MODELLO PER LA STRUTTURAZIONE SU FILE WORD DELLE NOTIZIE DA INSERIRE NEL DATABASE

Materia o Classe Tematica (da scegliere dalla lista): hacktivism

Tipologia o genere (da scegliere dalla lista): Sociologia e politicalibro

Argomento Principale (max. 35 caratteri): Cyberpower [questo argomento non è presente nel THESAURUS, quindi devi segnalare la cosa nel campo VARIE]

Argomento secondario 1 (max. 35 caratteri): Critica di Adrian Mihalache[qui devi scrivere ciò che è l’argomento della critica. Attenzione devi usare solo una parola (o poco più). Non deve essere una frase, ma una parola chiave]

Argomento secondario 2 (max. 35 caratteri): Critica di Sara Steinidem

Argomento secondario 3 (max. 35 caratteri): Risposta di Tim Jordanidem

Persona o gruppo/collettivo (max. 35 caratteri): Adrian Mihalache Adrian [prima il cognome e poi il nome], Sara Stein Sara, Tim Jordan Tim

Autore (max. 35 caratteri): Tim Jordan Tim

Titolo (max. 100 caratteri): Le recensioni di Adrian Mihalache e Sara Stein [a che cosa???]e la risposta di Tim Jordan

[in ogni caso mi sembra che il testo parli di “Cyberpower: The Culture and Politics of Cyberspace and the Internet” e dunque quello potrebbe essere il TITOLO, mentre quello che tu hai scritto qui sopra (completandolo meglio) potrebbe essere la DESCRIZIONE BREVE. Ciò che si deve capire dal TITOLO e DESCRIZIONE BREVE è che la notizia contiene recensioni, e risposta, del libro di Jordan]

Data dell'evento (max. 4 caratteri): 2000

Luogo dell'evento (max. 35 caratteri): USA

Descrizione breve (max. 255 caratteri):

Secondo la critica di Adrian Mihalache,Tim Jordan fa una distinzione interessante fra Cyberspace Internet e lo spazio informativo dei flussi; nel senso che il Cyberspace include Internet e lo spazio dei flussi ma include un certo numero di altre reti che non possono essere collegate ad Internet e contiene le risorse che non fanno parte dello spazio dei flussi indagando così ad esempio il campo dell’alimentazione.

Dal punto di vista di Sarah Stein i modelli di vita virtuale sono l'argomento del Cyberspace di Tim Jordan il quale li descrive come una cartografia delle alimentazioni che circolano con le vite virtuali e come una tabella delle forze che modellano la politica, la tecnologia e la coltura delle società virtuali.

L’autore del testo sostiene che le autrici trattano il Cyberspace come una sorta di manuale ed entrambe esplorano i problemi con troppa semplificazione. Ma ci sono contraddizioni nelle loro descrizioni perché il libro non è stato scritto come manuale ma per essere accessibile e per mantenere il Cyberspace al centro dell’attenzione. Poichè le note delle due autrici lo fanno apparire come un manuale e non come un testo introduttivo ai concetti chiave del cyberspace, l’autore desidera confermare che ha scritto un libro ambizioso nel tentativo di affermare il concetto di alimentazione all'interno del Cyberspace e di Internet ed esprimere queste idee perchè la maggior parte della gente possa leggerle.[riduci. Max. 255 caratteri. Questa interessante sintesi che hai fatto è un lavoro in più che non avevo richiesto. Dato che lo hai fatto potresti comunque inserirlo all’inizio del campo TESTO]

Dati bibliografici o fonte bibliografica della notizia (max. 255 caratteri):

http://www.google.it/search?hl=it&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Tim+Jordan,+Cyber+power:+The+Culture+and+Politics+of+Cyberspace+and+the+Internet,+London+and+New+York:+Routledge+1999&spell=1Cyberpower: The Culture and Politics of Cyberspace and the Internet

Varie o autore dell'inserimento (max. 255 caratteri): Mario Rossi, mariorossi@topolinia.it argomento mancante: Cyberpower

Testo (max. 64.000 caratteri):

Cyberpower: The Culture and Politics of Cyberspace and the Internet

Author: Tim Jordan

Publisher: London and New York: Routledge, 1999

Review Published: October 2000

REVIEW 1: Adrian Mihalache

Tim Jordan's view on "power" is systemic and structural: according to him,

"power" is the name applied to that which structures culture, politics,

and economics (1). Without the "lines of force," any field -- be it

magnetic, electric, social, or other -- would be devoid of form. Power is,

consequently, related to information because it in-forms; it provides a

pattern for the contradictory and interdependent actions that take place

in a specific area. The area Jordan selects for his approach is cyberspace

and his book is an attempt to "chart the forces that pattern the politics,

technology and culture of virtual societies" (3). He makes clear cut

distinctions between (a) "power" from the individual viewpoint, which

involves fluid identities, the restructuring of hierarchies and

informational constructs, (b) "power" at the social level, including

wired-rules within on-line communities and on-line/off-line communication

protocols, and (c) "power" at the imaginary level, that is, the dominant

metaphors, dreams and stories that deal with "power."

The first chapter examines three theories of power which Jordan thinks

relevant in the context: Max Weber's concept of power as a possession of

the individuals, Barry Barnes' one of power as the constituent of social

order, and Michel Foucault's power as domination. While Weber's position

stands clearly apart, the other two seem somewhat overlapping at first

sight. However, the final distinction provided by Jordan is satisfactory:

"Foucault argues that attempting to define power in the abstract is not

necessary; instead a methodology for studying power is needed. [. . .]

Foucault considers whether power should be studied as a relation or as a

possession, while Barnes and Weber analyze whether power is a relation or

a possession" (19, my own highlight).

In Chapter 2, cyberspace is analyzed from the perspective of cyberpunk and

from the development of its underlying infrastructure. He reminds the

reader that Internet was developed from the ARPA project of building up a

distributed computer network that would survive partial destruction in the

case of a nuclear attack. As a result, a myth of the intrinsic

anti-hierarchical nature of cyberspace was born, clearly contradicted by

the present-day centralized management of the assignment of IP numbers and

names (41). However, Jordan does not get into the political controversy

that the role of ICANN triggered in and out of cyberspace. As far as the

intuitive perception of the latter is concerned, Jordan believes that its

"spatial" features resulted form joining together "the visions of

cyberpunk to the reality of networks," thus creating "a concept of

cyberspace as a place that currently exists" (56).

Chapter 3 examines the issues concerning individual powers in cyberspace.

Three aspects are enumerated as worth examining: identity fluidity,

anti-hierarchism and information as reality (65). Jordan realizes that

"online characters are constructed and judged through a number of markers

that replace offline ones: addresses, handles, signatures, self-portraits

and styles" (79). However, whether the style works or not, whether it is

in fact a "correct" style, is determined by others (71). While the

people-on-the-net went cyber in order to escape the stifling power

relationships from "real life," cyber-behavior does not fail to induce new

such relationships. Jordan examines one specific behavior, the "trolling,"

which consists of posting unobviously false statements in order to make

fun of those who take them at their face value. He notes that "when

trolling is used systematically to establish boundaries between those who

can recognize and enjoy a good troll from those who cannot, then a system

of dominance appears out of the individual actions of those able to

indulge in trollingbecause of the powers they possess in cyberspace"

(88-89). He also mentions how legislation from off-line tries to limit

individual power on-line (95), but does not delve into the subject.

Chapter 4 takes up "The Virtual Social." When examining the social in

cyberspace, Jordan is aware of "the constant oscillation felt by users of

technology between operating technology as an inert, asocial 'thing' and

manipulating technology according to alive, social 'values'" (100-101). He

argues that social power in cyberspace is a Foucauldian form of power; it

is made up of networks of dominated and dominator (104). The substance of

the chapter is dedicated to the wired rules that induce relationships of

power in cyberspace without people even realizing it. The analysis of the

inherent regulating power of advanced information technology would have

been outstanding, had it not been better deployed in Lawrence Lessig's

excellent book, although more recent than Jordan's, Code and Other Rules

of Cyberspace [Reviewed by RCCS in August 2000], Jordan tells Lessig's

story in a more muddled way. However, he is the first to tell it.

In this "social" chapter, the author also takes up the issue of property

in cyberspace and rallies to the common opinion of the irrelevance of

property concepts in relation to informational products. He quotes John

Perry Barlow, the author of the "Cyberspace Manifesto" saying that:

"Property (tangible) can be taken from you. [. . .] If I own a horse and

you steal it, I can't ride it any more and its value has been lost to me.

But if I have an idea and you steal it, not only do I still have the same

idea, but the fact that two people now have the idea makes it

intrinsically more valuable (116).

This reasoning is as false as it is elementary, since giving information

away necessarily involves a loss for the supplier, who loses his or her

competitive edge with respect to the receiver. It is true that, at his

turn, he may access freely more information than he is ever capable of

supplying, but this is another matter worth looking into which Jordan

overlooks. Moreover, the fact that the book as a knowledge repository was

the first form of commodity also suggests that the issues of information

property are more complex than Jordan's philosophy dreams of. The

references to Microsoft's case (126) are, of course, obsolete, as any such

examples from the immediate are bound to be. For example, Lessig's

analysis of W2K suffers from the same cause. The conclusion of this

section has the authority of the obvious: "creating greater complexity in

the underlying technology of cyberspace distances individual users from

cyberspace's fundamental fabric and transfers control of that fabric to an

expertise-based elite (130).

Chapter 5 examines the social at the border between online and offline.

This is a good opportunity for the author to state his views on

globalization, and to draw a line between global and planetary. He

describes the four categories of workers that globalization brings about:

high-value producers, high-volume producers, raw materials producers, and

redundant producers (143-144). Information has become both the central

resource for and the key driving force of socio-economies. The human mind

is a direct productive force, not just a decisive element of the

production system. Consequently, offline production, consumption, and

politics rely on cyberspace, the territory par excellence where symbols

are manipulated and information is processed. As a result, "governments

legislate about cyberspace, corporations build and rebuild it to their

design, politicians apply it to electioneering and consumers demand its

support" (144). However, cyberspace is not just a function of offline

life, but has created its own social structures and forms of community.

Hence, possible conflicts between online and offline, which have to be

managed and kept within control. The main differences are, for the time

being, ideological. Freedom, for instance, is rarely mentioned in

mainstream media anymore, but it is ferociously defended -- and exercised

daily -- on the Net (163). As Jordan puts it, "for democratic politicians

to gain power they must receive the votes of people whose main, if not

sole, source of information about the politics comes from the media,

hence, the media (and, among them, web-based multimedia) fashion the

politics" (165).

Jordan makes an interesting distinction between cyberspace, the Internet,

and the informational space of flows. "Cyberspace includes the Internet

and the space of flows but it also includes a number of other computer

networks that may not be connected to the Internet and contains resources

that are not part of the space of flows (for instance MUDs). The space of

flows includes all parts of cyberspace and the Internet that contribute to

the three core elements of the space of flows: global, real-time,

never-ending" (170-171). Also, "the space of flows is, consequently, the

peculiar set of abilities to manipulate information that cyberspace offers

to offline space" (171).

When examining the alliances and conflicts between offline and online

elites, Jordan claims that cyberspace, just like any other "Frontier"

society, has no need for government because "social relations in such

cases are either freely chosen or are a response to basic human needs"

(174). This is a utopian argument, already convincingly overruled by

Lessig's analyses.

In chapter 6, "The Virtual Imaginary," Jordan attempts to tackle power at

the imaginary level, but does not get beyond such cultural constructs as

"Utopia and Dystopia," "Cyberspace as Heaven," "Cyborgs" and "Bots" as

mutants, the first indigenous species of cyberspace, and so on. He ends

his book with the pertinent observation that "the imaginary does not so

much connect to the individual and the social as permeate them (212).

Tim Jordan's Cyberpower was written as a textbook and, as such, it has the

qualities and the defects of such an enterprise. It sacrifices complexity

to clarity, depth to breadth, originality to completeness. However, it is

a comprehensive attempt, the first to raise and to analyze some important

issues on the circuits of power in cyberspace.

Adrian Mihalache:

Adrian Mihalache is a professor at the Politehnica University in

Bucharest, Romania, where he teaches Applied Statistics, Reliability

Theory, Total Quality Management, and Communication Skills. Presently, he

is a Fulbright Scholar at Western Michigan University, where he is

involved in the research project "Information Quality Assessment and

Cultural Diversity Promotion on the WWW." His work on cyberculture is

based on anthropologic fieldwork methodology and together with professor

Arthur Helweg, he is working on the book, "Ethnology of Cyberspace," to be

completed next summer.

REVIEW 2: Sarah Stein

The patterns of virtual life are the subject of Tim Jordan's Cyberpower, a

"cartography of the powers that circulate through virtual lives, a chart

of the forces that pattern the politics, technology and culture of virtual

societies" (3). This is an accessible and useful work that would fit in

well to an undergraduate course with a cultural studies approach to

cyberspace. Organized much like a textbook, each chapter begins with

several key concepts and definitions elaborated further in the pages that

follow. A brief glossary of computer culture acronyms is included at the

end. Sprinkled throughout the book are nine "myths of the electronic

frontier," that the author recounts as "founding morality tales of

cyberspace." Jordan's retelling of these cyber-legends includes the moral

lessons he believes they impart.

The concept of cyberpower is discussed on three levels: the individual,

the social and the imaginary. The first chapter, "Power and Cyberspace,"

presents three theoretical frameworks for analyzing power. Jordan states

that he will address these uncritically, as his aim is to introduce models

for the analysis of forces that structure cyberspace, rather than engage

all the problematics of the nature of power itself. He offers brief

summaries of power as a possession (Max Weber), power as constitutive of

social order (Barry Barnes), and power as domination (Michel Foucault). He

ends the chapter with several questions that could be useful in triggering

discussion among students.

Chapter Two, "Cyberspace and the Matrix," looks at science fiction, the

actual state of networked computers, and the way these discourses combine

to produce cyberspace as it is currently lived and understood. Science

fiction, and in particular cyberpunk, is addressed both as fiction and in

its claims as social criticism. Jordan follows with the contemporary

reality of computer networks, with useful sections on the history of the

Internet and studies on the demographics of Internet use. The first of the

nine electronic frontier myths appears here, as Jordan cites studies that

debunk the widely reported notion that ARPANET was designed initially as a

communications network in the event of nuclear war. The chapter concludes

by setting the foundation for the rest of the book: "We do not have

cyberspace as Gibson described it and we do have a computer network that

can just about be described. Between the two has emerged a social,

cultural, economic and political space of virtual human interaction -- a

real cyberspace" (55). From here, Jordan moves to the topic of the

remaining chapters, power as it sustains and constrains virtual lives and

possible virtual futures.

Chapter Three, "The Virtual Individual," looks at experiences in virtual

communities such as the WELL and in MUDs and MOOs. It discusses the

components of online life in terms of identity fluidity, its

anti-hierarchical nature, and its constitution by information. Cyberpower

understood as personal empowerment and the issues of access and online

rights that result from this concept of power are addressed. The

discredited Carnegie-Mellon pornography on the Internet study is described

to lead into a discussion on cyberpolitics, particularly those of free

speech and censorship. Power, as the experience of cyberspace, is examined

here in the Weberian sense of individual possession. The chapter concludes

with a discussion of the limits of understanding cyberpower at the

individual level, and moves toward cyberpower as a collective force.

Chapter Four and Chapter Five deal with the virtual social. Jordan

reverses his earlier focus: "Rather than individuals founding societies,

now societies will be the foundation for individuals" and asks what forms

of cyberpower appear in online societies (102). The first chapter,

defining social power in cyberspace as technopower, explores the concept

of "neutrality" in relation to technological tools and the social values

embedded in the design and construction of those tools. Jordan applies

Barnes' and Foucault's theories of power to this notion of technopower,

using the LambdaMOO virtual rape as told by Julian Dibbell as a case in

point. He considers the technopower of cyberspace in terms of information,

information overload, and technoelites (corporate and individual),

exploring cyberpower as "patterns of social relations that create systems

of domination, whose articulation in cyberspace fuels an ever more

dominant elite" (141).

Chapter Five furthers the analysis of the virtual social by exploring

cyberpower as it appears in the intersections of offline and online

societies, between virtual life and real life: "Cyberpower of the social

here pursues the nature of power that both allows cyberspace to reach

across into offline life and answers demands made on cyberspace by offline

life" (143). Jordan classifies the three areas of production, consumption,

and politics as those in which cyberspace has already played a crucial

role in offline life, in the "space of flows" of informational

socio-economies. The myth investigated in this chapter is the metaphor of

the frontier, allowing for a fundamental conception of virtual life as a

place: "Grasping cyberspace as a place allows notions of control and

domination of purchase on the virtual lands. The informational space of

flows becomes something that elites and the grassroots can try to control

'as their own'" (176).

Chapter Six, "The Virtual Imaginary" examines the utopian and dystopian

imaginary sides of cyberspace, the immortality of the cyborg versus the

"Superpanopticon" of total surveillance. Hans Moravec's fantasy of the

human consciousness downloaded into a robot body is discussed, as is Donna

Haraway's initial vision of cyborg consciousness. Jordan concludes by

arguing that the effect of cyberspace's imaginaries of the future is to

drive work and the formation of social bonds in the present and "in doing

so, constitutes a third circuit of power coursing through the virtual

lands. The imaginary binds the virtual social order [and] . . . creates

the possibility of virtual community" (207). Finally, Jordan's Chapter

Seven provides a summary of the theoretical frameworks of power he has

used and a discussion of libertarianism on the Net that fuses individual

liberty with free market forces.

Cyberpower is successful in driving home the complexity of issues of power

in relation to cyberspace, and the ongoing struggle between individuals

and the "cyber-elites" to control it. As an introductory text for

undergraduates and interested publics, Cyberpower draws together many of

the significant voices and events that have shaped cyberdiscourse over the

past decade. Certainly, a reading of this volume would dispel any notions

that virtual life is transparent, one of unconflicted good or evil.

My criticisms have to do with the author's attempts to cram everything

that has or can be said about cyberspace into this one text. His chapters

on the virtual social are dense and sometimes impenetrable, especially in

the awkward choice of phrases such as "informational space of flows." I

also found that Jordan's "myths of the electronic frontier" were

confusingly framed and could have used better explication (perhaps the

inclusion of Barthes' views on the naturalization of ideological myths

would have been useful). It didn't help that Jordan's first use of a myth

was to debunk the popular version of ARPANET origins, while later myths

were validated accounts used to exemplify the cyberlore that form

foundational principles of virtual life. But I would recommend Cyberpower

for seminars aimed at introducing issues of power and the intricate

interrelatedness of the individual and the social, current realities and

future visions that continually construct cyberspace.

Sarah Stein:

Sarah Stein is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication

at North Carolina State University. She teaches media theory and criticism

as well as film, video and digital media production. Her research is in

the areas of visual communication and digital culture.

<sstein@unity.ncsu.edu>

UTHOR RESPONSE: Tim Jordan

Reviews are like buses . . .

You wait ages for a review of the book you've laboured hard to produce and then two come

along at once. I found both reviews enlightening and only occasionally in the sense that

they found things in my book that I didn't realise were there. There are some related issues

that cross between the two and then a number of more particular points I'd like to respond

to as briefly as I can make myself.

Both authors treat Cyberpower as a text-book and both explore problems of over-complexity

and over-simplification. There are contradictions in their characterisations here.

Cyberpower was not written as a text-book (though I'm not sure how my publisher is

characterising it in North America); it was written to be accessible and to keep cyberspace

at the centre of the picture. As reviewers note, there are some 'text-book' features such as

key concepts but they don't define the text as introductory. I wanted to write a book that

was ambitious in its attempt to grasp power within cyberspace and the Internet and to

express these ideas in ways most people could read. This of course makes it possible that it

will be used as a text-book, which makes my publisher and me quite happy, and where

'text-book' really means 'accessible' then I am grateful for the reviewers' high praise.

However, there is a contradiction between seeing Cyberpower as the first comprehensive

attempt to 'raise and analyze some important circuits of power in cyberspace,' as Mihalache

does, and treating it as a text-book that is over-simplistic. I feel the reviewers'

assumption that Cyberpower is a text-book gets in the way of an assessment of theoretical

innovations I've attempted and that these innovations get little direct treatment. One

example is the failure in both reviews to explore the pivotal (to me) attempt to define the

reasons why cyberspatial technology is constantly spiralling upwards in complexity and how

this results in the simultaneous empowerment and disempowerment of both the digital

grassroots and digital elites. Of course, as reviewers they have limited space but it was

disappointing to see confusion in which my sins are to be both over-simple and over-complex.

Apart from the comments just made, I found little to disagree with in Sarah Stein's review.

She has not presented the more complex ideas within each chapter but has outlined the broad

area of each chapter. Her criticism that there is too much content is interesting; I had

made an effort to ensure there were stories and empirical support for all claims and perhaps

this is the source of the problem. I was puzzled why it is a problem to begin with a myth of

the electronic frontier that is factually untrue as I clearly say that the factual status of

a myth is irrelevant to the myth's function.

Adrian Mihalache's review also raises some interesting questions and a number of points with

which I disagree. In particular, towards its end it seems exhausted with itself and makes a

number of, to me, misguided comments. I will deal with these at the end of my contribution,

I hope all readers who read Mihalache's review will ensure they read my second to last

paragraph as well. First, I feel Mihalache is unfair in several times taking an

anachronistic approach to my book. ICANN and Lessig are used as examples when they would

have been difficult for me to discuss. Though Mihalache notes this of Lessig he uses that

author twice and at no point is fair enough to tell the reader that this review comes nearly

eighteen months after publication of my book. Second, and without wishing to attack Lessig's

book in anyway, I feel Mihalache does not present the detail of my argument in a way that

allows comparison to Lessig's on power in cyberspace and that my argument is substantially

different. Most important, though Mihalache presents the notion of technopower (not my

invention but drawn from a wide range of work), he does not present the particular nature of

technopower in cyberspace that I theorise. This is an ever-spiralling dance between

grassroots and elites in which elites, through their control of technology or the fabric of

cyberspace, both create tools that empower grassroots individuals and enhance the elite's

control of cyberspace. The statement Mihalache quotes may have the 'authority of the

obvious' but it does have a significantly more complex explanation than is allowed for in

the review. Sadly, academia is not like the Olympics and while I don't mind being first I'd

rather have my ideas presented clearly.

Third, Mihalache interestingly takes issue with the notion that information can be given

away without loss to the giver. His own reasoning seems to depend on the fact that giving

away information means the giver loses their competitive edge. First, the point in the

section of Cyberpower being discussed related to the distinction between material and

immaterial goods. In this context, Mihalache's criticism does not work as it simply is the

case that you can give an idea away and keep it whereas you cannot give your horse or stereo

or car or book away and keep it. Mihalache's criticism here is unfair in its failure to take

account of the specific argument at stake. However, it is an interesting general point and

within the category of immaterial goods like ideas, is it possible for there to be

competitive advantage through secrecy? Of course this would seem true in some cases (though

no criticism of my own argument because I was dealing with the distinction between

immaterial and material goods). What Mihalache does not seem to allow for is that the

opposite is quite possibly just as true. The multiplication of certain immaterial goods such

as software can enhance not undermine the value of my particular copy. If I am the only one

with an email programme what is it worth? But if I copy it to many other people who then

also use it, my programme is quite likely worth more to me? These are interesting questions

and Mihalache provides a beginning point for their discussion.

Finally, Mihalache's review contains a couple of sections near the end that are dismissive

and misleading. The most important claim that seriously misrepresents my arguments paints me

as a libertarian simpleton. Mihalache argues Lessig has already over-ruled my utopian case

that cyberspace is a frontier in which government is not needed. First, I hold my hand up I

had not taken into account Lessig's arguments published only a year after my own -- my

crystal ball was clearly on the fritz. But, putting that aside, the more important point is

that I do not argue as Mihalache suggests I do. The section being referred to comes from an

examination of the myth of frontier as applied to cyberspace and it notes two

interpretations of this myth, though Mihalache only mentions one. One interpretation claims

the frontier is a place of community beyond government and the other that frontiers are

places of colonialism and conquest. I explicitly hold up people's accounts to explore what

such seemingly opposed versions might have in common. Mihalache drags these arguments out of

context, entirely ignoring the fact that I explicitly address flaws in the libertarian

utopian conception of the electronic frontier. I do not endorse the libertarian utopia of

the frontier or argue it is true but explore how it and conceptions of the frontier as a

place of rapine, conquest, and death might be related and what that says about cyberspatial

conceptions of the electronic frontier. The second major difficulty I find with this review

is Mihalache's throwaway paragraph on my analysis of the imaginary. This paragraph bears

little resemblance to the actual chapter and its ideas (nor does the book end on p.212 with

the words Mihalache quotes). I can only ask readers to ignore the second to last paragraph

of this review.

I feel honoured for Cyberpower to be included within Resource Center for Cyberculture

Studies excellent series of reviews. I hope my own, Stein and Mihalache's views on my book

make it seem worth a look.

Tim Jordan

Email (max 35 caratteri): T.R.Jordan@open.ac.uk

Sito web (max 50 caratteri): http://www.google.it/search?hl=it&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Tim+Jordan,+Cyber+power:+The+Culture+and+Politics+of+Cyberspace+and+the+Internet,+London+and+New+York:+Routledge+1999&spell=1