Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 296
Netizens-Digest Friday, April 23 1999 Volume 01 : Number 296
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
[netz] Future Thinking Networking
[netz] MS & DSL
[netz] Truth in Billing
[netz] Canada Post Press Release on E-mail Tax Hoax (fwd
[netz] Role of Government in Internet development
[netz] It Begins ~~ Predictable Backlash
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:19:08 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] Future Thinking Networking
http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?990415.ichambers.htm
Source: IDG Intelligencer Newsletter quoting --
InfoWorld Electric Article
Top News Stories
Chambers: Adaptability is key to Net economy success
By Matthew Nelson
Posted at 1:44 PM PT, Apr 15, 1999
"...Chambers [Cisco Systems]
also stressed the importance of government leaders,
both in the U.S. and abroad, understanding
the Internet, building a network infrastructure
and educating younger generations.
'As you move forward within this area you suddenly realize
this isn't just business that is in this, it is
countries,' Chambers said. 'If you can't read and you can't
operate a computer, you're going to get a job
that is very limited.'..."
http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayNew.pl?/odonnell/990412od.htm
Original Source quoted:
InfoWorld Electric
Opinions
Plugged In by Bob O'Donnell
April 12, 1999
Home networking's soar in popularity will change the industry
"...Products specifically designed for creating home-based networks
have been available for well over a year now, but with last week's
introduction of the AnyPoint home networking products, many industry
observers believe Intel has "legitimized" this often-discussed market.
Until now, most of the home networking products have either required
the installation of wires inside your home walls, just as you would
for a traditional business network, or come from smaller companies
(see a previous Plugged In column for more). In addition, the
software that came with many of the first-generation products
just wasn't simple enough. As a result, the products required
a minimum amount of networking expertise to get running,
which basically defeated the purpose of a consumer-oriented
networking product..."
- --
P.A. Gantt, Computer Science Technology Instructor
Electronic Media Design and Support
http://user.icx.net/~pgantt/
[the Internet] could remain what it ought to be:
just a public instrument. There ought to be efforts --
not just talk but real efforts -- to ensure Internet
access, not just for rich people but for everyone.
~~ Noam Chomsky ~~
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 16:09:50 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] MS & DSL
http://www.news.com/News/Item/Textonly/0,25,35309,00.html
Source:
c|net News.com
Communications
Microsoft takes a second DSL stake
By Corey Grice
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
April 19, 1999, 10:40 a.m. PT
URL: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,35309,00.html
"...Microsoft said today that it will invest $30 million in NorthPoint
Communications, its second stake in a high-speed
digital subscriber line provider.
...
Last month, the software giant took a similar stake in Rhythms NetConnections, a
NorthPoint competitor which had
a strong initial public offering earlier this month. NorthPoint is set to go public
in about two weeks..."
- --
P.A.
pgantt@icx.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 19:48:40 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] Truth in Billing
Source:
Benton Foundation List Post
Subject: FCC Meeting Summary
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 17:49:58 -0400
From: Kevin Taglang <kevint@BENTON.ORG>
To: BENTON-COMPOLICY@CDINET.COM
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION OPEN MEETING SUMMARY
"...On Thursday, April 15, the FCC held an open meeting concerning both
telephony and broadcast issues. The following summary is based on FCC News
Releases and a published report from the National Exchange Carriers
Association
http://www.neca.org
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. TRUTH IN BILLING (Common Carrier Docket NO. 98-170, Report No. CC 99-12)
On April 15, the Federal Communications Commission adopted principles and
guidelines that will make it easier for all consumers to read and understand
their telephone bills. In 1998 alone, more than 60,000 consumers contacted
the FCC expressing confusion, anxiety and concern about their telephone
bills. The "truth-in-billing" principles and guidelines set forth in the
Order make telephone bills more consumer-friendly by providing consumers
with information they need to make informed choices in a competitive
telecommunications marketplace and to protect themselves against
unscrupulous practices.
The Commission enacted broad guidelines that implement three basic
principles -- consumers should know:
1) who is asking them to pay for service,
2) what services they are being asked to pay for, and
3) where they can call to get more information about the charges appearing
on their bill.
For example, under the new guidelines, new service providers must be
highlighted on the bill. Thus, as a result of the Commission's action,
consumers will be better able to detect when their carrier of choice has
been changed without their authorization. This illegal practice, known as
slamming, is the number one complaint of consumers filed at the Commission.
The new guidelines make it more difficult for the purveyors of fraud to
deceive customers and get away with it by taking advantage of confusing
telephone bills.
The Commission's guidelines also combat the illegal practice known as
cramming, the appearance of unwanted charges on customers' bills. Cramming
has emerged as an equally troubling fraud against consumers, and is now the
second largest category of written complaints received by the Commission.
Vague or inaccurate descriptions of charges make it difficult for consumers
to know exactly what they are paying for and whether they received the
services that they ordered. Thus, the Commission's guidelines eliminate this
confusion by requiring that bills contain full and non-misleading
descriptions and a clear identification of the service provider responsible
for each charge on their bill.
The Commission's guidelines will also reduce customer confusion about the
nature of the services being billed. The guidelines require that carriers
clarify when they may withhold payment for service, for example, to dispute
a charge, without risking the loss of their basic local service. Consumers
will not, out of confusion, pay charges that they do not understand for fear
that their basic telephone service would be terminated if they challenged
the charge.
The Commission's actions today will permit customers to understand and
compare the charges appearing on their bills that are related to federal
regulatory action. The Commission has received thousands of calls from
consumers confused about these charges, which is exacerbated by the myriad
of names carriers have used to describe the various charges. The guidelines
adopted today address this problem directly by requiring that carriers which
choose to place line items on bills use standard labels to identify these
charges. The Commission seeks further comment, particularly from consumer
groups and the industry, as to the specific appropriate labels.
The Commission also states that the broad principles that underlie the
adopted rules to promote truth-in-billing apply to all telecommunications
carriers, both wireline and wireless. Like wireline carriers, wireless
carriers also should be fair, clear and truthful in their billing practices.
The record does not, however, reflect the same high volume of customer
complaints in the wireless context, nor does the record indicate that
wireless billing practices fail to provide consumers with the clear and
non-misleading information they need to make informed choices. Thus, at this
time, the Commission only imposes certain requirements on wireless carriers:
that the name of the service provider and a contact number be included on
the bill, and uniform labeling of federal charges (if and when such
requirements are adopted.)
In the further notice, the Commission seeks comment on whether it should
apply the remaining truth-in-billing rules adopted in the wireline context
to wireless carriers, and whether forbearing from these rules would be
appropriate.
Action by the Commission April 15, 1999, by First Report and Order and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 99-72). Chairman Kennard,
Commissioners Ness, Powell and Tristani, with Commissioner Furchtgott-Roth
dissenting and Commissioners Ness, Furchtgott-Roth and Powell issuing
separate statements.
For additional information:
Common Carrier Bureau contact: David Konuch 202.418.0700
News Media Contact: Emily Hoffnar 202.418.0253
..."
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --
P.A. Gantt
pgantt@icx.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 21:21:32 -0004
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Subject: [netz] Canada Post Press Release on E-mail Tax Hoax (fwd
Whos *your Inquisitional Service Provider, eh?
(or, Where Australia leads, will Canada be far behind?)
- ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
From: Judyth_Mermelstein@babylon.montreal.qc.ca (Judyth Mermelstein)
Reply-to: Judyth_Mermelstein@babylon.montreal.qc.ca
To: act-mtl-d@tao.ca, mai-not@flora.org
Subject: Fwd: Canada Post Press Release on E-mail Tax Hoax
Date: 21 Apr 1999 14:23:31 GMT
Organization: Babylon, Montreal, Canada
http://www.newswire.ca/releases/April1999/20/c4381.html
Internet Rumour: Canada Post Sets the Record Straight
OTTAWA, April 20 /CNW/ -
Canada Post Corporation wants to inform Canadians that the
Internet rumour about plans for a 5-cent charge to be applied to
every e-mail message delivered by an Internet service provider is
entirely fictitious and has no basis in fact. Last week, Canada Post
discovered a message posted on the Internet suggesting that
legislation was being pushed through the House of Commons that
would see the corporation and the federal government benefit from
a 5-cent tax on every e-mail delivered.
``There is absolutely no truth to the story,'' says Alain Guilbert,
Canada Post's Vice-president of Communications. ``In fact, the
Liberal Member of Parliament, the Bill, and the Toronto lawyer
named in the story don't even exist.''
| Canada Post threatened legal action against the Internet service
| provider and shortly thereafter a full-page apology was posted on
| the Internet discussion group where the message first appeared.
[...]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:38:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Role of Government in Internet development
- ----------------
The Role of Government in the Development of the Internet
Paper Proposal
by Ronda Hauben
rh120@columbia.edu
There are many myths about the role that government has
played in the development of the Internet. The most prevalent
myth is that government has played no role, beyond funding the
early research to build the Internet.
This is a serious misrepresentation of the actual history
and development. This misrepresentation also has important
political consequences. There is a need to determine how to solve
a number of problems for the continued development of the Internet
and if the proper role for government is not determined, then the
problems become very difficult or impossible to solve.
Also, the U.S. government is currently making an effort to
change its role in how it relates to Internet development.
However, if there is a lack of knowledge of what the role of
government has been, then there are serious consequences that can
result from the U.S. government changing that role without taking
into account the problems that will develop.
The Internet has basically developed under government and
university support and activity. However, the form of government
and university support is often not obvious nor well documented.
In 1945, Vannebar Bush, an MIT scholar, was invited to
advise the President of the United States on how to apply the
lessons that had been learned about wartime scientific research
to solve the social and technological problems for peacetime
conditions. His work set a basis for an important form of
government structure that would nourish scientific and
technological development.
In my research, I plan to explore the influence of Bush's
work on the later creation and development of the Information
Processing Technology Office (IPTO) of the Advanced Research
Projects Agency (ARPA). This office was created in 1962 and
existed until 1987. During this period the work done by those
working for this office made it possible to create and develop
the Internet.
The Internet was developed between 1972 and 1987 under the
support and actions of people, often working under conditions
created by or more directly working for the IPTO. After 1987,
ARPA and the National Science Foundation continued to play an
important role in the development of the Internet. So I plan to
also touch on the role played after 1987, but will focus my paper
on the role of government between 1972 and 1987.
ARPA was created as a civilian agency in the U.S. Department
of Defense. Those who were part of ARPA worked hard to provide a
supportative environment that made it possible for
the initial research creating the Internet to be done and also
provided support for the actual development of the Internet. I
want to study how this was done, and how various pressures that
would have interferred with research and development were
constrained.
Also I plan to examine how Usenet was helpful in the
development of the Internet during the 1981-3 period and to
explore if there are lessons to be learned from the linking up of
Usenet and the ARPANET during that period which can be helpful in
solving the problems that the Internet is facing now.
The process of building the Internet involved a number of
procedures that made it possible for the grassroots to
participate in the design and development of important aspects of
the Internet. However, this was possible because there was a line
of responsibility and accountability provided by the government
processes involved in building the Internet. Once this line of
responsibility and accountability has been taken away by the U.S.
government, as in the privatization of the domain name system
(DNS) and other essential functions of the Internet, it has
become similarly impossible for there to be any grassroots
processes available to those online. Instead, those who are most
powerful are active trying to seize control of the public
functions and powers so that they will control the Internet.
In 1996 the U.S. government announced that it was planning
to privatize certain key functions of the Internet. This
announcement was made at a meeting of the Federal Networking
Council Advisory Committee.
Then in 1997-1998 there was a Report of the Office of the
Inspector General of the National Science Foundation (OIG of the
NSF) which opposed the privatization of the DNS. And there were
hearings in the U.S. House of Representatives about the plans to
carry out the privatization of these key functions.
The Office of the Inspector General Report did focus on
determining what would be an appropriate government role in the
continued development of the Internet. The hearings in Congress,
however, in general did not raise or examine this key question.
In the 1970's there were conferences and books about the
need to prepare to deal with the developing computer network as a
public utility. These articles and books stressed the need for a
social focus for the developing network. And they described how
the U.S. government would be unprepared to deal with the needed
social problems that the developing network would create if such
issues were not treated seriously by government support for
needed research and study. Also one of the writers pointed out
that the power struggle that would go on behind the scenes would
be very fierce, but that those who hoped for a democratic
development of the communications network might be blinded by
that hope from recognizing and properly dealing with the fierce
power battle. And most recently a similar concern was raised by a
political scientist from the Kennedy School of Government about the
need to have a government regulatory structure rather than a
private nonprofit corporation as a model for the operation and
protection of the essential and controlling functions
of the Internet. She also pointed out that there were procedures in
government like doing an FBI check on someone being appointed to
a regulatory commission position and holding them responsible
for honest activity or else subjecting them to criminal
charges. These kinds of structures were created to protect those
whose economic livelihood is dependent upon the regulators who
have great power. Thus she noted that the kind of situation being
created with regard to the Internet will give great power to
those who have no means of oversight to stop their abuse of such
power. The kind of private nonprofit corporation now being
created to regulate the Names and Numbers functions of the Internet
(ICANN)will make it possible for certain individuals to exercise great
economic power over people around the world while there are none of
the historically developed protections that governments have been
created to provide.
The research I am proposing will be to examine the role
played by government (especially the U.S. government, but if
possible other governments as well) in the development of the
Internet. And there will be an effort to identify the role needed
to continue that development. Also I will try to examine the
kind of political forces at play which are either trying to
determine the proper government role or to thwart these efforts.
Other draft papers about the development of the Net and of UNIX are
online at
http://www.umcc.ais.edu/~ronda/new.papers
For NSF Office of Inspector General Report, see:
http://www.bna.com/e-law/docs/nsfnsi.html
Netizens: On the History and Impact
of Usenet and the Internet
http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/
and in print edition ISBN # 0-8186-7706-6
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 09:42:49 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] It Begins ~~ Predictable Backlash
And so it begins ~~ The Backlash Negative Reaction
vs. Positive Thought and Action
==================================================
o http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19990422S0006
Source:
CMPnet
The Technology Network
TechWeb
Technology News
Trenchcoat Mafia Reverberates On Web
(04/22/99, 1:19 p.m. ET)
By Malcolm Maclachlan, TechWeb
"...Two teenagers opened fire on Tuesday at
Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., leaving
15 dead and more than 20 injured.
In the wake of the shooting spree by Columbine
students Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the Web
was abuzz. Numerous hoax postings about the
killings had gone online, even before the
hours-long rampage was over.
Tragedy equals opportunity for some Netizens..."
[P.A. Comments follow:
1. To put the incident into some sort of positive
context not to blame the Net;
2. To not use the tragedy as a cause celeb. to advocate
mandatory filtering for all Netizens;
3. To develop solutions for educators, parents, and
civic associations to responsibly mentor our youth,
namely to increase the number of Community Centers --
Telecentres that promote multi generational, cultural,
and gender specific programmatic solutions;
o http://www.ctcnet.org/
The Community Technology Centers' Network (CTCNet)
o http://www.edc.org/home.html
Educational Development Center, Inc. (EDC)
o http://www.hud.gov/nnw/nnwindex.html
Neighborhood Networks
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
About Neighborhood Networks
"...Envision a room in a HUD-assisted and/or -insured housing development
lined with computer workstations. Add a mix of people to make it work
(residents, multifamily housing owners and managers, paid and volunteer staff, and
community partners), plus a menu of educational and job training programs.
Open the doors both on-site and via the Internet to microenterprise and
telecommuting opportunities for residents. Introduce health care, wellness,
community and social service programs. This is a Neighborhood Networks center
tailor-made to fit a local community..."
4. Let's avoid a kneejerk reactionary response that blame the tools
rather than individually misguided, neglected
users of the tools that abused others in the most dire
of ways. Let's not blame or group all people and objects
and make negative, broad assumptions re: Net, guns, teens, schools...
o http://www.salonmagazine.com/media/col/poni/1999/04/22/kneejerk_mafia/index.html
(Use Ctrl C + Ctrl V on each line of a long URL)
Source:
Salon Magazine
salon.com
Media
Kneejerk Mafia
After a new tragedy comes a familiar cry: Stop the
Internet before it kills again.
by JAMES PONIEWOZIK
April 22, 1999
"...In the land of no good
explanations, the man with the daffiest
explanation is king. Witness Gerry Spence on
"Larry King Live" Tuesday, blaming the
shootings at Columbine High School in
Littleton, Colo., on the war in Kosovo:
"Violence is how we solve our problems in this
country," said the criminal defense attorney
and front-runner for the 1999 Malcolm X
"Chickens Have Come Home to Roost" Award.
But why not? Why the hell not? After an
inexplicable killing, Spence's guess was as
good as yours, but loopier, and so it made
better TV. And even at this late date -- 30
years after a sun-bronzed Al Gore, driving a
team of plow horses, dug a furrow for the first
T1 line -- some of the loopiest insinuations
being thrown about in the aftermath concerned
that multibillion-dollar menace, the Internet..."
5. To propose more domain extensions vs. the limited
number now available. .gov, .edu, .us, .com, .org etc.
to better designations that accurately group sites
to identify groups, commercial sponsors, and organizations
who create and maintain sites. A kind of truth in advertising
the eliminates groups hiding behind anonymity and PACs.]
Comments?
Suggestions for other sources?
Positive Discussion?
- --
P.A. Gantt, Computer Science Technology Instructor
Electronic Media Design and Support
http://user.icx.net/~pgantt/
[the Internet] could remain what it ought to be:
just a public instrument. There ought to be efforts --
not just talk but real efforts -- to ensure Internet
access, not just for rich people but for everyone.
~~ Noam Chomsky ~~
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #296
******************************
