the internet is a vehicle for self-discipline?

I was impressed at Masuda's prescience in the excerpt we read from his 1990 book Managing in the Information Society. I think he got a few things amazingly right (seriously, what were you thinking about the "information society" in 1990? It certainly wasn't on my mind!), but I'm not certain if his trick is akin to the astrologer's horoscope--"You are stressed about something, and perhaps unsure of your current relationship. You will take a trip soon"--who wouldn't that apply to? At any rate, here's some of the stuff I think he got right, and where I think he got it right:

• 6. The shared utilization of the "synergetic economy" (p. 17) reminds me a lot of the open-source movement.
• 8. The creation of the "voluntary community" brings to mind interest-based forums, chat rooms, and all the things that bring together those super- specific groups (i.e. lizard-loving-albinos-who-play-Chutes-and-Ladders)
• 12. Perhaps this is just my optimism, but I do see a little bit more "participatory democracy" in the blogosphere, Howard Dean's campaign and moveon.org .
• 14. So dead-on it's scary--the adjustment problems of rapid technology adoption, problems of privacy, global terrorism, etc.
  
• 15. "computerization will make it possible for each person to create knowledge and to go on to self-fulfillment" sounds a lot like wikipedia to me. Or at least the first part does; I'm ashamed/proud (depending on my audience) to admit that I've not experienced the "self-fulfillment" of wikipedia authorship.
  

Some stuff though just sounds quixotic and socialist to me, and not exactly how the whole "information society" thing is shaking out 16 years after this publication. Masuda says the information society will be "horizontally functional, maintaining social order by autonomous and complementary functions of a voluntary civil society" (p. 17, italics in original). Participation I see, but hierarchy still exists on the internet, as far as I can tell. Don't some sites get way more traffic than others? Aren't some deemed far more superior than others? Aren't people employed in knowledge work at the higher echelons of the pay scale, if not yet of society (although Bill Gates has made great strides for geeks everywhere)? And in particular, I think Masuda's way off when he suggests that the spirit of globalism (which I do think is in play on the internet) equates to "a symbiosis in which man and nature can live together in harmony consisting ethically of strict self-discipline and social contribution" (p. 20, italics in original). The internet is a vehicle for "strict self-discipline?" Hasn't he heard what the internet is really for?