The anxieties of inaccessibility are starting to be addressed not because of artistic projects (it is amusing to me, if no one else, that artists seem more concerned with producing content and then worry about the form after it has been released to the public), but because of legal/commercial concerns. Massachusetts lead the way (lead in that it made it a very public and commercial issue) by adopting the OpenDocument format (for a number of reasons), but it always makes me wonder why artists submit to proprietary formats (like Storyspace). Do artists not realize that in adopting a proprietary format they are giving over control of their content to engineers and coders governed by commercial interests?

Recently on the blog, people have voiced concerns about concealing the identity of real-life people in their final project hypertexts. As a part of my final critical project, I am researching how the computer's mimicry of the physical world effects us and possibly provides us with a false sense of security. For example, many online sites are now offering security options for customers. Banks are going online to provide customers with online accounts, often only protected by a username and password. Shopping sites offer customer accounts that include credit card and other personal information. Again, only protected by a username and password.