Difference between revisions of "Ted Byfield, Menno Hurenkamp, Andreas Kallfelz, Eric Kluitenberg, Geert Lovink (eds.) (2000) Tulipomania DotCom Reader"

From Domains, Publics and Access
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Ted Byfield, Menno Hurenkamp, Andreas Kallfelz, Eric Kluitenberg, Geert Lovink(2000).''Tulipomania DotCom Reader.''Amsterdam.Institute of Network Cultures.'''
+
[[File: Tulipomania_DotCom_Reader-img.jpg | thumbnail | right]]
  
Enlace:http://networkcultures.org/blog/publication/tulipomania-dotcom-reader/
+
== <small>'''Abstract'''</small> ==
  
Wayback Machine:https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://networkcultures.org/blog/publication/tulipomania-dotcom-reader/
+
In times of rapid growth of new media as an economic factor, the danger of creating a stagnating cultural ghetto is immediate. The aim of Tulipomania was not to express “Schadensfreude” towards all those who gambled – and lost, nor to mobilize resentment towards the steadily growing number of Internet millionaires. The conference was neither organised to call for state-lead interventionism against the monopolizing tendencies of the narrow ‘winner-takes-all’ business model promoted through the DotCom hype. There is enough (self)confidence to leave these easy anxieties aside and appeal to a much more powerful, temporary, networked collaborative imagination. Technical skills are no longer enough. Unlike perhaps five or ten years ago, we need a firm, broad, critical, compassionate knowledge of the Internet economy, one in which analysis opens a multitude of possibilities for involvement.
  
 +
== <small>'''File'''</small> ==
  
Resumen:In times of rapid growth of new media as an economic factor, the danger of creating a stagnating cultural ghetto is immediate. The aim of Tulipomania was not to express “Schadensfreude” towards all those who gambled – and lost, nor to mobilize resentment towards the steadily growing number of Internet millionaires. The conference was neither organised to call for state-lead interventionism against the monopolizing tendencies of the narrow ‘winner-takes-all’ business model promoted through the DotCom hype. There is enough (self)confidence to leave these easy anxieties aside and appeal to a much more powerful, temporary, networked collaborative imagination. Technical skills are no longer enough. Unlike perhaps five or ten years ago, we need a firm, broad, critical, compassionate knowledge of the Internet economy, one in which analysis opens a multitude of possibilities for involvement.
+
[[File: Tulipomania_DotCom_Reader.pdf]]
  
[[Categoría:Biblioteca]]
+
== <small>'''Source'''</small> ==
[[Categoría:Institute of Network Cultures]]
+
 
[[Categoría:Ted Byfield]]
+
[[Institute_of_Network_Cultures|Institute of Network Cultures]]
[[Categoría:Menno Hurenkamp]]
+
 
[[Categoría:Andreas Kallfelz]]
+
== <small>'''Links'''</small> ==
[[Categoría:Eric Kluitenberg]]
+
 
[[Categoría:Geert Lovink]]
+
'''URL:''' http://networkcultures.org/blog/publication/tulipomania-dotcom-reader/
[[Categoría:Inglés]]
+
 
[[Categoría:Holanda]]
+
'''Wayback Machine:''' https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://networkcultures.org/blog/publication/tulipomania-dotcom-reader/
[[Categoría:2000]]
+
 
 +
 
 +
[[Category:Library]]
 +
[[Category:Institute of Network Cultures]]
 +
[[Category:Ted Byfield]]
 +
[[Category:Menno Hurenkamp]]
 +
[[Category:Andreas Kallfelz]]
 +
[[Category:Eric Kluitenberg]]
 +
[[Category:Geert Lovink]]
 +
[[Category:English]]
 +
[[Category:Holland]]
 +
[[Category:2000]]

Latest revision as of 18:26, 10 May 2017

Tulipomania DotCom Reader-img.jpg

Abstract

In times of rapid growth of new media as an economic factor, the danger of creating a stagnating cultural ghetto is immediate. The aim of Tulipomania was not to express “Schadensfreude” towards all those who gambled – and lost, nor to mobilize resentment towards the steadily growing number of Internet millionaires. The conference was neither organised to call for state-lead interventionism against the monopolizing tendencies of the narrow ‘winner-takes-all’ business model promoted through the DotCom hype. There is enough (self)confidence to leave these easy anxieties aside and appeal to a much more powerful, temporary, networked collaborative imagination. Technical skills are no longer enough. Unlike perhaps five or ten years ago, we need a firm, broad, critical, compassionate knowledge of the Internet economy, one in which analysis opens a multitude of possibilities for involvement.

File

File:Tulipomania DotCom Reader.pdf

Source

Institute of Network Cultures

Links

URL: http://networkcultures.org/blog/publication/tulipomania-dotcom-reader/

Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://networkcultures.org/blog/publication/tulipomania-dotcom-reader/