Skip to main content

Some people gotta mess around





Michael Rogers, the "Practical Futurist", asks readers for their suggestions of a "business model" for the Internet. I have what I humbly think is a better question:



Why is the Internet in need of a business model?



It seems terribly clear to me, so maybe I'm blind. The Internet is an example of what can happen with a little government funding, a clear directive, and a bunch of eggheaded hackers. Poof, simple, direct, nearly indestructible communication between computers. Now, along come stomping a group that is collectively referred to as Big Business, and they are demanding a business model, damnit, right now, right quick, or they'll take their toys and go home.



Go.



My favorite "business model" to date is charging more for an e-book than for the same title in paperback -- despite the fact that the "production" costs have got to be close to nil. Certainly a publisher has to recover the cost of setting up the computer equipment, web programming, database, etc., but it looked (looks?) as though they want all their money back now and to heck with amortization.



Great "business model."



What's wrong with the current state of affairs? Seems that those businesses which prosper on the 'Net and doing so right now. Those that can't...don't. Oops, so sorry, so sad, ta-ta. I think that's called Free Enterprise and your good intentions to turn a profit aren't guaranteed to happen.



I would point anyone to Writing on Your Palm, especially if you're into using your PDA big time, but the site's owner/operator, Jeff Kirvin also is given to discussions of intellectual property rights and digital media. Cruise his column archive and you'll see what I mean.



I'm not completely thick headed, and I understand that some version of a business model needed for a company to survive on the Internet. After all, a "business model" is just a plan for generating profit from product. But these wholesale assaults on the Intenet and personal computer, where everyone pays for everything -- to one extent or another -- for the sole purpose that Major Players are guaranteed a profit is ridiculous.



I pay my ISP(s) a fee to jump on the 'Net. If you want to charge for an Internet service, then I get to decide if I'm willing to pay. If you want me to pay, make your service worth the $$$. If you're worried about piracy -- and I think too many people are too obsessed with piracy, to the point of wild exageration -- then don't put it online.



Meanwhile, blogs are a blossoming "business model" for the Internet which, tada, actually use the very nature of the system rather than spending millions fighting it. And that's a business model I can embrace.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Not the Hero We Deserve, But the Hero We Need

The Dark Knight is the best film I’ve seen in years. Not just the best “superhero” film, but the best film of any type. It’s not perfect, not quite a masterpiece, but it’s flaws are, to me, tiny and overwhelmed by the time the film ends. While relatively bloodless, it is consistently brutal, not just in what it depicts but in the themes that drive it. TDK is a film for adults, please leave the kids at home. Let’s deal with those “flaws” first, the largest being the character Rachel Dawes . In Batman Begins , I blamed Katie Holmes . Her acting was weak, to say the least, which is regrettable in that who she is and what she says and does are important to the film. Critics agreed and either for that or other reasons, Katie was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal , who is a better actress. Yet here she’s weak, real weak. Maybe it’s the character, not the actress, which is frustrating because Rachel is a pivotal character. The film,...
1 comment
Read more

Dune Part 2 (2024)

I have come not to praise Dune but to bury it. I am in a distinct minority. So be it. To explain why, there will be some minor spoilers ahead; sorry. The short version is #NotMyDune. Summary: Picking up where Dune Part 1 left off, we find the young Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) hanging out with the Fremen. Plots to overthrow rival houses and empires ensue. Go here to see what I thought about Dune Part 1 (2021) . Overall, I found it to be technically brilliant, but lacking a human heart, an exercise in frenetic slow motion. D2 is more of the same, though with far more action. Acting-wise, everyone is doing a fine, more than adequate job. Absolutely no one or nothing stands out. The way the characters are written (adapted, actually), their back and forths and interactions, are all weak and unengaging. I generally hate when they speak. I've read the novel a ridiculous number of times, and these films are prompting me to read it again. I understand that trying to translate the n...
1 comment
Read more