A critical question to the article of Clay Shirky

Question: This is the first time that I actually have a hard time making up a question. I just can’t come up with something critical. It’s all a bit of a blur to me what the article is about. Is it about the preconditions that distinguishes peer-to-peer from programs that aren’t peer-to-peer and if so, who cares, really? It seems to me like an rather technical article. But anyway, my question will be, what makes Napster P2P?

Answer: The addresses of Napster nodes bypass the DNS system, and because once the Napster server resolves the IP addresses of the PCs hosting a particular song, it shifts control of the file transfers to the nodes. Furthermore, the ability of the Napster nodes to host the songs without central intervention lets Napster users get access to several terabytes of storage and bandwidth at no additional cost.

A critical question to the article of Emelie Rutherford

Question: This article is obviously a commercial article. At one point the article explains the benefits of P2P for a company. One argument is that workers collaborating on a project can instantaneously chat and complete a task. My critical question is and what would be the negative effects of P2P?

Answer: It’s nice that people can look up information needed for their work through a cunning keen P2P program. But don’t you think that workers will also ‘share’ a lot of other stuff? Like music, fun things, games, porn etc. Workers are  already doing this with their email-system. So why wouldn’t they do this with P2P. I don’t think they will share and look-up information at the same time their completing a task. No they download and share a lot more while watching the other stuff they just collected. My advise to company would be NOT to acquire this, unless there’s a version with a filter that only allows work-related stuff but I don’t think it’s on the market yet….

A critical question to the article of Jeffrey Boase and Barry Wellman

Question: reading this article and especially the example of FREE Email system Hotmail, I had to think about the rotisserie assignment of last week about the participating being labour(it was last week wasn’t it?). My question would be, how would you consider this Labour?

Answer: I do consider it labour. Hotmail is making so much money due to our email-actions. Hotmail being free isn’t good enough. We should get paid and we should at least get more space in our inbox. I mean, the viral marketing-actions are so humongous with this email-system and hotmail is receiving so much income that it would only be fare if they would let us, the workers, get paid. And what’s really worthless is that when you sign up for hotmail they’ve put in a tiny junction which allows them to send you Spam!!! So not only are we working for free for Hotmail , second of all the email-system isn’t even user-friendly!