
t
hasn't. - Moira Gunn, Tech Nation
he mainstream is slower to fully embrace
it. - James Brancheau, VP, GartnerG2
ivic participation. Compassion. -
Douglas Rushkoff, author/New York University
Interactive Telecommunications Program
-democracy. Virtual community. -
Barry Wellman, University of Toronto
roadband has been slow to roll out
inhibiting the potential impact of true digital
households. - Mike Kelly, America Online
Education - I thought distance learning
would be more widespread. 2. Elections - I thought we
would get to online voting sooner. 3. E-commerce - I
thought that online commerce would have a more
devastating impact on local commerce and local
taxation. - Charlie Firestone, The Aspen Institute,
(this organization works to promote non-partisan
inquiry)
t has basically gone further than almost
all of my expectations short of truly immersive
experiences. But I have since decided that immersive
virtual experiences are too dull compared to real
experiences. - Alexander Rose, executive director,
The Long Now Foundation (this organization works to
promote long-term thinking)
t has been less intellectually
broadening than I would have hoped. The ready
availability of alternative viewpoints has not made
people more tolerant and broadminded. Quite the
opposite - it has if anything contributed to
polarization, as technology has made it easier to seek
out viewpoints that agree with your own preconceived
notions, and to filter out views that might challenge
those assumptions. - Rich Jaroslovsky, Bloomberg
News/founding president of the Online News
Association
expected to have more an impact on
education than it has. - Joe DeSantis, Gingrich
Communications
en years ago I expected that the
internet would change education in my lifetime. -
Christine Geith, Michigan State University
know I expected to see far more online
product-customization tools. I would have thought that
by now everyone's clothes would all be made custom.
- Fred Hapgood, Output Ltd.
pam and viruses. Identity theft and
frauds abetted by easy anonymity and insufficient
privacy safeguards. Dismal customer-service at most
companies - especially Internet businesses. - Peter
Denning, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey,
Calif./columnist for Communications of the
ACM
ducation. As with radio, most of the
hoped-for educational impact of the Internet didn't
materialize. For information, see Radio Research,
McCarthyism and Paul F. Lazarsfeld:
http://www.simson.net/clips/academic/pfl_thesis_scan.pdf.
- Simson Garfinkel, MIT/Sandstorm
Enterprises
nly that in the '90s it was more a
vehicle to create open societies where it's now
being used for surveillance and censorship because of
the world circumstance. - Jonathan Peizer, Open
Society Institute
expected the internet to completely
revolutionize education (especially higher education)
and other such institutions - government, news, etc.
The technology evolved in a way that would have
permitted this, but I underestimated the resistance of
the institutions to change. - Gary Bachula,
Internet2
expected that computers would be more
available to families at all income levels. I expected
less expensive access to proprietary databases. I did
not anticipate the extent of intrusive activities such
as spam, spyware, and unwanted data mining. - Lois
C. Ambash, Metaforix Inc.
ynchronous collaboration - "sharing
minds" via shared electronic spaces. - Noshir
Contractor, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign
am disappointed at the persistence of
the digital divide and continued expense of broadband
access. I am looking forward to increased access to
online services to all members of society. - Gary
Kreps, George Mason University
t has not fallen short of my
expectations. It has exceeded them. I never expected to
be spending two hours a day answering email, most of it
requiring an answer. It has improved my communications
system beyond my imagination. - Arlene Morgan,
Columbia Graduate School of Journalism
had thought it would do more to change
us socially and culturally. I think we're still in
the "old wine in new bottles stage," looking
to use technologically transformed means of doing
things to do the things we're used to. Linguists
say that a pidgin language moves to the creole stage
(develops its own integrity and grammar) only in the
second generation (since kids are better at language
acquisition and system-grasping than adults). I think
that's what will have to happen with the internet.
The so-called "digital natives," the
generation coming of age, will find truly
transformative ways of using the internet. - George
Otte, technology expert
thought the spread of the network would
be faster, that it would be a feature in every home by
now. The delay in the implementation of broadband was
something that few predicted at the time.- William
B. Pickett, Rose-Hulman Institute of
Technology
ccess to online databases and
publications has not become as widespread as quickly as
I thought it would. Partly it is because of fear over
protection of intellectual property. Partly it is
because proprietary sources are charging too much, thus
impeding growth. - Ezra Miller, Ibex Consulting,
Ottawa, Canada
he failure to address the security
issues that were identified before the mass-market
take-off. The predictions in 1995 that the take-off
would be followed by a post Y2K boom-bust and backlash
has proved all too accurate. I was one of those who
went public with such predictions (1996, "The End
is Nigh," published by Computer Weekly and IMIS)
in the hope of seeing the necessary action to prevent
them from happening. What happened was even worse than
I had feared. - Philip Virgo, secretary general
EURIM - UK-based Parliament Industry Group/IMIS -
UK-based professional body for management of
information systems
believed 10 years ago that the Internet
would replace physical social networks, and would
flatten them. What has happened instead is that society
has found a way to make the Internet work in a way that
supports a class society, rather than replace it. Now
many people have access, but social rules around access
have developed that keep social hierarchies in place.
Collaboration has also fallen short of my expectations.
It is still very difficult to collaborate online, and
in the business world, the model of creating a
document, attaching it to a message, and sending it, is
a replication of an old world concept that makes no
sense. - Ted Eytan, MD, Group Health
Cooperative
see students increasingly assuming that
if it is on the web, then it is the complete and
accurate story. - Fran Hassencahl, Old Dominion
University
t hasn't. It's right where it
should be: The Internet is to the 2000s what TV was to
the 1960s. - Joshua Fouts, executive director, USC
Center on Public Diplomacy
en years ago I believed we needed an
AAA-like organization, a group to promote the rights of
"drivers" on the "information
highway." I still believe that is true. -
Kevin Taglang, private technology consultant
t the time I thought we were all headed
for a Virtual Reality world - but instead only a subset
of users use MMOGs. I would not have predicted that the
internet would overcome TV watching among some users.
- Joe Crawford, San Diego Blog/LAMP Host
ormal education has changed less, much
less than most futurists predicted. It is hard not to
have been disappointed, to not have been suckered in by
the grandiose claims for rapid changes. - Douglas
Levin, policy analyst, Cable in the
Classroom
n improving K-12 education and a global
sense of possibility among young people. And in the
expansion of projects like ThinkQuest and Global
SchoolHouse - that should have grown exponentially and
have frozen in place or declined. - Cynthia
Samuels, Center for America Progress
tudent textbooks are not yet really
online. Mainstream news organizations have failed to
act creatively and nimbly to embrace the Net. - Jan
Schaffer. J-Lab: The Institute for Interactive
Journalism
Newspapers have done very little to make
use of the unique multimedia and interactive properties
of the Web. 2. Online communities have not grown as
quickly as I anticipated. 3. Publishers have been slow
to take advantage of the interactive and targeting
capabilities of the Web to offer new kinds of editorial
services and useful information services, though they
have been eager to exploit the target marketing
capabilities. - Janice Castro, assistant dean,
director, graduate journalism programs, Northwestern
University
e continue to support and promote
products and services to the "wired" and
ignore those who are confused and unable to access the
web - such as the very poor and the elderly. (Example:
Commerce Department's last report of the
"closing of the Digital Divide" - simply not
true when only 20% of seniors use the net vs. 80% of
others. This is a wide wedge in society. - Tobey
Dichter, Generations on Line, non-profit internet
literacy agency
ivic engagement - through I would see
more by government by now. - Liz Rykert, Meta
Strategies Inc., Toronto, Canada
ireless/pervasive computing has arrived
much more slowly than I'd expected ? I continue to
be amazed by the number of voluntary Internet exiles -
people who are offline out of choice/lack of interest,
not economic necessity. In my own area of research
(e-politics/e-government) change has arrived more
slowly than I would have imagined. Governments continue
to talk a lot about "breaking down silos"
between vertically-organized departments, but
organizational change has been very slow to catch up to
technological change, and without that organizational
change, the capacity to provide innovative,
single-window service remains limited. In the political
arena, we've yet to see a significant victory that
can be unambigously attributed to the Internet. The
[Minnesota Governor Jesse] Ventura story seems to be
partly a story about the Net, but there's too much
disagreement to conclude that it was the decisive
factor; and the [Democrat presidential candidate
Howard] Dean story, while it demonstrated the impact of
the Internet, did not produce ultimate victory. Net
campaigners are still very much searching for the
transformational models that will go beyond online
fundraising and organizing; the Net is still more a
tool for facilitating offline campaigning than a forum
in itself (except for a relatively small number of
digerati.) - Alexandra Samuel, Harvard
University/Cairns Project (New York Law
School)
n 1994, I suspected that within ten
years most people would be using email, and that a
great deal of commerce would be conducted online. I had
little idea that broadband would allow the kinds of
applications we have now. I did suspect more success in
telework. This has moved more slowly than I expected it
would. - A. Halavais, State University of New York
at Buffalo
thought the Internet would enable direct
e-commerce from the producer/manufacturer to the
consumer, bypassing the middleman. In part because of
resistance by middlemen, this has generally not
happened, Dell Computers, not withstanding. I thought
that the widespread use of consumer-based online
authentication systems would be here by now. I thought
that the ''local wide web'' would be
flourishing - in other words using the Web to enhance
local communities. It's only with ''Google
Local'' in the last few months that this is
beginning to happen. I thought we'd be farther
along on e-gov, e-learning; e-health; e-transportation
(e.g. ITS) than we are now. I thought the Semantic web
would be here by now. - Rob Atkinson, Progressive
Policy Institute (think-tank)
can't think of any [negatives or
disappointments] because too much of my time is spent
in pure amazement at what is possible with each new
day. - Leonard Witt, PJNet.org
am disappointed with the extensive
growth of proprietary programs, and the lack of
standards that permit interoperability. - Ted
Christensen, Arizona Board of Regents
think 10 years ago, most of us involved
with the early Internet business models thought the
Internet would replace traditional businesses. Instead,
it has grown to enhance business in ways we could of
never predicted. - Gerard LaFond, Persuasive
Games/Red Tangent
he use of the net by educational
institutions for high-quality course instruction and
learning is in use and in continued development by
those that embraced it, but there has been less use by
traditional established institutions and governments
than I expected. - William Stewart,
LivingInternet.com
And the following are from predictors who
chose to remain anonymous: [Workplaces of respondents
whose reactions are listed below include MIT, Evident
Marketing, RAND, AOL, FCC, AT&T, National Public
Radio, EG&G, Media General, U.S. General Services
Administration, MSNBC, Gartner, Microsoft, Polaris
Venture Partners, Michigan State University, Disney,
NeoPets, Florida State University, Fidelity
Investments, Netcraft, The Communisphere
Project/Interactive USA Inc., Internet2, Robert Wood
Johnson Foundation, Fannie Mae Foundation, Harvard
University, University of Illinois, Carnegie Mellon,
U.S. General Services Administration, University of
Delaware, Zix Corporation, Burson-Marstellar, Avenue
A/Razorfish, George Lucas Educational Foundation and
others.]
Politics still sucks.
America's getting more totalitarian even as the
populace is dancing in the streets to downloaded
music. We forgot to build the Internet
with enough security and economics.
Electronic government. Household tasks.
The means of finding what I want on the Internet have
not developed nearly as much as I had hoped and
expected. The flood of maliciousness and avarice that
e-mail has unleashed is a bit disappointment.
K-12 education; health care; e-government;
e-books. I'm disappointed that the
Internet and new technologies have not strengthened the
social fabric and increased civic behavior. I'm
also concerned that the aggressive actions taken by
entertainment-industry associations and the lobbyists
to stop sharing are short-sighted and will harm the
large entertainment companies ultimately more than
protect them. Civility online has deteriorated
and the potential for online discourse as a means of
revitalizing the public sphere has progressed more
slowly than I had expected. As I feared, bland content from
large media companies dominates too much. There is
great creativity from a wide range of sources, and it
does get noticed and it does have an impact. But the
balance is not where I would like it to be.
Training or education in how to sort through more or
less credible sources of information; lack of
evaluative information available as to credibility of
sources.
Things are happening. Things are still poised to
become radically different over time. But the virtual
world still must be "digested" by the real
world. Just because it's there doesn't mean
it's having the maximum impact possible on our
lives.
Video - most video applications remain very crude. The
network infrastructure simply isn't sufficient for
reliable internet video.
Democratic life.
Civic engagement and education.
We were drastically wrong about predictions of on-line
community. The growth of online multimedia
news and interactive content has been hampered by
slowness of adoption and other market forces, coupled
with the 2001-2004 failure of the "new
economy" to measure up to advertisers'
expectations.
I was involved in some of the early 1990s conferences
on the Health Information Infrastructure and
telemedicine. Just finished reviewing some files
tonight. Many of the same issues are still under debate
with the same benefits being touted. We have, however,
made progress with Internet access and broadband
distribution. It's just much slower than anyone
thought it would be. And the problems of electronic
medical records and standards is taking generations to
solve.
Fallen far short in electronic democracy or building
political capital.
The Internet has been bogged down by commercial
websites that reflect the dominant corporations. I
would have expected more "shopping bots" and
other consumer tools to become ubiquitous tools.
Local governance.
Fewer people with access and expertise than
expected. Convergence has been much slower
than anticipated - ask Time Warner; roll out of
broadband and digital television has been slower;
computertish television - slower; the manner in which
software has made products too vulnerable; the digital
divide is still too wide; we have not adequately
protected our children; we have allowed the loss of
privacy; we do don't appreciate the power from the
aggregation of information; some of the attempts at
creating transaction-based markets have failed. It took much longer for broadband
to catch on in the U.S. and globally. Plus, independent
online-only publications have mostly failed miserably
to the old-line media companies online. Online gaming
also took longer to become a mainstream passion than I
thought it would.
I still struggle to control the flow of information so
that I only engage when I want to, not when someone
else wants to engage me.
The quality of internet content continues to be
generally poor. It is still the case that "on the
internet nobody knows you're a dog" and so one
cannot trust internet relationships.
I had few expectations, but was always surprised at
how long it took to realize what could easily be
imagined. Standards wars seemed to hold things
up.
Eradicating porno sites - safeguarding computers
against virus invasions, moving too fast and not
thinking of rules/regulations for websites - so much
SPAM. I must have 40 SPAM stops every day at work, and
on my home yahoo account I must get 300 a day. AND I
still get junk mail at home.
Online learning has been very flat. There has been a
lack of successful collaborations among institutions,
which are negatively incented to form partnerships (due
to enrollment quotas) and to use technology (faculty do
not receive positive incentives to explore technology
rather than publish papers).
I thought that the Library of Congress would be
digitized by now. I am appalled that this has not
happened. The cost of such an undertaking would be
about $230M. I am disappointed, but not surprised that
encryption technology isn't widely used today (most
email is not encrypted end-to-end, and neither is this
survey).
Health care - especially in terms of the ability to
exchange patient information. Education hasn't
really changed fundamentally. Communities of place have
not changed in the ways we hoped.
The future seems to always lag expectations. There was
no "Big Brother" in 1984 and no
"HAL" in 2001. I'm not surprised at where
we are; I would have thought we would be here sooner.
The places where we've fallen short have been in
the video streaming area. I would have thought ten
years ago that nearly all entertainment would utilize
the Internet for all forms of television, on-demand
movies, etc. That hasn't happened yet.
The utility of email due to spam, the validness of
information (due to people's ability to publish
what they want whether wrong or not), and weakness of
the structure due to DoS attacks, co-opted machines by
worms, etc.
1. individual creation of video; 2. medicine and
health care.
Too many bandwidth-eating applications with all glitz
and no substance.
Disintermediation hasn't really happened.
Consolidation of the pipeline and legal restriction of
the potential of this pipeline was very sad to watch.
There has been little or no change in the use, other
than the explosion of online retailers. Virtual
interaction has taken a backseat to advertising.
Expected the Internet would hail an era of better
customer satisfaction by making institutions more
accessible. If anything service has decreased as
organizations have not been able to keep up with the
demand.
The internet is very effective in increasing certain
types of efficiency, e.g. in shopping. It has fallen
short in differentiating quality information from
everything else, which dominates.
I expected to get away from typing, to have functional
voice recognition and easy graphical input. But
we're not there. I'm still typing, and it
hurts!
The whole thing is still way too slow, even with the
best computers on the best network connections.
It's still not reliable enough, and there is way
too much garbage to wade through to find genuinely
useful information.
The Internet is much less secure than I expected with
the explosion of worms, viruses, spams and fraud.
Bots never really came to the fore.
I had expected more change in the medical arena and an
overall reduction of societal health care costs as a
result of internet communications and record-keeping
efficiencies.
I'd expected more innovative ways of seeing
things, less 2D/screen, more immersive and engaging
interfaces.
I am still surprised that I am reading information on
paper. I also thought, by now, "on-demand"
options - of movies, etc. - would be more pervasive. I
still cannot make a doctor's appointment
online!
Micropayments have been a failure. The use in the arts
is less than I would have expected.
The internet still does not provide easy access for
most users. Sites are often designed for more highly
educated, wealthier Americans. The internet continues
to be inaccessible on a variety of levels for many
Americans.
It has exceeded my expectations for certain
demographic segments of the world's population. As
expected, most people in the world are unaffected by
the advent of the Internet.
Religion. I launched faith-oriented websites in 1996,
expecting many would see the Internet's
effectiveness in religious communication. It didn't
happen. Most adult churchgoers still can't use the
Net effectively.
Ten years ago, I would have predicted a higher
penetration rate in homes, and a greater impact on
healthcare.
Teleconferencing and computer-mediated real time
communication is the vision that has not happened. We
still wait for the paperless office. The concept is
probably foolish. Some folks (not I) thought that
education would have been more rapidly transformed. I
was a pessimist in this space.
We haven't yet developed a method for ensuring the
quality of information posted online and there is a lot
of junk out there that masquerades as useful knowledge.
The growth in weak ties (if there indeed has been one)
has not had the impact I imagined it would.
I had expected the Internet to represent more diverse
views, but the most popular sites are part of large
media conglomerates or other large corporations.
It's about where I expected. I gave a talk at
InternetWorld 2005, and mostly things have turned out
as such. Web Services are slow to get going. -
Microsoft
The public sector has embraced the Internet much more
slowly than I had envisaged. Community networks have
never really become mainstream as we thought they
would. Also, digital libraries have mostly been driven
by professional groups (such as ACM/IEEE), rather than
by governments.
Electronic money, i.e. a currency created on the
Internet for electronic exchanges, unrelated to
national currencies.
Too few physicians using the Internet in practice,
either to access information or to communicate with
their patients.
While I hoped it would be a big time saver, it has
added a new demand to my personal and professional
life. Being able to reach out to so many means you need
to stay on top of them all. It also means so many more
people can reach me.
Ten years ago, I thought the net would be a greater
force for peace in the world. Now I see this as
naive.
Among other things, I thought journalists would grasp
the technology's potential more firmly. We have
not, for the most part, and we remain paralyzed by the
threats we see from the changes.
Small- and medium-sized businesses haven't
participated in e-commerce as much as I would have
expected.
I expected video broadband delivery to be much further
along.
The Internet was supposed to empower individuals at
the expense of corporations and nations. That view now
seems naive.
The ''cleanliness'' of information
available - I do not refer to pornography - I refer to
the fact that there is so much ''dead''
information that comes across daily when all I need is
a statistic from one major source; I am disappointed by
this.
I had thought that we'd see more interlinking of
various types of content by now (example: images of
artworks linked to in-depth encyclopedias of art
history) along with better visualization tools. The
progress is being made but much more slowly than I had
thought.
The saddest part of the story is how big business and
media has tried to force the Internet into the box they
define for it, rather than using it to its fullest
potential. Not that all is lost, but all of these
analytics companies trying to measure and show business
results is quite hideous. Also, the use of content
online keeps getting downplayed when really that is
what the Internet is about.
It's taking longer for people to comprehend and
embrace the power of the internet than I thought would
be the case. I'm surprised by how many people still
don't ''get it.'' I had also
expected online education to be more widespread than it
is right now.
Fallen short? Quite the contrary! Due to the internet,
I telecommute 300 miles from my home office, and thus
can be close to family rather than be stuck in another
city due to job needs. I get and share information
about uncommon things like treadle sewing machines,
purchase parts that I would have enormous difficulty
finding locally. Internet research allowed us to
collect a depth and breadth of data about our
neighborhood that we could NEVER have gotten from a
realtor and allowed us to find an under-priced house in
a desirable neighborhood. The ability to do this sort
of thing I would not have thought would have been
possible in 1994.
Effective personal instruction and creation of
learning landscapes has been slow in coming. People
outside of education made too many important decisions.
Time of involvement, peer mentoring and sharing, and
project based learning and innovative ways of working
seem to have been slow in coming, and just as they did,
the No Child Left Behind Act, created a tidal wave that
swept over the technology initiatives in that there was
confusion so the use of the Internet were slowed.
The web is still largely a ''junk''
medium, like a library where all the books are strewn
on the floor (I stole that quote from someone but
can't remember who). The web has been co-opted by
large media companies; evolution of the centralization
of media has continued in a medium many hoped would
discourage this problem. Web pages still load too
slowly.
Primarily in terms of the impact on politics and
society in general... Like many people who have been
researching the net for some time, I also initially
approached the net with a somewhat utopian and
deterministic approach. Research (and reality) have
forced me to take a more balanced approach in terms of
my expectations of the net. In general, I see the net
as being a catalyst for existing social and political
trends and changes rather than something that
necessarily initiates these changes.
The internet still requires a great deal of human
effort to filter through the ''noise''
to find what one is looking for. i.e., there's
still a lot of crap out there. I'm also surprised
that extremely high speed internet access is not more
widely available. In many places, dialup is still the
connection method of choice.
The corporate buying and corralling of the Internet.
There is a lot of information out there but linking
structures funnel you to only a small portion.
It has not brought people of all walks closer
together. With the digital divide, there is a greater
marginalization of certain groups. Too many lower
strata families lack the buying power, computing power
and the overall knowledge power to function
online.
The FCC vision of humans as consumers who consume
third party corporate content, as opposed to the
Information Revolution where all all line are creators
and innovators. FCC policy has perpetuated the
evolution from couch potato to cyber couch potato.
Instead of promoting true Internet connections, the FCC
has liberated a duopoly which has the power to ban
VPNS, webservers, wifi access points, encryption, third
party VoIP. FCC policy envisions the humans as
''consumers'' of mass content who have
no need for the empowerment of an interactive medium.
Finally, FCC policy has led us to the place of mediocre
broadband network access, provided by a consolidated
market, with no concept of traditional common carriage
ideals.
I was surprised to see how poorly the IT sector
deployed defenses to spam and hackers. I was surprised
that Microsoft products have never improved in quality.
Information visualization.
I did not expect that porn and objectionable content
would have as large an impact as it has had on so
many.
I never expected the internet to take off like this. I
would not have predicted the problems of the internet -
spam, phishing, viruses - and would have been
disappointed to learn of them, if I had even thought
they would happen.
[I am disappointed in] its ability to redefine
publishing and information-sharing models. Online
publications have gained editorial legitimacy, but they
are lagging in acceptance as a mass medium. And e-mail
has become a near-nightmare. The inability of
technocrats to fix the spam problem will go down as a
major missed opportunity in Internet history.
It has not become as ubiquitous as expected, and is
not likely to rise over 75-80% penetration as long as
we are tied to PCs as the main interface. I think that
is overcome by widespread adoption of embedded devices,
in everything from our cars to home appliances to
medical devices such as blood-sugar and heart-rate
monitors. Second digital media distribution. Both the
technological and the business barriers have been far
more difficult than anyone expected.
|