Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 294
Netizens-Digest Wednesday, April 14 1999 Volume 01 : Number 294
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
[netz] A place with links to monitor your state
[netz] Dateline: Santa Fe, NM ~~ citizens against USWest Deregulation
[netz] Re: [IFWP] A Presidential Issue?
[netz] History and vision for the future of Internet - Public Question
[netz] ICANN constituency Formation FYI
[netz] FCC, ISPs, and Cable -- Important
[netz] On-line Poll NATO/Balkans
[netz] Nordine Hadi : Help
Re: [netz] Nordine Hadi : Help
Re: [netz] Nordine Hadi : Help -Reply
[netz] FCC, Telecos -- Consumer's Union Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 1999 22:36:30 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] A place with links to monitor your state
Keep an watchful eye on your state's
telecom policies here <be selective of
information> as it may be spin.
TN has already enacted and began charging
state sales tax for customer to ISP connection.
See what your state public service commissions
are up to...
http://www.states.org/contents/indexg.html
Source:
States.org
States Inventory Project
"...The mission of the States Inventory Project is to foster the
development of the National Information Infrastructure by
providing a single clearinghouse for tracking state,
territorial, and provincial information infrastructure
strategies and activities. By providing a resource for
jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction comparative analyses, the
States Inventory Project helps the states, territories, and
provinces efficiently develop their own advanced
information infrastructures. This resource is shared and
maintained by policy makers, telecommunications experts,
and other interested parties..."
Partial Broad Categories Include:
Communications-Related Demographics
Electronic Commerce
Electronic Democracy
Privacy
Security/Authentication/Encryption
Taxation and Jurisdiction
Other Areas of Electronic Commerce
Education
K-12
Higher Education
Distance Education
Research and Education Networking
Government's Advanced Telecommunications Usage
Laws and Regulations On-Line
Local Competition/Deregulation
Local Level/Community Projects
On-Line Delivery of Services
Libraries
State Regulation of Telecommunications/Internet
Laws Enabling State Regulation of
Telecommunications/Internet
Telecommunications/Internet Acts and Regulations
Home Pages of Public Utility Commissions, Related
Agencies, and Task Forces
Public Utility Commission Rule Making On-Line
State-Wide Communications Infrastructure
Home Pages of Related Agencies, Task Forces, and
Commissions
Network Architectures and Connectivity Maps
Commercial and Non-Profit Providers in the State
Test Beds and Special Projects
Studies, Plans, and Reports
Funding Issues
Other Issues
Strategic Planning
Telecommuting/Telework
Universal Service/Universal Access
Home Pages of Related Agencies, Task Forces, and
Commissions
Funding and Cross-Subsidization Information
State Definition of Basic Telephone Service
High Cost and Rural Access Activities, Programs, and Task
Forces
Special Projects
Studies, Plans, and Reports
Other Issues
- --
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: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 13:39:30 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] Dateline: Santa Fe, NM ~~ citizens against USWest Deregulation
Why DEregulation is a ripoff of the consumers
in any state or nation when it comes to
giant Telco monopolies
=============================================
http://www.sfnewmexican.com/news1999/index.html
Source:
The Santa Fe New Mexican Editorial Page
Governor can demonstrate independence from Dems
http://www.sfnewmexican.com/news1999/editorial_april/apr07_VETO.html
http://www.sfnewmexican.com/news1999/editorial_april/apr07_WEDED.html
A New Mexican editorial
"...He can thank our state Legislature's Democratic leadership for the
ease
with which he was re-elected. Now Gov. Gary Johnson should repay the
state's voters with vetoes of two bills that exemplify the
Democrat-dominated lawmaking system at its most venal.
The two so-called "utility-deregulation" measures sitting in the
governor's office are so offensive to his sense of fair play that he
should have killed them forthwith.
The electricity-deregulation bill that pirouetted through the Roundhouse
on the arms of a lobbying corps de ballet makes much of open
competition - but that competition would begin with a
multimillion-dollar advantage for Public Service Company of New Mexico:
PNM would be allowed to keep charging ratepayers for years' and years'
worth of bad investments - "stranded costs," as PNM execs euphemized
their poor judgment while dancing this bill past their well-entertained
friends in the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Those costs should be swallowed by PNM shareholders, not by New
Mexico consumers. As a businessman, Gov. Johnson knows a thing or
two about corporate responsibility: It belongs with ownership, and
shouldn't be shifted to customers under an artificial extension of
protected monopoly..."
For the rest of the editorials see the above links.
- --
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: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 16:09:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Re: [IFWP] A Presidential Issue?
Jay Fenello <Jay@Iperdome.com> wrote:
>Today, I happened to catch Presidential Candidate
>Pat Buchanan on CSPAN. He was giving a talk on US
>China Relations to the Commonwealth Club of California.
>At one point in the questioning, Pat described how the
>world had changed from the 80's, how the Conservative
>movement related to the Libertarian's, and the future
>of the Republican party.
Interesting.
>To paraphrase, the 80's had conservatives united=20
>against a common enemy, namely the former Soviet Union.
>Under Reagan's leadership, they won that war, and they
>reduced taxes from 70% down to 26%. With the combined
>economic and political success of those conservative
>issues, the Republican party had lost its way.
And they leave out the end of Bell Labs and the kind of
research resulting in the transistor, UNIX, the 5ESS
Switch that required millions of lines of programming
that Unix made possible, etc.
And they leave out that the ARPA/IPTO office was ended
and that the basic research in computer science which
ARPA/IPTO pioneered was reduced to transition to industry
and relevant product research.
The probelm is that they get access to the mass media
to boast of their crimes and there is no means in that
media for a voice that represent any divergence to be
heard.
That is some of why the U.S. is in the fix it is in today,
with the ICANN mess. The discussion on vital issues is
within such a narrow self congradulatory framework
that there is no chance the long term and public interest can even
be aired, never mind make any impact on how the issues are framed
or discussed or decided.
.
>When it came to the Libertarian question, Pat described
>differences with regards to "free trade", and the concerns
>over it resulting in a World Government. He went on to
>predict how the traditional Party structure in the U.S.
>would change.
Strange what they call "government" :(
It is the institutionalization of those with a conflict
of interest making the decisions to benefit themselves
and their narrow set of cronyies. This is the epitamo
of the worst and most corrupt form of institions.
And this they call "government or governance" to make a mockery
of the social insitution that has developed from the
development of human society.
>What I quickly realized is that ICANN is the incarnation
>of Pat's concern. A single global body, determining the
>rules for content, privacy, access, and just about every
>other civil liberty. Most ironic of all, it is being
>established on Al Gore's watch (a competing Presidential
> Candidate).
Yes, when I was at the October 7, 1998 Congressional hearing
of the subcommittee on basic research and on technology,
one of the witnesses spoke about how ICANN is the prototype
for their vision of the future government for the world.
That this was their experiment.
>Wouldn't it be interesting if ICANN became an election
>issue for the Presidential campaign ;-)
How do you see that happening? Are both parties to fight
over whether ICANN is more their vision for the future control
of the world?
It seems to the contrary that they both realize that it
is an embarrassment because their ideal is shown to
be a fraud in the example that ICANN has demonstrated.
Also it is interesting that both parties seem to be fighting
over who is responsible for the development of the Internet.
And interesting principle is that anyone who is actually
responsible for the development of the Internet would have
to show very grave concern about what harm ICANN represents
to the Internet and its users. Thus those who are willing
to slap themselves on the back for both the Internet and for
ICANN show the phoniness of their claims about concern for
or contribution to the Internet's development.
It's a bit like Brecht's play the Caucausian Chalk Circle,
where the judge figures out how to tell who a child's
real mother by a test he sets out.
The Internet is facing a similar test with ICANN creation and
development.
>Jay Fenello
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
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 13:13:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] History and vision for the future of Internet - Public Question
Someone sent me this quote from a recent interview that Noam
Chomsky did. So somehow the word is out it seems that there
is a battle on :-)
Chomsky:
"Handing over the digital spectrum, or for that matter the Internet, to
private power -- that's a huge blow against democracy. In the case of
the Internet, it's a particularly dramatic blow against democracy
because this was paid for by the public. How undemocratic can you get?
Here is a major instrument, developed by the public -- first part of
the Pentagon, and then universities and the National Science
Foundation -- handed over in some manner that nobody knows to private
corporations who want to turn it into an instrument of control. They
want to turn it into a home shopping center. You know, where it will
help them convert you into the kind of person they want. Namely,
someone who is passive, apathetic, sees their life only as a matter of
having more commodities that they don't want. Why give them a powerful
weapon to turn you into that kind of a person? Especially after you
aid for the weapon? Well, that's what's happening right in front of
our eyes."
"Could the system be different? Of course it could be different. This
[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. And it should be freed from the influence of Microsoft or
anybody else. They don't have any rights to have anything to do with
that system. They had almost nothing to do with creating it. What
little they did was on federal contract."
http://weeklywire.com/ww/current/boston_feature_3.html
Guess the history and vision for the future of the Internet is becoming
a public questions :-)
Ronda
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
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 14:08:08 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] ICANN constituency Formation FYI
Hmmmmm ICANN just handing out domain names eh?
So what's this?!?
Not to mention who is saying who will get or
retain their domain names?!?
===============================================
Reply-To: domain-policy@open-rsc.org
To: "IFWP" <list@ifwp.org>, "DNSO"
<dnso.discuss@lists.association.org>,
"ORSC" <domain-policy@open-rsc.org>,
<DOMAIN-POLICY@LISTS.INTERNIC.NET>
Following the recent posts on the ICANN web site:
http://www.icann.org/dnso/constituency_groups.html
The undersigned are pleased to announce the creation of a new mailing
list to discuss the creation of the trademark, intellectual property and
anti-counterfeiting interest group contemplated by Section VI-B (3) (b)
(7) of the ICANN Bylaws. We ask any individual, organization, or
business
entity interested in the interface between intellectual property law and
namespace to join the online discussions that we hope will complement
the
planned in-person meetings and will lead to the recognition of this DNSO
constituency group
Interested participants can begin the discussion at the dnso-ip mailing
list. To subscribe, send a message to majordomo@world.std.com, with the
message "subscribe dnso-ip ___@_____.__," where the blanks denote your
e-mail address.
Karl Auerbach
Mikki Barry
Bret Fausett
Harold Feld
Jay Fenello
Jeff Graber
Milton Mueller
Peter Rony
David Steele
Dan Steinberg
Peter Dengate Thrush
- --
P.A. Gantt
pgantt@icx.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 17:13:58 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] FCC, ISPs, and Cable -- Important
Source IDG.net Intelligencer
FCC ups charge for second phone line
(Source: Network World Fusion) The government has made it
official: The federally mandated monthly charges on separate
Internet access phone lines will be higher than charges for
primary telephone links for telecommuters and small-office
workers.
http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=112057
Consumers want ISP choice, even over cable
(Source: PC World Online) Congressional hearing will consider
whether cable companies can specify customers' ISPs.
http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=112060
- --
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: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 00:59:40
From: John Walker <jwalker@networx.on.ca>
Subject: [netz] On-line Poll NATO/Balkans
On-line Poll NATO/Balkans
The CSS Internet News is conducting an on-line poll.
Should NATO commit ground troops to a war in the Balkans?
Register your vote and view results at:
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/war.htm
Links are available to sites expressing the views of all
sides in this matter.
On-line Learning Series of Courses
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/course.htm
Member: Association for International Business
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ _/
_/ John S. Walker _/
_/ Publisher, CSS Internet News (tm) _/
_/ (Internet Training and Research) _/
_/ PO Box 57247, Jackson Stn., _/
_/ Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8P 4X1 _/
_/ Email jwalker@hwcn.org _/
_/ http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker _/
_/ _/
_/ "To Teach is to touch a life forever" _/
_/ On the Web one touch can reach so far! _/
_/ _/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 14:48:13 +0100
From: Nordine Hadi <NH144@mercury.anglia.ac.uk>
Subject: [netz] Nordine Hadi : Help
Hello,
I am writing a thesis about the cyber democracy in the United States at the
Free University of Brussels (Belgium) and i have some problem with the NII.
I would like to ask you if someone of the Netizens community can help me to
understand the effectiveness of the National Information Infrastructure
because I wonder if it is really efficient. Maybe someone knows where i can
find a report explaining the result of this program.
Thank you very much in advance,
Friendly
Nordine Hadi
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 20:58:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: Re: [netz] Nordine Hadi : Help
Have a look at the Netizens book with the NTIA online conference
reports which we describe in chapters 11 and 13. Also the orignianl
archives of the conference should still be online.
People at the online conference which occurred in Nov 1994 explained
how they didn't feel that enough people had access to the Internet
and that the U.S. government wasn't doing enough to make that access
spread. That was basically both a complaint with the NII and with
the plans to privatize the U.S. backbone to the Internet.
Chapter 12 of Netizens describes some of the problems of privatizing
the U.S. backbone.
I hope that is helpful.
Ronda
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 09:34:41 +0100
From: Nordine Hadi <NH144@mercury.anglia.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [netz] Nordine Hadi : Help -Reply
Thank you very much Ronda.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 08:46:04 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] FCC, Telecos -- Consumer's Union Sources
o http://www.consunion.org/other/0406atdc499.htm
Sources:
Consumers Union
Nonprofit Publisher of Consumer Reports
Press Release
April 6, 1999
Statement of Gene Kimmelman
In Response to AT&T's Announced $3/month Charge
for Basic Schedule Long Distance Customers
"...AT&T's new minimum charge is the latest example of telecommunications
deregulation run amok, driving up prices
for millions of consumers. AT&T joins MCI and others in driving up monthly charges
for the 10 to 20 million
households that make less than $3 a month in interstate long distance calls. This new
charge is in addition to the
approximately $2-3 a month in new fees (e.g., universal service, federal access) AT&T
and other long distance
companies added to consumers' bills last year. Consumers are now paying more than $1
billion a year in fees to
long distance companies that have not been offset with lower per-minute calling
charges..."
o http://www.consunion.org/other/tele2sw299.htm
Press Release
February 17, 1999
Consumers Union Southwest Regional Office
Survey: Deregulation of local phone service results in
higher prices, virtually no competition in Texas
[New Mexico is not alone]
"...AUSTIN, TX -- State and federal laws passed in the mid 1990s have failed to spark
local telephone competition in
Texas while the average residential consumer's phone bill has continued to increase,
according to a survey
released today by the Southwest Regional Office of Consumers Union, publisher of
Consumer Reports.
Although more than 200 companies have registered with the Public Utility Commission
(PUC) to provide local phone
service in Texas, the study found that very few actually provide competitively priced
basic residential services.
Instead, they target high revenue users like business customers or residential
customers who use phone services
extensively. Or, quite often, they target low income people with very costly prepaid
service.
"Promises of a new day for consumers have fallen far short of reality," said Janee
Briesemeister, a CU senior policy
analyst. "Instead of competition and lower prices, local phone monopolies like
Southwestern Bell and GTE have
used mergers to increase their slice of the pie and assume control over even larger
geographic areas."
According to the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, monopoly phone companies
must satisfy a "14 point
checklist" - or 14 market opening reforms - before they are allowed to enter the long
distance market. However,
none of the reforms includes the existence of actual competition in the local market.
The Public Utility Deregulation Act passed by the Texas Legislature in 1995 also
called for an opening of the local
telephone market to competition, primarily from long distance and cable companies.
The Legislature then placed a
cap on residential phone rates until September 1999. But the local monopolies have
thrown roadblocks at efforts
by competiors to enter their markets. And they have come up with an array of new fees
and surcharges with the
net result being that overall rates for local service have continued to rise..."
o http://www.consunion.org/other/0125brdc399.htm
Press Release
January 25, 1999
COMMUNICATION ADVOCACY GROUPS:
FCC SHOULD REQUIRE OPEN ACCESS TO HIGH-SPEED CABLE NETWORKS
"...High-Speed Cable Internet Access Monopolies Hurt Consumers and the Internet
WASHINGTON, DC -- Communication advocacy groups announced today that they will file a
joint petition to the
FCC on Wednesday asking to begin an expedited Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the
issue of open broad-band
cable networks. The Consumer Federation of America, Consumer's Union, Consumer
Project on Technology, the
Media Access Project and the Center for Media Education, among others, are requesting
that the FCC require
broad-band cable providers to allow fair, non-discriminatory access to their
broadband cable network to competing
Internet Service Providers. According to the filing, the current closed, monopolistic
system hurts consumers by
denying them choice and raising prices, while also threatening the open, competitive
nature of the Internet...
Send your comments to the FCC here:
o http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html
- --
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
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #294
******************************
