Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 292
Netizens-Digest Tuesday, March 30 1999 Volume 01 : Number 292
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
Re: [netz] Re: [IFWP] then ICANN is in the fire
[netz] Network Non-Solutions Wall of Shame
[netz] Re: Cyber citizenship
[netz] Critics battle US West deregulation bill
[netz] Network Non Solutions II
[netz] Congress only 1/2 right on the FCC
[netz] Congress 1/2 right II the sequel
[netz] Wired religion
Re: [netz] Re: [IFWP] then ICANN is in the fire
[none]
[netz] Science and Government and decisionmaking
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 10:08:24 -0500
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: Re: [netz] Re: [IFWP] then ICANN is in the fire
<break time, Fri.>
Sorry... had to laff...!!!!
> Bob Allisat <bob@fcn.net> writes:
> >Dave "Pot, Kettle, black" Crocker says...
Life is short isn't it? <grin>
After watching my bles't momma die from
the worst cancer imaginable for three long
painful years I learned this...
- --
P.A. Gantt, Computer Science Technology Instructor
Electronic Media Design and Support Homepage
http://user.icx.net/~pgantt/
mailto:pagantt@technologist.com?Subject=etech
http://horizon.unc.edu/TS/vision/1998-11.asp
~~ Jargon ~~ Any sufficiently advanced terminology
is indistinguishable from magic words. ;^P ~~ Daily Whale
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 16:04:38 -0500
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] Network Non-Solutions Wall of Shame
http://www.netsol.com/partners/
Anyone having tons o' fun w/ domain registration of late?
The WebConsultants-l & webdesign-l are t*rked and ready
for bear over Network Non-solutions and InterNIC of late.
Won't even go there re: ICANN... <bletch>
- --
P.A.
pgantt@icx.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 17:43:30 -0004
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Subject: [netz] Re: Cyber citizenship
Jay, have you forwarded this to Nordine? It sounds like byDesign
will be worth watching as materials come together.
- ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date sent: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 11:15:48 -0500
Send reply to: Universal Access Canada <UA-C@CCEN.UCCB.NS.CA>
From: Liss Jeffrey <ljeffrey@MCLUHAN.UTORONTO.CA>
Subject: Re: [UA-C] visions and practical steps
To: UA-C@CCEN.UCCB.NS.CA
Thanks to John Grogan for his answers to vision and practical steps
questions. .
You can also find his post, and forum for discussio animated by these
questions on the panam site http://www.panam-bydesign.net
Hope to hear from others as we build our discussion forum on visions of and
steps to get to sustainable communities using new media and policy.
On aother note, we at byDesign E Lab at McLuhan Program have been asked to
pull together (fast!) a resource base of key materials -- web sites and
bibliographic references or online documents -- on
1. Public Space
and
2. Universal Access
Emphasis is the online realm, contemporary, key isues, models to understand
or to accomplish, best practices, exmplary web sites, and rcommendations
from community or policy groups worldwide.
Annotated descriptions of matrials preferred, but we will take whatever you
can give including poiters to other lists and references.
yes there are various ways to fame these broad topics:
civil space online, or what we call electronic commons
and some call electronic public space
public sphere
uiversal access --
universal service etc
Please if you can help send to the resource coordinator
agnes@mcluhan.utoronto.ca
all this info will be placed in our son to be launched public space
online site that is under construction This project was
independently underway as part of our civil space online project,
with involvement from students and others in the new media and
policy grad course at McLuhan Program but in its current form is
initiated by a subcommittee of Canarie and sponsored by Indutry
Canada
Please keep those emails coming!!
thanks in advance
Liss Jeffrey
director, research network
adjuct faculty
McLuhan Program, U of Toronto
founder/director byDesign E Lab and electronic commons
at the McLuhan Program
Liss Jeffrey, Ph.D.
director, Research Network/
director/executive producer
byDesign Visionary Speaker series
& E Lab
at the McLuhan Program in Culture & Technology
University of Toronto
416-978-7026; 515-7110; fax 978-5324
ljeffrey@mcluhan.utoronto.ca
http://www.mcluhan.utoronto.ca
http://www.candesign.utoronto.ca
http://www.newmedia-forum.net
http://www.panam-bydesign.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 17:39:48 -0500
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] Critics battle US West deregulation bill
Please excuse the cross-postings in advance.
============================================
http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,34240,00.html
Source: CNET -- Communications
Critics battle US West deregulation bill
By John Borland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
March 24, 1999, 6:00 p.m. PT
"...A battle is raging in New Mexico over a proposed law that
would free US West from much of the state's regulatory rules,
a move which critics say may dramatically undermine telephone
and data competition..."
=======================================================
Specter of things to come?
Look for competition to be cut in a country or state in
your part of the world...
- --
P.A. Gantt, Computer Science Technology Instructor
Electronic Media Design and Support Homepage
http://user.icx.net/~pgantt/
mailto:pagantt@technologist.com?Subject=etech
http://horizon.unc.edu/TS/vision/1998-11.asp
~~ Jargon ~~ Any sufficiently advanced terminology
is indistinguishable from magic words. ;^P ~~ Daily Whale
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 19:35:38 -0500
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] Network Non Solutions II
Please excuse the crosspostings in advance.
Topic very timely... Curious I had to go to
Germany to see this article reference.
Source:
- --------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Gunnar Bender
- --------------------------------------------------------------
Institute for Information, Telecommunications and Media Law (ITM)
Section for Administrative Law - Prof. Dr. Bernd Holznagel LL.M.
University of Muenster, Germany
Universitaetsstr. 14-16; D- 48143 Muenster
Tel.: +49/251/8328411 Fax: +49/251/8321830
E-Mail: benderg@uni-muenster.de
Institute: http://www.uni-muenster.de/Jura.tkr/
NEW LAYOUT: http://www.compuserve.de/bc_recht/
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Forward-this-message-and-inform-your-colleagues---
To subscribe to TKRNEWS-L, send mail to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.GMD.DE
with the command SUBSCRIBE TKRNEWS-L
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
* USA - Case against NSI dismissed (CNET News.com) Network
Solutions, which assigns Internet addresses under an exclusive
contract from the government, has won the dismissal of an
antitrust case filed by rival Internet company PGMedia.
http://www.news.com/News/Item/Textonly/0,25,33915,00.html?pfv
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
- --
P.A. Gantt, Computer Science Technology Instructor
Electronic Media Design and Support Homepage
http://user.icx.net/~pgantt/
mailto:pagantt@technologist.com?Subject=etech
http://horizon.unc.edu/TS/vision/1998-11.asp
~~ Jargon ~~ Any sufficiently advanced terminology
is indistinguishable from magic words. ;^P ~~ Daily Whale
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 19:46:54 -0500
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] Congress only 1/2 right on the FCC
http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,34311,00.html?st.ne.fd.mdh
Congress to push laws against Net fees
By John Borland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
March 18, 1999, 4:45 p.m. PT
URL: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,33995,00.html
"...Several members of Congress are planning new legislation that would
officially bar federal regulators from imposing
new charges on Internet access.
[Comment: Good.] ;^}
In a letter to Federal Communications Commission chairman William
Kennard today, a group of GOP legislators
asked him to support legislation definitively barring his agency from
regulating Internet fees..."
[Comment: Bad.] ;^{
Darn it! They only got it half right again. ;^{
Actually someone in the Fed. needs to regulate the monopolies
in favor of small ISPs. to keep competition level. ;^{
- --
P.A. Gantt, Computer Science Technology Instructor
Electronic Media Design and Support Homepage
http://user.icx.net/~pgantt/
mailto:pagantt@technologist.com?Subject=etech
http://horizon.unc.edu/TS/vision/1998-11.asp
~~ Jargon ~~ Any sufficiently advanced terminology
is indistinguishable from magic words. ;^P ~~ Daily Whale
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 20:20:31 -0500
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] Congress 1/2 right II the sequel
http://www.cnnfn.com/digitaljam/newsbytes/128509.html
Source:
CNN FN The Financial Network
Anti-ISP Access Charge Bill Unveiled
March 26, 1999: 4:45 p.m. ET
"...WASHINGTON, DC, U.S.A. (NB) -- By Robert
MacMillan, Newsbytes. Senate Commerce
Committee John McCain, R-Ariz., is not the only
legislator introducing a bill to keep the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) from
regulating the Internet. Rep. Fred Upton,
R-Mich., has introduced a similar bill designed to
make FCC Commissioner William E. Kennard to put
his money where his mouth is..."
Problem: No Federal guarantee of help to small ISP business
stave off monopolies counter competition that will
price small ISPs out of the emerging broadband market.
Lack of Federal action will encourage states such as
New Mexico seeking to deregulate telecommunications
in favor of USWest and against consumers and
a fair playing field for competition.
Tennessee has imposed a state sales tax on ISP connection
27 states are considering like legislation.
- --
P.A. Gantt, Computer Science Technology Instructor
Electronic Media Design and Support Homepage
http://user.icx.net/~pgantt/
mailto:pagantt@technologist.com?Subject=etech
http://horizon.unc.edu/TS/vision/1998-11.asp
~~ Jargon ~~ Any sufficiently advanced terminology
is indistinguishable from magic words. ;^P ~~ Daily Whale
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 00:25:00 -0004
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Subject: [netz] Wired religion
Given the various bugs in the internet program:
1) wiretapping (
http://www.telepolis.de/tp/english/inhalt/te/1667/1.html
2) encryption /privacy
3) porn and child exploitation
4) libel vs free speech
5) names as property (Alston v NSI
6) ISP liability (http://www.cyber-rights.org/press/
7) 'representation' of a coordinating authority (
8) spam (http://maps.vix.com/rbl )
9) netwar etc.
it begins to look as if all the separate furores are missing
something essential, doesnt it? Does the 1st Amendment have
more going for it than we've been giving it credit for?
Here's the beginning of a what could be an argument that ICANN
is an unconstitutional 'establishment of religion' -- from private
correspondence, but I'd like your opinion of the general perspective
- --------------------
> I figure that we just have to use words and attitudes that are friendly,
> don't you? that is part of our religion--our attitudes. Religion is why we
> do what we do. All of what we have been doing all along is an expression
> of our religion, or that's my opinion.
Yes, exactly. Thing is, it takes a long time to get acquainted so
people are comfortable talking about attitudes. In a sense, its the
other side of our venerable 'freedom of speech' conditioning, which
of course is altogether approrpiate in *limited fora, on limited
topics. Net-talk however under that rule is empty chat: we all
conscientiously live on the first floor, never going downstairs to
touch the ground and *do anything, so to speak.
For those in 'religious' mode however, friendliness *works: the
agenda of 'things to do' becomes subordinate to sustaining the
*readiness to do. You dont get the 'We must's and the 'There
should be's and the namecalling and the sarcasm and cynicism
that typifies the ranter and the flamer and the megalomaniac.
There are groups that talk about 'net dynamics' and the 'cybermind'
- -- but they have yet, as far as I know, to discover the language in
which these distinctions are 'simplicity itself.' (Either they do the
psycho-sociological thing with 'personality types' and 'learning
organization' jargon, or they assume that 'community' happens
naturally and intuitively and that to 'analyse' the 'phenomenon'
would 'destroy' it.) So there's obviously a problem in *introducing
the notion that 'religion is the answer' but its also becoming obvious
that not too many answers are coming out otherwise, either
(particularly for 'governance' of the net itself, which promises to be
as totalitarian as can be -- the 'default' structure that comes out
when noone can agree that agreement is the important thing). But
sooner or later, the right questions are going to be asked at the
right time, and then we'll see ;-)
======
kerry
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 16:50:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Subject: Re: [netz] Re: [IFWP] then ICANN is in the fire
In article <199903261406.JAA07470@panix3.panix.com> Ronda wrote:
>The whole conception of ICANN is fundamentally flawed. It
>is embodying conflict of interest as a principle, and will
>continue to do so with its membership structure if it adopts
>one. The fundamental problem ICANN represents is that
>it is a privatizing (though under the actual but hidden hands
>of the government) of what there is no authority for the
>U.S. government to privatize.
Possibly, but what happens if either "government" or "science"
encounters problems that may not be technically unsolvable, but are
practically unsolvable because of the high level of politics and
controversy that surrounds them, so much so that it actually drains
the energy of those who attempt to solve them?
For example, you speak of publicly provided water:
>It is like a government taking the water supply and raffling
>it off to those who will put different colors in it and then
>add to the price and sell it at their whim to who they choose.
>The water supply is vital to all in a society. Only a very
>corrupt government (and these clearly are the state of society
>these days sadly) would be considering the color of the water
>as that which can be changed to have someone make money off
>of it, rather than considering the health of the water and
>the fact that it needs to be maintained in a public entity
>that will be held accountable to any harm that comes to
>the water supply of a country.
If you ever lived in a city like Los Angeles, where in many places the
water is (or at least was, when I lived there a few years ago) unfit
to drink unless it's boiled, you'd realize that practically speaking,
neither "government" nor "science" can do anything about these
problems because of the circumstances under which the problems exist.
Arguably, there are individuals who might possess either the political
experience to have funds allocated (or raised) to pay for the
scientific and engineering expertise that would rectify these
problems. However, because of the great deal of controversy that
surrounds these problems, said individuals either tire of those jobs
and wind up resigning, or refuse to take those jobs. This leaves the
jobs to whoever is selected to do them from the remaining candidates.
Yet, in the absence of significant progress on water treatment, a lot
of money has been made by private companies who supply water to
individuals.
While the analogy between LA city water and DNS may not be exact, I
think there are some parallels. You should not expect "government" or
"science" to be able to solve any problem that comes along,
particularly when those problems are highly complex and
controversial.
- --gregbo
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 11:11:18 -0500 (EST)
From: Jay Hauben <jay@dorsai.org>
Subject: [none]
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 03:24:16 -0500 (EST)
> From: Bob Allisat <bob@fcn.net>
> To: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
> cc: list@ifwp.org, netizens@columbia.edu
This is Bob Allisat's message cc:ed to the netizens mailing list:
Greg Skinner writes:
> Possibly, but what happens if either "government" or "science"
> encounters problems that may not be technically unsolvable, but are
> practically unsolvable because of the high level of politics and
> controversy that surrounds them, so much so that it actually drains
> the energy of those who attempt to solve them?
>
> (edit)... You should not expect "government" or "science" to be able
> to solve any problem that comes along, particularly when those problems
> are highly complex and controversial.
Dammit Greg that's just when so-called government
and bloody science is supposed to work to find
solutions! Have we sunk to such depths of apathy
to actually believe the rhetoric of those in whose
interests it is to perpetuate great problems?! Not
me, baby! See when a regime or a group of so-called
scientists start moaning or whining about how the
world is so cruel and how everything is so bad even
they can't do anything about anything it's not time
to call it quits. It's time to kick those bastards
out of office, find some new, vibrant thinkers to
replace the oldbies and move as rapidly as possible
towards f*cking solutions and away from stasis or
rather decay or corruption and anything or anyone
associated with same. See we have the choice.
Bob Allisat
Free Community Network ... bob@fcn.net __ http://fcn.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 14:10:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Science and Government and decisionmaking
Greg Skinner <gds@best.com> wrote:
In article <199903261406.JAA07470@panix3.panix.com> Ronda wrote:
>>The whole conception of ICANN is fundamentally flawed. It
>is embodying conflict of interest as a principle, and will
>continue to do so with its membership structure if it adopts
>>one. The fundamental problem ICANN represents is that
>>it is a privatizing (though under the actual but hidden hands
>>of the government) of what there is no authority for the
>>U.S. government to privatize.
Possibly, but what happens if either "government" or "science"
encounters problems that may not be technically unsolvable, but are
practically unsolvable because of the high level of politics and
controversy that surrounds them, so much so that it actually drains
the energy of those who attempt to solve them?
This is a very important question and one that needs to be
examined.
This is the issue that C.P. Snow addressed in a nice little
volume of a talk he gave at Harvard in 1960.
In the talk C.P. Snow raises the dilemma posed by modern society
in which science raises important problems and that government
has to deal with these problems, but that too often decisions
about these problems are made in secret and in a legal or political
form where those making the decisions are not able to comprehend the
consequences of the decisions they are making.
The volume called "Science and Government"
It describes how there is a need to have scientists more intimately
involved in these decisions, but also the issue of how to
open up the discussion so that it becomes a public discussion
is raised in a talk that C.P. Snow gave the following year at
MIT where he discussed the same problem.
Ronda
ronda@panix.com
Netizens: On the History and Impact
of Usenet and the Internet
http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/
in print edition ISBN 0-8186-7706-6
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #292
******************************
