This was an important point to include in this article because of how contradicting, yet true it is. It is not fair to expect individual users to fix problems created by massive companies by themselves. Those of authority and in power that are supposed to protect us, like government officials, also have a responsibility to address these issues. Even those who possessed the power and intelligence to drag us into this radical system have the ability to change culture, but why would they when they benefit most from it? Knowledge is power, and the more we educate ourselves and others, especially our students and young minds, about the dangers of the openness of the web, the more motivated they may be to choose alternatives. So, although this may not be fair - I believe that the new generation of teachers have a unique responsibility to empower students to question big tech. The sooner we acknowledge this, the sooner we can come together to get institutions to change course.

Creators choosing to sacrifice income just to maintain control over their work - reading this, my initial reaction was anger. How did we get to this point and how do we undo the damage thats been done? Human beings who have rightful ownership over their own work and creativity have lost their right to decide what happens to it, where it goes, and who has access to it. The optimist in me is glad to see creators choose dignity over money, just because it is the right way to connect with others. I think we get so caught up in emerging technologies like AI and what it can do, that we forget we have the power to be intentional about how we participate. No matter what progresses in technology or the openness of the web, I believe we have the responsibility to use our moral compass when deciding what is important to us - control over what is rightfully ours or fleeting public praise.

The last sentence of this section resonated with me. Large technology companies have benefitted from the openness of the Internet, but now some of their business tactic might make it harder for smaller creators and companies to compete. They may believe that they do not stand a chance against these large, powerful companies that partake in this radical architecture - which the author basically describes as a free-for-all system. This begs the question, will smaller communities (which consist of the majority of the world) lose their voice or potential contributions? Who will be heard? Do we stand a chance combatting a radical system that powerful people benefit from?