Stephen Graham: Let me first say that those myths still function. Every new layer of communication technologies is always surrounded by a big discursive push, as far back as the telegraph actually, the telephone, videotext, the Internet, Wi-Fi and everything else. There’s a sense of a big rush of myths of transcendence, myths by which we will finally be able to do away with materiality, with physical movement, sometimes with the city itself, which in a way is a communications device, and to overcome the time constraints of interaction. But I think the myths actually deflect attention from network technologies rather than bring attention to network technologies. For example, the myth of cyberspace as a sort of separate realm that exists in a parallel world tends to totally neglect, obscure and cover up the huge materiality of communications systems. These are powered by vast amounts of electricity; they are materialized through unimaginably complex systems of fibers and servers and satellite dishes and radio-systems and so on, which are sedimented into the landscape and city as a means to overcome spaces and times. So the consequence of these ideas about the end of geography tends to be that we don’t pay attention to these hidden substrata of technologized, materialized infrastructure.