Response to Cyberspace Pro Readings

I find it worth noting that all three articles in the pro group were written before year 2000, before the dot com bust.

In Masuda and Dyson et al's articles, one can sense authors' excitement even zealot about the new technologies. It reminds me of the unrealistic expectation and optimism of stock market investors during the dot com boom years. Just read these statements:

"The information society will be a new type of human society, completely different from the present industrial society." (Yoneji Masuda)

"It also spells the death of the central institutional paradigm of modern life, the bureaucratic organization." (Esther Dyson, George Gilder, George Keyworth and Alvin Toffler)

Since the dot com crash people have cooled down and become more realistic about the promise and limitation of information technologies. The information society is not completely different from industrial one. Easier access to and collection of information have, in many cases, enabled central institutions and bureaucratic organizations to have tighter control over citizens' public and private life. I find those two articles outdated.

Charles Leadbeater's article is more clear-headed. He acknowledges the downsides of information technologies (e.g. "Innovation threatens familiar routines, institutions and occupations"). But he is more encouraged by the opportunities they bring to reforming and reinventing social and economic institutions. "The task is to combine finance, knowledge and social capital in a cirtuous circle of innovation, growth and social progress." I agree with him that information technologies can (1) make financial market more efficient and transparent; (2) accelerate the generation of new ideas and translation from ideas to products; and (3) promote social collaboration and understanding.