In
his essay From ARPANET to Internet Mark Giese brings up an important topic
about the Internet that gets taken for granted these days. Namely that the
Internet has a long, interesting history and did not just shoot forth into
existence arbitrarily, as some people probably assume. While it did well at
explaining this topic, I found some confusions and contradictions in his
discussion on the dichotomy of Internet ‘culture.’
His
main point is that the history of Internet culture and development is defined
by two contradictory, but interrelated sides, that of the hierarchal rigid
military sphere, and the more egalitarian ‘hacker’ academic sphere. The problem
is that he provides very little evidence of the military actively conflicting
with the academics. The military, in his description, seems to take a very
laissez-faire approach to how the academics and hackers used their equipment.
As long as ARPANET and it’s successor kept performing it’s originally intended
defense function, then the military had little reason to interfere with the
academics and hackers discussion groups and experiments. The problems of the
early Internet Giese describes don’t seem to be a product of military
blockheadedness, but the growing pains of new technology.
In
fact, the relationship between the military and academic cultures seems to not
be one of confrontation and contradiction, but of mutual benefit, forming a sort
of feedback loop. If it were not for ‘hackers’, such as Bill Gates, then there
wouldn’t be the Microsoft systems upon which the military is completely
dependent. The latest pieces of military technology, such as the Predator
drone, would not be possible without the innovations brought about by the
military’s attitude towards the academic community. Modern net and ‘hacker’
culture flourished because of military hierarchy and control, not in spite of
it.
Scott, the point is the clash of cultures, so much so that the military eventually broke off from ARPANET to form a separate network, MILNET.
ReplyDelete