The Internet does not exist: it perfectly matches the physical world, we go there as we go to the office, to a bar or as we enter our bedroom. The only real difference with respect to physical environments is that it allows us to be ubiquitous.
On the Internet there aren’t different conversations, it’s that you listen to conversations of people very different from you.
Online relationships are just like offline relationships: a few of them are deep, many are superficial, as many are opportunistic, mannered or false.
Technology enables the change, it does not generate it: a person who has nothing to say or write does not become active and generous only because they may do so. Explaining the change to him again and again is like explaining a joke if one did not laugh the first time you told it.
Technology enables the talent where it exists, it does not create it.
Digital natives are accustomed to technology, not aware of all its potential: being amazed or disappointed that they use Facebook to comment on X-Factor rather than to make a revolution is like giving me a pole and wondering why I’m not jumping from one rooftop the other.
The awareness of the significance of a medium (any medium) belongs to a minority of professionals. Bridging the digital divide does not mean making everyone professionals.
In being an enabler and not the cause of the change, digital media cannot be classified as good or bad, right or wrong, useful or dangerous.
Labeling them with those attributes is just a cheap shot to win the stage.
If someone – even competent – explains in detail the issues of the Internet, they’re are just telling you about their problems with the Internet.
The Internet is a medium in which the spoken language prevails, or even better, the transcribed thought. We need a new syntax.
Most of the exchanges that occur online are phatic nature, no transmission of information.