Here we go...
1) Are Schiller & Reid correct in their beliefs that because "no one owned the network. Virtually nobody made money from it directly. And almost every piece of software that governed or accessed it was free" The Internet thus resulted "as much from the free availability of software...as from anything else." Schiller continues to argue that "had proprietary ethic been applied, there can be little doubt that the Net would have been stunted during infancy."
With that in mind, and considering how Operating Systems (primarily Windows) were purely proprietarian efforts, is this argument valid?
2) In reference to the satellite difficulties which occurred in April '98 (among many other similar incidents), are consumers in a digital capitalist marketplace too comfortable and too trusting of technologies they do not understand? Why/Why not?
3) I couldn't help but notice the Microsoft/Compaq 20% ownership of Road Runner Hi-Speed Online, the venture of Time Warner and Media One. Consider that someone who owns a Compaq computer, runs Microsoft Windows OS, Microsoft's Internet Explorer Browser, and subscribes to Road Runner (through Time Warner Cable) is unknowingly consuming a bundle of products from one company, simply masked under names of subsidiaries and joint-ventures. Is this "mono-oligopoly" that has integrated itself throughout Media good or bad for consumers? Please explain, (particularly if you think this is good.)