The trouble is that unlike the tranquil spiritual ether imagined by the ancient Greek mystic, cyber-space is all too clearly a human artefact. A site of unceasing warfare - abounding in worms and viruses, vulnerable to attack and decay, and needing scarce resources and energy to operate - the virtual realm of the internet is a projection of the human world with all its conflicts.
It is hard to take seriously the opinion of a philosopher on things 'virtual' who only refers to the technology platform performing the "virtualisation" in the abstract and in analogies.
He probably doesn't know the difference between a bit and a byte or how TCP/IP, packet communications, network routing, etc function. Yet here he is confidently espousing the technology's demise because why? ... because it is a "projection of the human world", a purely philosophical argument that has no basis in rational technical reasons.
He should take a look into the large body of philosophical work surrounding network growth, emergent behaviours, automata, whole outperforming sum of the parts, crowd-sourced solutions, etc, that have a far more rigorous empirical and quantitative grounding than "it will be limited to only ever being a projection of the human world".
Basically he is a technophobe, or techno-ignorant, defeatist ... so therefore it can't work.
