Thought Paper: October 25

The Commercialization of a Dream: How the American way usurps idealism.

This week’s paper has been inspired by two of the readings from Critical Cyberculture Studies (Eds. Silver & Massanari, 2006), Fred Turner’s essay “How Digital Technology Found Utopian Ideology: Lessons from the First Hackers’ Conference,” and Gina Neff’s “ Associating Independents: Business Relationships and the Culture of Independence in the Dot-Com Era.” Turner explores the development of utopian information ideology by examining hackers of the 1970s and 1980s and the events of the 1984 Hackers’ Conference. The media myth of hackers is that they are loners and late-night prowlers, additionally they are portrayed as warriors in fight between commercialization of information, software and the Internet and the “Free software” movement or as I know it the “Open source” movement—Linux (OS) and Sakai (collaboration software) are current examples). Based on the six values of the hacker ethic (Levy, Steven. 1984. Hackers: Heroes of the computer revolution), early hackers began the creation of a utopian view of their work

1. Access to computers—and anything which might teach you something about the way the world works—should be unlimited and total.
2. All information should be free.
3. Mistrust Authority—Promote Decentralization.
4. Hackers should be judged by their hacking, not bogus criteria such as degrees, age, race, or position.
5. You can create art and beauty on a computer.
6. Computers can change your life for the better.

These early hackers were primarily working for major research institutes as MIT and Stanford. I would suggest that it is easy of promote the free diffusion of technology when you are employed by a university and funded by government grants.

Not all feel into the “Free software” camp, Turner points out that Macintosh designer Bill Atkinson defended the commercial practice of copyrighting and selling software. Bill Gates is a notable example of the proprietary model of software development. By the mid-1980s (the time of the Hackers’ Conference), the commercial model was winning out. The attendants were only able to agree that “the free dissemination of information was a worthy ideal,” and never could reach a consensus on the correct approach to face the upcoming challenges of the software industry. As we now know, the commercialization of the software and information industry is the dominant business model. The laws suits by music, movie and software companies against average consumer who have “illegally” downloaded the companies copyrighted material through peer-to-peer (Free software) networks is an example of how seriously corporate America is about protecting their property. With few examples—Linux and Sakai, among others—the idealism of the early days of computerization has given way to American way of capitalism.

Neff’s essay explores the transition of New York’s “Silicon Alley” from the bohemian art and content driving Web sites to the profit driven sites of online advertising companies and business oriented software businesses. Neff’s argues that the transition was not only driven by the external influences of the financial markets and investors, but the shift was in the change of cultural values within Silicon Alley itself. Neff examines the parties, gatherings, and events of Silicon Alley to explore the changing social and culture networks of New York’s Internet industry.

By looking at who attended which events from 1997 to 2001 using the “Cyberscene” social column of the online trade publication AtNewYork, Neff was able to see a trend in the institutional make-up of the event attendees. Early on the events were attended by start-ups, Internet content and art sites with no representation of financial interests, but by 1999 the arts were relegated to a minimal role and other industries—financial, TV-Radio-Film, and PR and Advertising) made up the networking block with start-ups and Internet content. Neff argues this shift occurred before the heavy investment of Internet companies.

It also illustrates another example of how the capitalism and commercial interests usurp the idealism of the early Internet entrepreneurs. Now gone are the original art sites, with their ideas of art for art’s sake (ada’web, The Blue Dot and Rhizomes) or desires to promote high culture (Word.com and Urban Desire), and what remains are the DoubleClick’s (online advertising). Neff states:

…when Silicon Alley began to experience financial success it coincided with the destruction of the diversity of company types in the industry, as culturally oriented sites were scuttled and digital advertising firms, e-commerce firms, and consulting firms began to gain recognition in financial realms (296).

One final note, I find it interesting that in both of the essays it is offline events that help to define the participants. In Turner’s essay, it is the first Hackers’ Conference that defines the hackers’ identity. In Neff’s essay, it is social networks and events that define the power and cultural shifts of the New York Internet industry. As Neff writes, “face-to-face business meetings remain important to Silicon Alley.”