'Weblogs' are a part of that, of course, but hardly even the only way of finding good writing on the net. Usenet's still around, among other things.

Other whining: "In making publication available to all, the Internet bypasses the editorial process that attempts to separate the wheat from the dross, the publishable from the unpublishable. ... It has no standards, because none are required." Also wrong. Not every website is equally popular; you can find your way to good writing on the net!

Wrong. The egalitarianism rests on no such assumption, it results from the empowerment of everybody with a voice that anyone can hear.

The Wired Word: (a là array) "The egalitarianism of the Internet is appealing, but it rests on an untenable assumption: not merely that all of us are created equal, but that all of us are equally meritorious and interesting. Thus we have news Web sites in which the opinions of readers are solicited ("What's Your View?") and displayed in a format that gives equal weight to the informed and the ignorant; at last count Washingtonpost.com had registered more than (!) 2,600 "opinions" about gay rights in Vermont. "

Now... back to my Mozart...

And I can't resist... "Metallica's Lars Ulrich said in a statement, '[It's] sickening to know that our art is being traded like a commodity rather than the art that it is.'" Nah, I think 'commodity' sounds about right.

Still soliciting comments on yesterday's question... people other then Wesley Felter are allowed to reply too... the beginning of the thread.

Is it just that I haven't been around long enough, or is the judicial system in this country becoming actively hostile towards the Internet? ACLU's Filter Appeal Rejected in the cphack case, and apparently quite summarily. The ACLU might as well start saving for the appeal right now. The judge has already ruled, I think.

Ok, I'm going to fulfill something closer to this site's original purpose today...