Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 215
Netizens-Digest Monday, November 23 1998 Volume 01 : Number 215
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
[netz] Part of the problem
[netz] Re: [ifwp] RE: Need for public ownership of essential functions of t
[netz] Re: NEWS RELEASE: AN ACCOUNTABLE ICANN?
[netz] Re: NEWS RELEASE: AN ACCOUNTABLE ICANN?
[netz] PREDICTIONS FOR 1999
[netz] Re: [ifwp] Re: Net Access (was Re: NEWS RELEASE: AN ACCOUNTABLE ICANN?)
[netz] ICANN't
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 23:45:04 -0400
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Subject: [netz] Part of the problem
http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/html/erm9866.html
EDUCOM REVIEW: Your work suggests that you see information technology not just
as part of the solution, but also as part of the problem. How do you define the
problem?
JAMES BURKE: The problem is that for the last half a million years we have
lived with what I would describe as a culture of scarcity. Ultimately,
information technology is power, and power belongs to those who have
information. Throughout history, the availability of this power, the
concentration of it, the ease with which it was generated and distributed, and
the ease above all with which it was denied -- have been a kind of driving
force in our social development since we came out of the cave. At any one time
throughout history there have been only limited sets of technology available to
society to do what it wanted to do. This has led to at least two consequences.
First, technology has tended to be in the hands of relatively few people,
because there was not enough technology to go around. And, second, many
of those people became what we call "leaders." They were the ones who
made the decisions. And what we are living through right now is a sudden
and accelerated form of that same problem.
ER: In what sense?
BURKE: In the sense that -- particularly since the advent of radio and
television -- the majority of people have lived with a very rapidly increasing
awareness of the sense that they don't have what they need, don't know what
they need to know. Many of the structures that were originally designed to give
people some kind of freedom of action -- and I speak here, for example, of
democratic government forms -- have not so far lived up to their promise, in
the sense that you cannot really have a democracy without a democracy of
information.
ER: And what is the consequence of that?
BURKE: The social turbulence we are living through at the moment--and will
continue to be living through for the next couple of generations at least. A
period when people's expectations, thanks to the fueling of those expectations
by information technology like television and radio, exceed the ability of the
social institutions to provide what it is people increasingly want. We have a
couple of generations coming up where the serious problem created by the
culture of information scarcity will not be satisfactorily dealt with...
Such tools were always limited to a very small number of people. I think the
Internet will entirely reverse the process. And in that sense, in a classical
sense of the word "tool," the Internet is not a tool at all; the Internet
actually destroys the concept of the tool as a specialist artifact. What the
Internet does in a sense is to create a medium in which ordinary people can
express themselves without needing the kind of specialist knowledge and
specialized tools that have been necessary up until now to manufacture and use
information and therefore wield power.
... Children went to schools initially when their parents went to the
factories. But the new technology will put the parents back with the children,
perhaps in small communities. If you think about it, I suppose the industrial
revolution was only a blip in the flow of our social development. The other day
I heard someone saying, "The only thing I dislike about telecommuting is that I
really miss people"; well, that is a sad reflection on this temporary
Industrial Age transition we are going through, because if what you mean by
"meeting people" is going to a place where you stand or sit next to them
working from nine to five every Monday through Friday, well, that ain't much of
a way to meet people. Anybody living before 1750 would have thought of a modern
factory or office being much like a prison.
So I think information technology may well return to an altogether socially
healthier way of doing things and that's why I rambled on about precepts and
Socratic dialog being better taught by communities and parents than by
teachers.
...
ER: And when you say that are you thinking mainly in terms of the
developed nations or are you thinking in terms of the world?
BURKE: Both. The description "developed nations " tends to relate, I suppose,
to the physical products of our technology. We have manicured lawns and a car
that works, and everybody has a shower and all those other consumer durables.
However, I don't know that the "developed" world is, in many areas
(particularly, in terms, let's say, of the political process) all that
developed....
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 20:10:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: [ifwp] RE: Need for public ownership of essential functions of t
"William X. Walsh" <william@tjns.tj> wrote:
>Ms. Hauben,
>Your comments below :
>> The public comments didn't support any movement forward. The
>> public comments were restricted to a very short period of time
>> with very little public notice inviting people to comment.
>> And there was no newspaper coverage of this situation until after
>> the comment period was over and then very little public media
>> coverage.
>This is blatently untrue. NUMEROUS news reports of this process,
>beginning with the release of the Green Paper and the initial public
>comment period, were published, both in online and traditional media.
Was there any national radio or TV coverage of the process? I don't
remember seeing or hearing anything about it.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 21:23:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: NEWS RELEASE: AN ACCOUNTABLE ICANN?
Some time back, Dave Farber expressed the feeling that some honest
mistakes were made in the process of privatizing the Internet. I
think some of what Ronda's pointed out here is relevant, because
perhaps, in the haste of trying to come up with a way to privatize
Internet name, address, and protocol management functions, some things
might happen in the future that could have been more carefully managed
if there was more time taken to examine the problems, and more input
actively solicited from the public.
I'd also like to hear more about the USG's position on NSF's
involvement with the current Internet from Becky Burr, if possible.
The sense I have gotten is that NSF is turning its attention to the
NGI. The OIG reports that Ronda quotes may be true in the sense that
NSF has enough money to conceivably continue to fund (and oversee)
Internet name, address, and protocol management functions, but it may
be in the best interests of the NSF (and the world) to direct its
efforts towards a long-term research project than an short-term
engineering and policy project.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 21:48:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: NEWS RELEASE: AN ACCOUNTABLE ICANN?
Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com> wrote:
>peterd@Bunyip.Com (Peter Deutsch) wrote:
>>As I've told you in recent postings, prior to the arrival of
>>commercial Internet Service Providers it was *not* possible for you
>>to gain access to the internet unless you were affiliated with a
>>suitable research and development organization and agreed to a quite
>>restrictive Appropriate Use Policy. In effect you, as a private
>>citizen, could *not* go onto the net during this period.
>That is absolutely untrue. I did in fact participate in
>comp-priv on the Internet in 1992 from freenets that had
>begun to spring up around the U.S. and then into Canada.
To modify Peter's statemtns somewhat, as a private citizen, you could
get onto the net even from its very beginnings, if you were fortunate
enough to know people who were willing to give you access. In most
cases, it was an account on a machine, but as lower-cost IP access
evolved, some organizations of private citizens were able to be
connected to the Internet. However, Peter is correct that the AUPs
for "guests" were often quite restrictive (although in some places
like MIT the policies were pretty lax).
>When we tried to form a freenet in NYC (where most people don't
>have access) we had people come to our meeting from service
>providers and do what they could to interfere with the efforts
>to start a nyc freenet.
I don't know much about NYC net.culture, but here in the SF bay area,
freenets and other community-oriented network services have always
been a staple of the culture. I think it's unfortunate that NYC ISPs
would engage in such behavior. However, I think it's beyond the scope
of ICANN to deal with such actions.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 01:41:53
From: John Walker <jwalker@networx.on.ca>
Subject: [netz] PREDICTIONS FOR 1999
The CSS Internet News (tm) is a daily e-mail publication that
has been providing up to date information to Netizens since 1996.
Subscription information is available at:
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/inews.htm
or send an e-mail to jwalker@bestnet.org with
SUBINFO CSSINEWS in the SUBJECT line.
NOTE: Make a donation to your local food bank or favorite charity
from 15 November to 15 December '98 and receive one third off the
yearly subscription rate for the 'News.
The following is an excerpt from the CSS Internet News
NOTE: Registrations for the On-line Learning Series of Courses
for December are now being accepted. Information is available at:
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/course.htm
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hunger HURTS, let's make sure everyone has enough this holiday season!
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
PREDICTIONS FOR 1999
Okay, I know it is a bit early, but I've been asked to give ten
predictions for the Internet/computer industry in 1999. Before
giving them, I'd like to recap my 1998 predictions, many of which
I believe have turned out to be reasonably accurate.
1998 Predictions Recap
1) Information overload will become a central issue for the Internet
in 1998, as basic search engines begin to lose their value.
2) Ecommerce will flourish in America and will show strong growth
in Europe, with business-to-business transactions leading the way.
3) The Web will stay simple in 1998: lots of content, driven by
databases, with small graphics, no gee whiz, and thus fast
downloads.
4) By the end of 1998, the PC will have well and truly become a mass
market product, with quality PCs selling for well under USD1,000.
5) Microsoft will find that there are limits to how large and
powerful it is allowed to get.
6) There will be at least 150 million Internet users worldwide by
the end of 1998. (Nua's current estimate is 150 million -
http://www.nua.ie/surveys/how_many_online/index.html)
7) The Internet will force many middlemen/distributors to transform
their business models or face decline/liquidation.
8) Small pockets of high-bandwidth will exist but for the average
consumer bandwidth will remain scarce.
9) Driven by child abuse, hate abuse, spam abuse and taxation
issues, Governments will pay a lot more attention to the Internet
in 1998, and a wide range of legislation will either be prepared
or enacted.
10) 1999 will be the year when the Internet becomes truly mass
market.
1999 Predictions
1) There will be more than 200 million people using the Internet
worldwide. (The wider acceptance of set-top boxes for televisions
could explode this figure.)
2) The 'World Wide' Web will look much less 'world-wide' as
individual countries and cultures stamp their identity on it.
This will result in the necessity to create multilingual versions
of websites whose tone and business approach are founded in that
particular culture.
3) What will destroy the myth of the 'World Wide' Web is bandwidth.
The difference in experience of a user in a poor bandwidth country
in comparison to a user in a rich bandwidth country will be like
rich and poor; upstairs, downstairs; black and white; chalk and
cheese.
4) The myth that it is cheap to develop for the Internet will be
well and truly hammered, as companies realise that running a
successful website requires quality staffing, ongoing development
and substantial investment in promotion and marketing.
5) Branding will be everything on the Internet, as all but the
largest of brand websites find it increasingly difficult to
attract visitors.
6) Email will remain the killer application for the Internet but
will cause serious headaches for organisations who do not have
proper usage and storage/deletion policies
7) The Linux operating system and open source software in general
will grow in acceptance though it will by no means topple Microsoft
8) Whether it happens in 1999 or not, Microsoft will have to be
broken up. It has simply got too big, too all-powerful, and no
matter what sort of public relations spin is put on it, this is
not good for the consumer.
9) The computer industry, having learned from Apple that consumers
like products that have style, will start bringing out computers
that have a bit of visual flair
10) Ecommerce, having become common in America, will gain ground
in Europe, though the focus will still be business-to-business
Gerry McGovern
mailto:gerry@nua.ie
Courtesy NUA, Ireland
- ----------------
Also in this issue:
- - Web makes tracking family relatively simple
Sticky family issues are no longer the exclusive domain of Dear Abby
or Ann Landers. Adoption, divorce, and the instincts of a future
mother-in-law give the Virtual Woman her challenges for this week!
- - Cyberloafing becoming all too common at office
Harassment and legal issues are also Net dangers
- - Lewinsky book goes online Monday morning
A British publishing company said Sunday it would put a new book on
Monica Lewinsky's sexual affair with President Clinton directly onto
the Internet on Monday.
- - MIT teens create cyberspace forum for children
A group of teenagers have created a country for children named
Nation 1.0 that exists in cyberspace as a forum for children to
express ideas and argue their rights.
- - Net Site Found To Supply False Data
CHICAGO (AP) -- A computer program glitch is causing the National
Association of Realtors' new Internet site to provide inaccurate
ratings of school systems across the country, the Chicago Tribune
reported Sunday.
- - AOL to buy Netscape?
In what would be one of the technology world's biggest transactions
ever, the world's top online service reportedly is in talks to
purchase Netscape Communications Corp. for about $4 billion in
stock.
- - The Week in Review
The Internet's Top Newsmakers of the Week.
- - New Lists and Journals
* NEW: ON PURPOSE - How to Create and Live a Meaningful Life
* CHANGE: The Webmaster's Digest
* CHANGE: CML - Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia Online Support
On-line Learning Series of Courses
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/course.htm
Member: Association for International Business
- -------------------------------
Excerpt from CSS Internet News (tm) ,-~~-.____
For subscription details email / | ' \
jwalker@hwcn.org with ( ) 0
SUBINFO CSSINEWS in the \_/-, ,----'
subject line. ==== //
/ \-'~; /~~~(O)
"On the Internet no one / __/~| / |
knows you're a dog" =( _____| (_________|
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker
- -------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 22:58:27 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: [ifwp] Re: Net Access (was Re: NEWS RELEASE: AN ACCOUNTABLE ICANN?)
peterd@Bunyip.Com (Peter Deutsch) wrote:
>Instead of fearing the future, we should have just a tad
>more faith in the people who use this wonderful tool.
Actually, I have a lot of faith in individuals, ranging from end-users
to CEOs of large companies. :) I think that most everyone has good
intentions towards their customers. What tends to happen is that in
the process of trying to do business, large companies are forced to
cut back on services and homogenize their products in order to satisfy
demands for short-term profits and to keep the value of stocks high.
Small companies have difficulty competing in this arena.
How this relates to our discussion is that the proposed new registries
or registrars tend to be discussed here in terms of their market
value, rather than their service value. I think the emphasis of these
businesses (or organizations) should be placed on the service they
provide to the Internet at large, as they are basically providing
information that the Internet at large uses to communicate. What I
fear is that these new registries or registrars may become less able
to focus on the service aspects of namespace management in the need to
sign up as many (or as lucrative) domain holders as possible.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 15:54:36 -0500 (EST)
From: Jay Hauben <jay@dorsai.org>
Subject: [netz] ICANN't
The United States Government's (USG) efforts to privatize and
commercialize the Internet have reached a point where there now
exits ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Numbers and Names).
The USG has indicated that it considers ICANN the candidate to which
it will transfer the administration and control of the crucail elements
of the Internet: allocation of IP numbers, control of name registration,
oversight over the protocol numbers and control of the protocol and
standards process. But there exists great opposition to ICANN among
various technical and Internet service and access communities. The
USG wants this resistance quieted or overcome, so that the
central control and administration of the Internet that the USG
has overseen for the last almost 30 years can be successfully
turned over to ICANN and the US cooperate interests behind it. To
try to overcome or quiet this opposition and the opposition to
the privatization itself, ICANN arranged for a meeting in the
Boston area on November 14, 1998 where the ICANN Board of
Directors and people from various Internet related communities
would appear together. The following are comments submitted to
ICANN concerning what happened at that meeting with some editing
and additions. (A garbled transcript of the Nov. 14 meeting can be
seen at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/ and related documents can
be seen at http://www.columbia.edu/~jrh29/geneva/ )
General Comments Based on the Nov 14 Boston ICANN Meeting
ICANN is a failure. There is no way to reverse the fact that the
ICANN interim Board was selected on the basis of a process that
was secret and representative of forces which prefer to remain
hidden. Out of this secret process has also come a hidden agenda,
complete with an approximate timetable with no member of the
Board or others who know this agenda willing to expose it to
scrutiny by the public or even just those at the Boston meeting
on Nov 14.
ICANN is not yet NewCo as outlined in the White Paper process and
conceivably it might not become NewCo. Still some USG assets such
as the NSI contract appear, from Mike Robert's statements, to have
already been taken over by ICANN. In which case statements from
Ira Magaziner that there were still some conditions unmet for the
transfer are part of a fraud. It is unclear what other USG and
Internet community assets have been transfered to ICANN and to
what extent the hidden process reaches.
Why wasn't ICANN just declared already to be NewCo and the
charade consensus process ended? Perhaps a clue is that the
Board members acknowledged that they were chosen not for their
technical knowledge but for their ability to direct the formation
of a new corporation. ICANN will not be able to administer and
control the crucial technical functions of the Internet without
the cooperation and subordination of the Internet technical
community, the ISP community, and the name and number registry
and registrar communities. Many in the Internet communities have
worked very hard over many years to develop and implement the
wonderful technology that makes the Internet possible. Among the
members of these communities there are many people who are
suspicious of the hidden agenda and secrecy about the forces
behind the formation of the ICANN. Without more of these crucial
people cooperating with it, the integrity of an ICANN controlled
Internet would be in great danger.
There are other problems with ICANN as well. No one on the ICANN
Board who appeared on Nov 14 seemed to understand or support the
concern of those Internet users who are being completely
disenfranchised by the process leading to the ICANN. The
unprofitable uses of the Internet such as for public health and
safety, education, access of government information, interaction
with government officials, email, Usenet, chats and MOOs, library
searches, scientific and technical research and student uses of
all sorts, are all left out by the ICANN Board as secondary to
commercial uses that see users only as customers of one form or
another. There was no mention and every sign of avoidance of any
relations with governments and public entities. The participant
who said that the ICANN would have a chokehold on the economies
of the US and the world was correct but it would also choke off
the common uses that people have grown to expect, for themselves
or at least for their children or grand children.
Forces opposed to the privatization and commercialization have
been frozen out of the picture by the declaration that the
question of privatization vs the continuation of a public
Internet has already been answered. Where the debate over that
question occurred has never been shared and in fact no such debate
will be invited because the outcome might be that the Internet
should remain a public network of diverse networks. Still at the
Nov 14 meeting, some speakers did accuse the Board of only
representing commercial and private interests and the Board did
nothing to deny that. In the online comments I made to the Board
in preparation for the meeting I referred to JCR Licklider's
vision that inspired the creation of the Internet in which he saw
online access as a right not a privilege. The Board did not
respond to my comment nor could it because rights require
governments for their protection and ICANN has been carefully
crafted to eliminate any government role in the administration
and control of the Internet.
There were many comments at the Nov 14 meeting that the choice of
the Board and its functioning were not "transparent" and could
not be "trusted". Whether they were aware of it or not, the
participants were trying to assert an Internet sovereignty over
the structures that the USG is trying to establish as new
Internet Czars. But sovereignty requires citizenship in one's
country and netizenship on the Internet both of which are what is
under attack by the privatization efforts of the USG and the
corporation entities behind it. So ICANN is a failure because it
is not a body that can serve citizens and netizens, it can not
meet the requirements of the White Paper and it can not insure
the integrity of the Internet. It was good there was the meeting
on Nov 14 in Boston to expose ICANN. But still the USG is going
ahead with using ICANN to try and privatize the Internet. That
was the sadness that the first participant spoke about when she
began her comments on Nov 14.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Comments and opinions welcomed.
Jay
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #215
******************************
