Imagine opening corresponding author: www.zdnet.com2006-03-09 09:51 AM ZDNet interview with the MIT Media Lab senior researcher Andrew Lippman, to learn more about his views on the open media, open source and open communication, and he worked at MIT The research work made.
If someone is sitting in the table with the three largest media companies, when he questioned the future of the company's future, he is really courageous.
At the Media Summit held in New York, senior researchers of MIT Media Lab propelled their own views on the transfer of media controlled rights in the round table. MTV President and Chief Operating Officer Michael Wolf, the Global Chief Executive of MTV, KEVIN ROBERTS, and Media Services Companies Global Chairman and CEO William Cella face this question, even for a while, I don't know how to answer. The main purpose of the Lippman's view is that people have been able to create and post content like large media. In this case, it has jeopardized the decision of media companies and executives.
ZDNET UK interviewed Lippman, further understanding his views on open media, open resources, copyright, and open communication, and his research work in Mit.
Can you participate more detailed introduction to open media you advocate? If you recall the media industry from a historical point of view, it will find that inventive media creators are also inventors 500 years ago. For example, Da Vinci's own mineral pigment used by the painting. When the current media era, due to the improvement of technical content, creators and inventors are no longer set. The computer era gives us the era of returning to creators and inventors.
At the round table, you talked about open source software and the action of Brazil in Linux. What changes do you think of open source software will bring in the next few years? This is my personal point of view. I have not done any research work on this topic. But I think open source software will develop in an index level. When the size of the community is relatively small, people will only create their own needs; programmers are good at writing systems for other programmers. However, when more people start using this software, when the size of the community is more open, the software is more open to new creative users, and the open source software will grow index.
What personal opinions do you have for desktop linux? I don't think that ordinary consumers will use it; so far, use the desktop Linux has not simply put it as simple as inserting a microphone. However, it will develop more simple, faster, and the community is even greater, and the change is more diverse. It will achieve self-sufficient. Linux has been launched for a long time, but the impact on the outside world is not big, because people in the community are more habitual and community members, not external dialogue.
In the round table, you also pointed out that the record industry always assumes consumers to steal their products, and the consumer demon. Whether you can introduce this question in detail, and what kind of solution you think? I want to emphasize again, this is my personal point of view, but I think that most people are honest, admit that they should pay the work of others. But the media industry believes they will use their work. Should try to stop rather than completely - need to make the product is difficult to be pirated, you need to remind users to be honest, but you can't deceive consumers.
You are now leading a "viral communication" research team in the MIT Media Lab. What does it mean? What do you want to study? The virus mentioned here is the strength and ability, that is, creation from the community: It is some beginning to be very small, then it will grow rapidly. Skype is a good example. Just two years have a download of 250 million people.
However, the reform of the communication industry is difficult, because this industry is centrally equivalent, and it is also a vertical call. Similar to Skype and Wikipedia have creative inventions are only on the edge of the system. Highly integrated innovation is more difficult. What we have studied is how to break this challenge, how we can build a vitality and stable communication system, and only need to have less infrastructure. How do you think the communication industry responds to your work? Will they think about obstructing this system to open? Because such systems mean more competition and less business income. In fact, in the digital world, the largest open system is the Internet and PC, which is all done before commercialization. What is the case of creating the Internet is how to make it as soon as possible for future innovation, and the communication industry is created from the beginning to economic benefits.
Although this is a fact, this does not mean that the communication company will oppose my research work. For example, recall Carterfone appears, any non-AT & T products cannot access the telephone network. In that era, AT & T has monopolized everything. After the "Carterfone ruling", AT & T has only occupies a part of the market, but the entire industry has developed quickly, and new products such as answers, fax machines, and modems have emerged. Now the wireless products and mobile networks are also in the former Carterfone era: The only way to connect with the mobile network is the use of the phone provided by the network provider.
If you are a communication company, open may also be a good suggestion: you will benefit from the creation of openings. If I can make a cellular phone that does not require a tower station, if each phone yourself is a tower station, then the cellular phone company does not have to take a tower station. I certainly don't start to launch a revolutionary elimination telephone company.
When is your project end? I also hope to answer this question. Nicholas Negroponte, who has resigned MIT Media Lab, launched a project of "a child, a laptop". If you can connect all children's computers, you will become a fairly fertilizer with creative network. You can implement it through a mesh network.
The wireless broadband of the laptop can form a mesh network, and each computer can talk to the most close computer, becoming an ad-hoc local network. According to the FAQ, we can know that this project also is also inquiring how to connect the laptop with the Internet backbone with a very low cost.
First, there will be five million laptops to send five million children in five countries, and the number and scope of the last distribution will be wider. Do you think that the large network network will run smoothly? How do we make this network to run? I hope they can run all the communication methods they want to try on the Internet, never stop. Can we create an unlimited development network? No. What is the extent of the network? Do not. So can technical can improve the network during the network development? The answer is available. The problem is how we make it develop.
Do you think people use a mesh network in order to save costs? I don't think we are fighting for cost. The biggest benefit or change from eBay, Skype or Wikipedia displayed community capabilities. These things are difficult to expect. The importance of "viral network" is that it can reduce communication barriers to make us innovate.
What is the most expecting in the next few years? Any technique has resistance, as if the record industry is not accepted by digital music technology. However, I believe that when you start building an open platform, you can defeat this resistance. The society will give you strength. I think the society will eventually win the victory.
Finally, the law is a social maintainer, but they can't control the society. If the system and platform are completely open, society can express their voice. For example, the Millennium Digital Copyright Act will modify the behavior of the past civil law as a violation to make it more low. Because the legal structure must support social structure.
