-
Lessig, RMS on DRM
by
Andrew Orlowski
–
Professor Lessig tells us that he should have reviewed the Sun Microsystems press release before it went out. It doesn’t fully reflect his position, he says, and he’s emphatic that this blessing doesn’t constitute an endorsement. Read more…
-
Anti-war slogan coined, repurposed and Googlewashed … in 42 days
by
Andrew Orlowski
–
In early 2003, the phrase “Second Superpower” became a popular way to refer to the street protests against the imminent invasion of Iraq. The metaphor had been used by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and on the cover of The Nation magazine. A small number of techno utopian webloggers hijacked the phrase. The narrower sense…
-
Meet the Jefferson of ‘Web 2.0’
by
Andrew Orlowski
–
If Google’s PageRank reflects the “uniquely democratic nature of the web” – and if weblogs are the most empowering technology of our age – then how can we begin to fete a humble entrepreneur based in St Paul, MN? Very probably as the Gutenberg of the digital age. And the Jefferson. All rolled into one.…
-
Lessig blesses DRM
by
Andrew Orlowski
–
Oh. Dear. If you arrive for work today and discover a grisly pool of brain tissue and bone fragments where a colleague used to sit, we may have the explanation right here. For, n a move that risks causing Scanners-style head explosions across the land, Professor Lawrence Lessig has endorsed DRM. Not just any old…
-
Flock founder flees
by
Andrew Orlowski
–
Soon all browsers would look like Flock, predicted Business Week. Included here for this quote, found on the internets. Wasn’t this the quintissential Web 2.0 business plan? Raise a bunch of capital in order to hire old people for pennies on the dollar. Use this vast, untapped resource in order to ‘develop’ a browser that…
-
Nature journal cooked Wikipedia study
by
Andrew Orlowski
–
Nature magazine has some tough questions to answer after it let its Wikipedia fetish get the better of its responsibilities to reporting science. The Encyclopedia Britannica has published a devastating response to Nature‘s December comparison of Wikipedia and Britannica, and accuses the journal of misrepresenting its own evidence. Where the evidence didn’t fit, says Britannica,…