology are now happy to present Part II of Issue 9 on Cybercrime. The selection committee has reviewed and considered a series of papers submitted for the first ISP/YJoLT writing competition and call for papers, as well as for the conference on Cybercrime and Digital Law enforcement (entitled "Digital Cops in virtual environment"), Yale Law School, 26-28 March 2004. In part II, we are delighted to have papers by Susan Brenner, NCR Distinguished Professor of Law & Technology, University of Dayton School of Law; Jennifer Granick, Center for Internet and Society Stanford, California; Sonia K. Katyal, Associate Professor, Fordham University School of Law; K. A. Taipale, Center for Advanced Studies in Science and Technology Policy; James F. McLaughlin, New Hampshire Police Department; Jason M. Young, LL.M. University of Ottawa. WRITING COMPETITION AND CALL FOR PAPERS 2005 We are also proud to announce the winner and runners-up of the ISP /YJoLT / IJCLP writing competition. The authors of these papers will be invited to present their work at a panel during the the Yale Law School “Global flow information” conference. The winner receives coverage of his travel to and accommodations at Yale University for the conference. Their articles will be included in special Fall 2005 volumes of the two journals, devoted to the conference topic. Winner: “Law as a Network Standard” by Dan L. Burk; Runners-up: (1) “Technology and Authority in Times of Transformation”, by Zack Kertcher and Ainat N. Margalit; & (2) “Piracy or Community? The Clash of Freedom of __Expression and Copyright in the Case of Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing of Digital Music in the United Kingdom” by Robert J. Danay. Congratulations to the winner and the runners- up and we would like to again thank all the other competition participants for their submissions. We are still considering many of those articles for publication, and the authors can expect to be updated soon as to that process. All participants are most welcome to attend the conference on April 1st-3rd 2005. For more information, please consult: http://islandia.law.yale.edu/isp/GlobalFlow/

1 0

Microsoft Word Spelling and Grammar Check Demonstration
by Sandeep Krishnamurthy 21 Mar '05

21 Mar '05

Microsoft Word Spelling and Grammar Check Demonstration Sandeep Krishnamurthy sandeep(a)u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/sandeep http://sandeepworld.blogspot.com Too often, our students feel that running the ÂSpelling and Grammar checkÂ feature on Microsoft Word is sufficient to ensure good writing. The paragraph shown below is designed to pass these checks. You can judge the quality of writing for yourself! ---------------------------Demonstration Paragraph Begins----------------------- Marketing are bad for brand. McDonalds is good brand. McDonaldÂs is good brand. McDonaldÂs are good brand. McDonaldsÂ are good brand. Finance good for marketing. 4PÂs are marketing mix. I use marketing mixes for good marketing. Internets do good job. Internets help marketing. Internets make good brand. Gates do good marketing in Microsoft. Gates build the big brand in Microsoft. The Gates is leader of big company in Washington. Warren buffet do awesome job in marketing. Buffet eat buffet. ---------------------------Demonstration Paragraph Ends------------------------- [I used Microsoft Word 2002 SP3 to run the Spelling and Grammar check. Please try it on your computer and tell me what happens. I would love to hear from WordPerfect and OpenOffice users as well.]

3 2

Re: [Air-l] we need a new word? (Intern)
by Dan L Burk 21 Mar '05

21 Mar '05

See Bob Cannon's 2002 paper, "Will the Real Internet Please Stand Up?": http://tprc.org/papers/2002/165/RealInternet.htm Note especially his conclusion, and the postscript. DLB On 20 Mar 2005, jeremy hunsinger wrote: > many of the descriptions so far take 'communication' as a the noun, and > while this is fine for some descriptions of some events, it tends to > leave out much of the rest of the ecological systems that these in > which these technics are enmeshed. the objects that barry brought up, > were systems and technologies, onto which communication can be mapped, > onto which media can be mapped, but I think it should be very obvious > that when we are talking about their whole existence, from their > origination to their use, that not every part of that will be mapped by > communication and/or media. most, but perhaps not all of their human > use could be said to be communication, but... what about installation, > and interface, they seem to be mediated experiences that don't always > pertain directly to communication, and while they might be mediated by > speaker or screen, that mediation might not encapsulate the whole > social imaginary that affects the world in which they are used. > > the internet is the general network we study, which is a network of > networks, built on the principle that information can be encapsulated > in packets, and routed by defining the endpoint, thus allowing the > computers or relevant technologies to communicate. computers and > technologies have devices that mediate the information that they > receive into user accessible experiences. this is true insofaras I can > determine, so internet technologies will always be information > technologies, mediated technologies, and communication technologies in > some respect. however, the technologies exist through society, and > individuals, both simplisticly as objects, but also in much more > complicated ways, that affect our lives, cultures, etc. -- our mental > ecology, our social ecology, and our environmental ecology. > > so, that's why I use "ICT" and then describe what I'm talking about > further should the need arise. > On Mar 20, 2005, at 4:05 AM, richard-seyler.ling(a)telenor.com wrote: > > > Wouldn't a type of overly technical description be IP mediated > > communication? All the things you describe are IP based and go via > > the Internet. Yet they are communication (in the social sense of the > > word). > > > > Using IP mediated communication would allow us the fun of coining a > > new acronym like IPMC or IPMECOM or IPCOM that only the cognicenti > > understand for awhile. > > > > I note, however, that your discussion does not necessarily include > > mobile communication. For that we would need another acronym like > > MOMECOM for mobile mediated communication. > > > > Rich L. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: air-l-aoir.org-bounces(a)listserv.aoir.org > > [mailto:air-l-aoir.org-bounces@listserv.aoir.org]On Behalf Of Barry > > Wellman > > Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 16:45 PM > > To: aoir list > > Subject: [Air-l] we need a new word? > > > > > > I was speaking at a seminar for non-techies at MIT yesterday (not a > > contradiction, as these were community development folks from across > > the > > USofA). > > > > And I found myself saying -- and my PPTs reading -- "Internet" -- but > > then > > verbally qualifying by saying, "well I really don't mean the > > traditional > > email Internet, but also IM, chat, lists, video, etc." (add your > > favorite > > including Usenet and BBS). > > > > What to call it? "Computer mediated communication" is a mouthful, > > jargony > > and chews up PPT space. "New media" is too indistinct and PoMo: > > moreover, > > is email "new media" any more? We should focus on the affordances of > > the media and not on the newness. > > > > So what to call it. My first thought at the breakfast table was > > "e-media", > > but I am open to other suggestions. I also am putting it on the list, > > because I am confident that others have had similar dilemmas, and that > > it > > would be best if we had a standard word. > > > > Barry > > _____________________________________________________________________ > > > > Barry Wellman Professor of Sociology NetLab Director > > wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman > > > > Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto > > 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 > > To network is to live; to live is to network > > _____________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-l-aoir.org(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-l-aoir.org(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > Jeremy Hunsinger > Center for Digital Discourse and Culture > () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail > /\ - against microsoft attachments > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-l-aoir.org(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > Dan L. Burk Visiting Professor Cornell Law School Myron Taylor Hall Ithaca, NY 14853 USA Oppenheimer, Wolff & Donnelly Professor University of Minnesota Law School 229 19th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA *************************************** Voice: 612-626-8726 Fax: 612-625-2011 bits: burkx006(a)umn.e

1 0

RE: [Air-l] we need a new word? (Intern)
by richard-seyler.ling＠telenor.com 21 Mar '05

21 Mar '05

Wouldn't a type of overly technical description be IP mediated communication? All the things you describe are IP based and go via the Internet. Yet they are communication (in the social sense of the word). Using IP mediated communication would allow us the fun of coining a new acronym like IPMC or IPMECOM or IPCOM that only the cognicenti understand for awhile. I note, however, that your discussion does not necessarily include mobile communication. For that we would need another acronym like MOMECOM for mobile mediated communication. Rich L. -----Original Message----- From: air-l-aoir.org-bounces(a)listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-aoir.org-bounces@listserv.aoir.org]On Behalf Of Barry Wellman Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 16:45 PM To: aoir list Subject: [Air-l] we need a new word? I was speaking at a seminar for non-techies at MIT yesterday (not a contradiction, as these were community development folks from across the USofA). And I found myself saying -- and my PPTs reading -- "Internet" -- but then verbally qualifying by saying, "well I really don't mean the traditional email Internet, but also IM, chat, lists, video, etc." (add your favorite including Usenet and BBS). What to call it? "Computer mediated communication" is a mouthful, jargony and chews up PPT space. "New media" is too indistinct and PoMo: moreover, is email "new media" any more? We should focus on the affordances of the media and not on the newness. So what to call it. My first thought at the breakfast table was "e-media", but I am open to other suggestions. I also am putting it on the list, because I am confident that others have had similar dilemmas, and that it would be best if we had a standard word. Barry _____________________________________________________________________ Barry Wellman Professor of Sociology NetLab Director wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 To network is to live; to live is to network _____________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ The Air-l-aoir.org(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/

6 5

Re: [Air-l] Internet vs. WWW
by Ren Reynolds 21 Mar '05

21 Mar '05

Art >Incorrect. The Internet proper is a distributed network of networks which consists of a common set of technical protocols that serve as the foundation upon which almost all CMC services or groups of services currently rest, including the WWW. The individual networks do not just consist of a common set of protocols, they all use the TCP/IP set at the top level and talk to each other using BGP (boarder gateway protocol). However at lower levels some networks use protocols such as ATM for what’s known as “traffic shaping” as the wild and free nature of IP is all very well unless you’re trying to manage a large network commercially. Also some networks carry other protocols depending on what the network owner wants to do with it. Increasingly the ‘internet’ bit is actually just a virtual network or protocol bundle within a larger multi- protocol network that is used for all sorts of things, the reason being that providers are looking to consolidate old data and voice networks on to a common set of fibre and big routers such as the large Juniper ones. Thus networks are common at one level and often heterogeneous at others. >The Internet is essentially an open communications platform and agreement upon which services are built. Well, “agreements”. Typically ‘peering’ between two networks that exchange similar volumes of traffic and ‘transit’ where a smaller network buys up stream bandwidth from a larger (generally better connected) one. >The Internet itself doesn't do anything. What makes The Internet special is what it allows you to build with it. That’s moot I think. There is the so called end-to-end design philosophy of the net which means that you keep the centre dumb and leave the smart stuff at the outside. However DNS is a distributed but hierarchal system with central servers. SMTP is based on servers that can be argued to be in the net. It’s arguable whether these constitute doing ‘anything’ or not. >The WWW is a subset and extension of the The Internet, consisting of both a communications protocol (HTTP) and a page markup language (HTML), whose specific purpose is the presentation of information in a format that previously was only possible via desktop publishing. If WWW is a subset of the Internet and the internet existed before WWW then Internet must denote the network of interconnected networks and the set of common protocols that run on those networks at any given time. Noting that the protocols might change over time and that not all protocols might be common to all networks at all times and that some networks will run protocols that are exceptional; and that network refers to some physical stuff and some virtual networks that run on that physical stuff and, increasingly, wireless networks. So I guess what the term Internet is doing is picking out a particular yet shifting group of protocols and services embedded within a changing network of physical, virtual and wireless networks and attendant contracts. Ren ---- Original message ---- >Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:28:28 -0800 (PST) >From: Art McGee <amcgee(a)virtualidentity.org> >Subject: Re: [Air-l] Internet vs. WWW >To: air-l-aoir.org(a)listserv.aoir.org > >> Up till now, i've commonsensically used "the Internet" to >> denote, essentially, everything that i can access or >> receive and anyone i connect with when i "go online" >> (connect my computer to data that is not on my computer's >> harddrive). In other words, i've used "the Internet" to >> denote the sum of all that's online. > >Incorrect. The sum total of all that is metaphorically >referred to as "online" is most properly called Cyberspace. > >Some people extend cyberspace to include non-computer >related technologies and forms of communication not >involving technology, but for the most part, common usage of >the term Cyberspace has narrowed over the years to be >specific to CMC. > >Cyberspace predates The Internet and is a superset of The >Internet. Cyberspace includes proprietary networks and >protocols that existed before the Internet was conceived of >and still exist outside of it. > >> I've always assumed commonsensically that "the world wide >> web" simply denotes the network of computers that are >> "online" (all or part of the time). Since what's online >> has to rest (or am i missing some basic tech fact?) on >> some computer, and since to access what's on a particular >> computer, that computer needs to connected to other >> computers, "the World Wide Web" and "the Internet" as i >> understood their meaning refer to the same referent. > >Incorrect. The Internet proper is a distributed network of >networks which consists of a common set of technical >protocols that serve as the foundation upon which almost all >CMC services or groups of services currently rest, including >the WWW. The Internet is essentially an open communications >platform and agreement upon which services are built. The >Internet itself doesn't do anything. What makes The Internet >special is what it allows you to build with it. > >The WWW is a subset and extension of the The Internet, >consisting of both a communications protocol (HTTP) and a >page markup language (HTML), whose specific purpose is the >presentation of information in a format that previously was >only possible via desktop publishing. In other words, the >WWW was created in order to move some aspects of DTP from >your local hard disk onto the larger network. Previously, >most information on the net was served in extremely simple >ASCII text formats. > >The Internet predates the WWW. The WWW is a recent extension >and addition to The Internet. Before the WWW, there were >other cruder protocols and services which had a similar >function and purpose. They went by names such as ARCHIE, >VERONICA, GOPHER, and WAIS. > >> also, up till now i also thought of "cyberworld" as an a >> term interchangeable with the other two terms, but that >> leaves me with no term to denote the "life-world" of >> people online, as distinguished from "the Internet" as >> defined above. Could "cyberworld" be used to denote this >> "life-world", or will that be another gross carelessness >> with definitions (i can almost feel Thomas Hobbes standing >> behind me getting ready to slap me ... ) > >Cyberspace is definitely NOT interchangeable with The >Internet or the WWW. As I said before: > >Cyberspace is a superset of The Internet. > >Cyberspace predates The Internet. > >Cyberspace exists outside of The Internet. > >The Internet is a superset of The WWW. > >The Internet predates The WWW. > >The WWW is a subset and extension of The Internet. > > >Art >_______________________________________________ >The Air-l-aoir.org(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >http://www.aoir.org/

1 0

CFP: Persistent Conversation minitrack (HICSS 39)
by Tom Erickson 21 Mar '05

21 Mar '05

CALL FOR PAPERS Seventh Annual Minitrack on Persistent Conversation Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science (HICSS 39) Hyatt Regency, Kauai, Hawaii January 4-7, 2006 New changes: - Abstract deadline extended to March 31st - A half-day workshop will precede the minitrack === AT A GLANCE === = Summary of Topic = Persistent conversations occur via instant messaging, chat, email, blogs, bulletin boards, MOOs, graphical VR environments, document annotation systems, text messaging on mobile phones, etc. Such forms of conversation play a crucial role in domains such as online communities, the sharing and management of knowledge, and the support of e-commerce, e-learning and other network mediated interactions. The persistence of digitally mediated conversation affords new uses (e.g. searching, replaying, restructuring) and raises new problems. This multi-disciplinary minitrack seeks contributions from researchers and designers that improve our ability to understand, analyze, and/or design persistent conversation systems. = Who = Researchers and designers from fields such as anthropology, computer-mediated communication, HCI, interaction design, linguistics, management, psychology, rhetoric, sociology, and so forth. We also welcome submissions from graduate students. = Chairs = Thomas Erickson, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center (snowfall(a)acm.org) Susan Herring, School of Library and Information Science, Indiana University (herring(a)indiana.edu) = Important Dates* = Abstract submission:** Thursday, March 31, 2005 Abstract feedback: Thursday, April 15, 2005 Paper submission: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 Accept/Reject notice: Monday, August 15, 2005 Final papers due: Thursday, September 15, 2005 One author must register: Thursday, September 15, 2005 * For other dates. such as end of early registration and hotel deadlines see the official HICSS conference site ** Abstracts are optional but strongly recommended; to submit a paper without an abstract, please contact the chairs = For More Information = * This call for participation: http://www.visi.com/~snowfall/HICSS39pc.html * History (papers and participants in previous minitracks): http://www.visi.com/~snowfall/HICSS_PC_History.html * About the minitrack, contact: snowfall(a)acm.org, herring(a)indiana.edu * About the HICSS conference, see: http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/Hicss39/apahome39.htm === DETAILS === = About the Minitrack = This interdisciplinary minitrack and workshop brings designers and researchers together to explore persistent conversation, the transposition of ordinarily ephemeral conversation into the potentially persistent digital medium. The phenomena of interest include human-to-human interactions carried out using chat, instant messaging, text messaging, email, web logs, mailing lists, news groups, bulletin board systems, multi-authored Web documents, structured conversation systems, textual and graphical virtual worlds, etc. Computer-mediated conversations blend characteristics of oral conversation with those of written text: they may be synchronous or asynchronous; their audience may be small or vast; they may be highly structured or almost amorphous; etc. The persistence of such conversations gives them the potential to be searched, browsed, replayed, annotated, visualized, restructured, and recontextualized, thus opening the door to a variety of new uses and practices. The particular aim of the minitrack and workshop is to bring together researchers who analyze existing computer-mediated conversational practices and sites, with designers who propose, implement, or deploy new types of conversational systems. By bringing together participants from such diverse areas as anthropology, computer-mediated communication, HCI, interaction design, linguistics, management, psychology, rhetoric, sociology, and the like, we hope that the work of each may inform the others, suggesting new questions, methods, perspectives, and design approaches. = About Paper Topics = We are seeking papers that address one or both of the following two general areas: * Understanding Practice. The burgeoning popularity of the internet (and intranets) provides an opportunity to study and characterize new forms of conversational practice. Questions of interest range from how various features of conversations (e.g., turn-taking, topic organization, expression of paralinguistic information) have adapted in response to the digital medium, to new roles played by persistent conversation in domains such as education, business, and entertainment. *Design. Digital systems do not currently support conversation well: it is difficult to converse with grace, clarity, depth and coherence over networks. But this need not remain the case. Toward this end, we welcome analyses of existing systems as well as designs for new systems which better support conversation. Also of interest are inquiries into how participants design their own conversations within the digital medium -- that is, how they make use of system features to create, structure, and regulate their discourse. Examples of appropriate topics include, but are not limited to: * Turn-taking, threading and other structural features of CMC * The dynamics of large scale conversation systems (e.g. USENET) * Methods for summarizing or visualizing conversation archives * Studies of virtual communities or other sites of digital conversation * The roles of mediated conversation in knowledge management * Studies of the use of instant messaging in large organizations * Novel designs for computer-mediated conversation systems * Analyses of or designs for distance learning systems For other examples see the list of previous years' papers: http://www.visi.com/~snowfall/HICSS_PC_History.html = The Workshop = The minitrack will be preceded by a half-day workshop open to all minitrack authors, as well as those who will form the core audience for the minitrack. See the online version of this call for more details: http://www.visi.com/~snowfall/HICSS39pc.html = Instructions for Abstract Submission = Submit a 250 word abstract of your proposed paper via email to the chairs: Tom Erickson <snowfall(a)acm.org>, Susan Herring <herring(a)indiana.edu> by the deadline noted above. = Instructions for Paper Submission = * HICSS papers must contain original material not previously published, or currently submitted elsewhere. All papers will be submitted in double column publication format and limited to 10 pages including diagrams and references. Papers undergo a double-blind review. * Do not submit the manuscript to more than one Minitrack Chair. If unsure which Minitrack is appropriate, submit the abstract to the Track Chair for guidance. * Submit your full paper according to the instructions found on the HICSS web site: http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/Hicss39/apahome39.htm === END, HICSS PERSISTENT CONVERSATION CFP ===

1 0

Re: [Air-l] "network of networks" - origin of
by Laurent Straskraba 20 Mar '05

20 Mar '05

That's very interesting. Thanks for the reference. Actually, I thought it was going back to Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn but 1973 was the year, no doubt. While talking about origin, I remember Joseph C.R. Licklider's (ARPA) concept of a "Galactic Network" going back to the early 1960s when also ideas of sociocybernetics came up - much influenced by Norbert Wiener who wrote his book about Cybernetics in 1948 (!). Best, Laurent At 21:16 20.03.2005, you wrote: >In a recent post, Neil Randall referred to the internet as a "network of >networks." > >In case anyone is interested, Paul Craven and I invented that term in our >1973 article "The Network City." (in _Sociological Inquiry_ 43 (Winter): >57-88. [Reprinted in _The Community_, edited by Marcia Effrat. New York: >Free Press, 1974.] > >Way back then, we were referring to social networks, but the concept was >the same as was later ported over to the internet (or independently >re-invented). > >In short, we claim terminological priority! > Barry > _____________________________________________________________________ > > Barry Wellman Professor of Sociology NetLab Director > wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman > > Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto > 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 > To network is to live; to live is to network > _____________________________________________________________________ > > >_______________________________________________ >The Air-l-aoir.org(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >http://www.aoir.org/ --- Mag. Laurent Straskraba Information Society Researcher post: Ontlstrasse 3, A - 4040 Linz, Austria / Europe mobile: +43.650.7711861 (GMT +1) e-mail: laurent(a)straskraba.net web: http://www.straskraba.net ---

1 0

Internet vs. WWW
by reuven shlozberg 20 Mar '05

20 Mar '05

Joanne (or others), as a newbie to the academic study of the Internet, with no tech background, could you explain to me what difference between the two is? Up till now, i've commonsensically used "the Internet" to denote, essentially, everything that i can access or receive and anyone i connect with when i "go online" (connect my computer to data that is not on my computer's harddrive). In other words, i've used "the Internet" to denote the sum of all that's online. I've always assumed commonsensically that "the world wide web" simply denotes the network of computers that are "online" (all or part of the time). Since what's online has to rest (or am i missing some basic tech fact?) on some computer, and since to access what's on a particular computer, that computer needs to connected to other computers, "the World Wide Web" and "the Internet" as i understood their meaning refer to the same referent. also, up till now i also thought of "cyberworld" as an a term interchangeable with the other two terms, but that leaves me with no term to denote the "life-world" of people online, as distinguished from "the Internet" as defined above. Could "cyberworld" be used to denote this "life-world", or will that be another gross carelessness with definitions (i can almost feel Thomas Hobbes standing behind me getting ready to slap me ... ) thanks, Reuven Shlozberg Political Science University of Toronto

4 5

Re: we need a new word?
by Bram Dov Abramson 20 Mar '05

20 Mar '05

air-l-aoir.org-request(a)listserv.aoir.org (12:20, 19.3.2005): >And I found myself saying -- and my PPTs reading -- "Internet" -- >but then verbally qualifying by saying, "well I really don't mean the >traditional email Internet, but also IM, chat, lists, video, etc." >(add your favoriteincluding Usenet and BBS). > >What to call it? I usually use: - "Internet applications", for those things that specifically require the Internet. (Most of the ones you listed.) - "media applications", as the more general class of things that may but don't always need the Internet -- even if they increasingly do. (Like mobile media applications.) cheers Bram

5 4