Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 317
Netizens-Digest Sunday, July 11 1999 Volume 01 : Number 317
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
Re: [netz] Ads cloaked as posts or the Internet is under seige
[netz] Answering Vint Cerf
Re: [netz] Ads cloaked as posts or the Internet is under seige
Re: [netz] Ads cloaked as posts or the Internet is under seige
[netz] Free agency
[netz] Re: Free agency
[netz] New skirmish breaks out in Net domain war (US)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 13:27:17
From: John Walker <jwalker@networx.on.ca>
Subject: Re: [netz] Ads cloaked as posts or the Internet is under seige
It seems like you have gone off on at tangent here.
Please remember that I was here and have watched the changes to
the Internet over the years. I have monitored discussions on many
lists. I don't suffer from tunnel vision. I tell it like it is.
There is danger to the Internet from commercial interests, telcos
that want to charge by the minute for Internet access, the recent
situation with Yahoo/GeoCites.
But there are also problems created by governments. The US government
was considering cutting off satellite access to the Balkans which would
have effectively removed them from the Internet.
And then there are those who advocate keeping the 'Net pure. This usually
means for there own little interest group.
Yes, when I first joined I told you that I was against all of this and
that I would fight it. I have kept my promise. Those who have read the
excerpts sent to this and other lists know that.
This battle is far from over.
We have an obvious difference of opinion. That's not necessarily a bad
thing. Life would be very boring if we all agreed on everything.
But please keep the personal attacks to a minimum.
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: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 21:55:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Answering Vint Cerf
Following is interesting post from Vint Cerf that I responded to below
It seems important that the issues raised here be considered and
discussed as well on other lists like the Netizens list.
The Electronic Commerce agenda of Washington leaves out all
other uses of the Internet than e-commerce.
Ronda
- ----------
"vinton g. cerf" <vcerf@mci.net> wrote:
>some corrections:
At 11:08 PM 7/5/99 -0400, Gordon Cook wrote:
>Don Heath has been
>ISOC exec director since early 96.
His position is president and CEO.
>Vint, co-author of the TCP/IP protocol,
>>father of the Internet, but senior MCI executive for the past five years.
>>Vint who insupport of ICANN in May opined: "Let us dedicate ourselves to
>>the creation of a global legal framework in which laws work across national
>>boundaries to reinforce the upward spiral of value that Internet is capable
>>of creating."
No one denies the imprtant important contributions to the Internet made by
Vint Cerf. However, it seems more appropriate to speak of founding fathers
of the Internet rather than any one person as the father.
A Wall Street Journal front page article the Friday before Father's
Day spoke of the fact that there needs to be some thought about
who the founding fathers are.
>I was actually making reference to the Papers on electronic commerce that
>were issued by the White House in June 1997 and updated in October 1999.
>There is still an enormous amount of work to be done to fashion a framework
>for electronic commerce which addresses the significance of digital
>signatures, liabilities for electronic contracts, jurisdiction in various
>business disputes, etc.
But this all is secondary isn't it to what makes it possible to
keep the cooperative processes functioning to keep the Internet
an Internet.
Is there some reason that you don't put the communication nature
of the Internet as the primary issue, rather than taking a secondary
aspect, i.e. one possible use of the Internet, and making that
primary.
>ICANN has a tiny role in this very large and very complicated
>electronic trade framework.
Why should the institutionalization of the IANA functions have
anything to do with creating an electronic trade framework?
The institutionalization of the IANA functions require a protection.
These are the functions of the communication medium.
These should not be at the mercy of someone's ideological power
plays over their business interests.
>The governments of the world will need to work together to put
>into place practices and procedures that really
>are conducive to the continued growth of commerce on the Internet. In many
The issue however, that is primary is that governments and computer scientists
work together to support the continued growth of the communication
medium that is the Internet.
This is again very different from subordinating this main essence
of the Internet to one of the many uses of the Internet.
What about the education uses of the Internet. And what about
the uses of the scientific community. And what about the uses
of the librarians. Why are you trying to erase all these from
memory and instead substituting only one activity, i.e.
electronic commerce, and subordinating all to it?
>instances that will mean refraining from regulation where that would be
>an impediment, but it seems to me equally likely that there will be some
>legislation that would enable rather then impede electronic commerce.
But unless there is regulation protecting the IANA functions from
power plays like that we have already seen ISOC and ICANN and
GIP people carrying on, the Internet is being sacrificed to the
narrow purposes of a few behind the scenes players.
>=================================================================
>"INTERNET IS FOR EVERYONE!"
You mean the buying and selling Internet?
The electronic commerce is all agenda has effectively narrowed
down the nature and value of the Internet to all.
And ISOC refused to give press passes to journalists who
challenge this narrow agenda. This is very far from any
Internet for Everyone actuality. But a fine slogan to
cover the fact that "e-commerce" is out to disenfranchise
all users of the Internet.
>Join the Internet Society and help to make it so.
Doesn't the Internet Society have to open up and change its
basic nature? Isn't it clear from the mess that ICANN has
become from its first days that the Internet Society is at
its essence a real problem for the Internet, rather than
anything constructive?
>See you at INET2000, Yokohama, Japan July 18-21, 2000
>http://www.isoc.org/inet2000
If you can afford the high fees for registration?
And if you are a journalist, if you keep quiet and don't
report the truth about the lack of democratic processes
and procedures and about the narrow program of the Internet
Society.
Ronda
ronda@panix.com
Editor
Amateur Computerist Newsletter
The Newsletter denied press passes at INET '99
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 03:15:54 +0200
From: Carsten Laekamp <carsten.laekamp@wanadoo.fr>
Subject: Re: [netz] Ads cloaked as posts or the Internet is under seige
On Thu, Jul 08, 1999 at 10:14:40AM -0400, Ronda Hauben wrote:
>
> John Walker <jwalker@networx.on.ca> writes:
> And people on the Netizens list have said that they aren't appropriate.
>
> Even if only one such person said that they aren't appropriate, then
> that would be something that one would expect a Netizen to take
> seriously.
Hmmm... "to take seriously", or at least not to dimiss, certainly. But
not as a basis for a decision, IMHO.
BTW: I believe that the majority of expressed opinions should matter,
not that of list members, even if the result cannot be significant
when the "vote taker" is a party involved.
> What he is doing shows how there is no dialogue possible between
> business interests and Netizen interests.
There could be a dialogue if both parties would want it... it seems to
me that neither John nor you really wanted it, in this particular case.
> The commercial interests want to restrict the spread of the Internet
> to use for their buying and selling and other profit making purposes.
Hmmm... I haven't got the impression that John restricts the spread
of the Internet with his postings. On the contrary, if his business
is entirely based on the 'Net, as I understand it to be, he should
be interested in its spread being the largest possible. Even for his
advertising, which is, IMHO, a misuse of 'Net resources.
>
> But the Internet was built with a great deal of public funding
> and voluntary contribution so it would spread as a communications
> medium.
Yes, but that would include business communication too, no ? I don't
think that the community the Net was made by/for _only_ used it for
the public interest either. Sex newsgroups were around before the
"general public" could get access to the 'Net..
> Commerce might have a way to participate, but not by swamping
> the educational and scientific purposes and uses of the Net
> as it is doing today.
Yes (although I'm not sure if it's the case "today", it's certainly
the way things are evolving). But I think that commerce _should_ (not
"might") have a way to participate, in the use of the Internet aswell
as in its financing (and, to some _limited_ extent, in its control).
Cheers,
- --
Carsten Läkamp
carsten.laekamp@wanadoo.fr
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 10:42:18 -0400
From: Mark Lindeman <MTL4@columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: [netz] Ads cloaked as posts or the Internet is under seige
FWIW, I thought John's posts were within the reasonable bounds of the
list's purpose as I understood it. Certainly this would be a topic for
discussion among interested list members. Incidentally, I have quite a few
copies of Ronda's book's ISBN number on my hard drive, and they don't seem
to have inconvenienced me.
Now back to lurking... no, wait, am I a lurker under Kerry's
definition? Auuuuggggghhhhhh!
Mark Lindeman
MTL4@columbia.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 20:44:13 +0000
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Subject: [netz] Free agency
http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,0-38955,00.html
ICANN defensive in letter to Commerce**
By Courtney Macavinta
[...]
Countering NSI's complaints that ICANN is trying
to regulate its business as well as those of the
new registrars through operating agreements, the
nonprofit insisted today that it is a grassroots
organization, not a policy-setting body.
"If they come into existence, these contracts will
be the product of voluntary agreements; since
ICANN has no governmental power, and indeed no
existence outside the context of community
consensus, it cannot coerce cooperation," ICANN
told the Commerce Committee.
Still, legal experts and other observers have said
that ICANN has to ability to "make law" on the Net
through its agreements. That's because to enter
NSI's business, new registrars have to promise to
comply with numerous terms and conditions, such
adopting an impending domain name dispute
procedure that could give offline trademark holders
special rights to Net names even if they already
are in use by someone else.
[...]
"NSI must fulfill its obligation to recognize ICANN,"
Commerce stated. "The transition of DNS
management to the private sector can succeed
only if all participants in the domain name
system--including NSI--subject themselves to
rules emerging from the consensus-based,
bottom-up process spelled out in the White
Paper."
=======
**
ICANN's (40 page) reply to the House Cmte on Commerce is at
http://www.icann.org/correspondence/bliley-response-08july99.htm
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 00:21:44 +0000
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Subject: [netz] Re: Free agency
http://www.icann.org/correspondence/bliley-response-08july99.htm
...ICANN "decisions" are nothing more than the recognition of
community consensus, and require voluntary compliance by a
large number of independent actors to have any effect at all...
Even with the relatively limited amount of competition that has
begun for name registrations, no accredited registrar has yet to
offer services at a rate higher than the $35 charged by NSI, and
thus both NSI's $9 registry fee and the $1 cost recovery fee due to
ICANN are being absorbed by the registrars, not paid by users, and
presumably being reflected in lower operating margins than might
otherwise exist.
... even just a $2 reduction in the average cost of an annual name
registration would save consumers approximately than $20 million
annually,
Note 6: ...it seems reasonable to expect that the fee that NSI will
eventually be [*]permitted[*] to charge for accessing the registries
that it operates will be significantly lower than the $9 temporary
charge that is now permitted.
- ----
>From these quotes (and the fact that NSIs $35 annual fee for
registering is mentioned 7 times), one is obviously to conclude that
NSI grossly overcharges; that with a bit of competition the price to
the registrant will drop, and that a $1 surcharge to support ICANN
(thus $10m /yr) is hardly anything to be concerned about.
Nevertheless, it is also evident that ICANN can hardly afford for NSI
to remain outside its registrar's agreement/ contract, and thus the
legitimacy of calling that contract 'voluntary' is seriously
undermined. In short, ICANN's argument is that *if* everyone
agreed to support ICANN, the overhead would not be a problem;
therefore they *should* agree, voluntarily.
The fact remains that the total ground for expecting NSI to
understand this point rests (note 3) "in fact, in Amendment 11,
[where] NSI agreed to support the transition of USG DNS
responsibilities to 'NewCo,' (now ICANN), agreed to 'recognize
NewCo pursuant to a contract between NSI and NewCo,['] and
agreed that ICANN would have 'the authority . . . to carry out
[ICANN's] responsibilities.' "
Admittedly, its lawyerly writing in the finest tradition, but ICANN
collectively, and its members individually, might have been wise to
practice a bit of lawyerly *reading before sticking their heads in the
DNS mess.
Indeed Amendment 11 states, a couple paragraphs earlier,
"Commencing upon the Phase 1 deployment of the Shared
Registration System, and for the term of this agreement, NSI's
prices for registry services through the Shared Registration System
in the gTLDs for which NSI now acts as the registry, will be no
more than a dollar amount per registration/year to be specified in a
further amendment [not yet written] reflecting NSI's costs and a
reasonable return on its investment. This price cap will be adjusted
via an amendment to the Cooperative Agreement to reflect
demonstrated changed costs of NSI arising from newly enacted
legislation, [*]NewCo fees[*], inflation, regulations, standards,
costs of new litigation (including settlements and judgments)
in excess of NSI's operating plan or changes in the operation of the
registry, or to fund specific additional activities in the event such
activities are reflected in an amendment to the Cooperative
Agreement."
In short, NSI is to be reimbursed all its expenses. If it did come to
the point of paying ICANN anything at all, I'd bet NSI immediately
bills ICANN to get it back again, plus costs. ICANN may, willy-
nilly, find itself in the business of running a competing *registry* --
and shouldnt every devout free-enterpriser be ready to cough up a
dollar to help them make the play?
kerry
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 08:44:02
From: John Walker <jwalker@networx.on.ca>
Subject: [netz] New skirmish breaks out in Net domain war (US)
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.
The following is an excerpt from the CSS Internet News. If you are
going to pass this along to other Netizens please ensure that the
complete message is forwarded with all attributes intact.
NOTE: Registrations for the On-line Learning Series of Courses
for July/August are now being accepted. Information is
available at:
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/course.htm
- ------------
New skirmish breaks out in Net domain war (US)
BY DAVID L. WILSON
Mercury News Washington Bureau
http://www.mercurycenter.com/business/top/045138.htm
WASHINGTON -- Internet flame wars -- spirited electronic debates
that degenerate into hysterical exchanges between participants who
don't distinguish between fact and paranoid fantasy -- are legendary.
But the real-world debate stirred by the U.S. government's move to
create competition in the market for the Internet's most critical
infrastructure makes a flame war look like tea party banter.
That infrastructure is currently controlled by a single company,
Network Solutions Inc. As part of the transition, the government has
created a non-profit corporation that is expected to sign contracts
with other companies who hope to compete in that market. But critics
say the non-profit could wind up wielding too much power on the
Internet, putting free speech, access and reasonable prices in
cyberspace at risk.
The latest skirmish came Friday as the U.S. Commerce Department,
responding to allegations of impropriety from a powerful member of
Congress, vigorously defended the new non-profit corporation at the
center of the transition, but suggested that the group make changes
including never meeting behind closed doors, and postponing key
financial decisions until an elected board is in place.
The letter was sent to the chairman of the House Commerce Committee,
Rep. Thomas Bliley, a Virginia Republican, in response to his
accusations that the new entity, the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers, has exceeded the bounds of its authority.
ICANN officials said the suggested changes would be considered, but
made no commitments. ``We'll pay close attention to them,'' said Joe
Sims, ICANN's general counsel. ``We always pay close attention to
anything the Commerce Department says.''
Critics say the attempt to get the government out of the Internet
management business is long overdue. But they argue that the
replacement structure developed by the government is ripe for abuse
and that business interests may eventually be able to seize control
of the Internet, leaving consumers at their mercy. In worst-case
scenarios, unpopular or competing speech could be suppressed,
wealthy interests favored over the poor, and consumers could find it
more expensive to be connected, they say.
Observers say that while some critics are sincere in their
arguments, others appear to be using such concerns to advance their
own ends. For instance, delays in shifting from government to private
control benefit those who have an advantage under the current system.
Meanwhile, those working at ICANN are racing against tight deadlines
to change the most diffuse and complex technological system ever
devised, all the while hoping that they don't break anything.
ICANN's task is to move the Internet from an almost completely
informal management of the technology to a more structured system
that's less directly tied to a single government but is still subject
to oversight by the public through elections and the judicial
process.
Much of the dispute over ICANN's actions comes because the Internet
represents a vast source of wealth that has not yet been tapped,
said David G. Post, an associate professor of law at Temple
University who helps run a Web site designed to monitor ICANN and
encourage debate about the process.
``The concern is that with that much money on the table,
institutions -- business, government, associations -- of all kinds
who want a piece of that will do whatever it takes to gain control
over ICANN because they'll get a degree of control over cyberspace.
And that should concern us all,'' he said.
The frenzy over ICANN revolves around Internet domain names. Domain
names act as an Internet address, bringing up the right Web page and
allowing mail to correctly move from computer to computer.
Network Solutions, of Herndon, Va., has since 1992 handled
registration for the most popular domain names including those
ending in .com -- an indication that the owner is a business -- under
contract with the U.S. government. Until 1995, when a government
subsidy ended, registration was free. NSI currently charges $35 a
year for a domain name.
Many of the people who keep the Internet humming acknowledge the
need for some sort of payment and don't think the cost excessive --
but have been concerned by the absence of any competition that would
keep prices reasonable in the future.
Key Internet players have spent the past four years trying to hammer
out a way to let other companies register domain names without
breaking the Internet.
The solution, enacted last year by the Commerce Department, was to
form ICANN. The non-profit group has no real statutory authority,
but is, in effect, an arbitrator of consensus. Those who disagree are
free to set up their own little fiefdoms on the Internet, but those
fiefdoms may be unable to connect to the rest of the Net. This
possibility of fragmentation -- a balkanization of the Internet --
is the danger that looms ahead if the ICANN experiment fails to gain
the support of Internet users.
ICANN will also eventually set policies for resolving troubling
issues such as what to do when somebody registers a domain name that
violates somebody else's trademark, for example, entering the
Internet to make use of the name ``Walt Disney Co.''
ICANN is designed to sign contracts with other companies who want to
compete with Network Solutions for domain registration business,
ensuring that everybody is playing by the same rules.
The government had been left holding the bag on the domain registry
issue because the origins of the Internet go back three decades to
Defense Department projects.
ICANN will eventually be made up of 28 directors representing such
factions as business, consumers and Internet service providers from
around the world. Most will be elected in some yet-to-be determined
process. But at the moment, ICANN is proceeding with 10 directors
who were appointed to an initial, interim board.
Network Solutions minces no words about ICANN's board members.
``They are unwilling to understand what the public mandate was for
ICANN,'' said Don Telage, the company's chief policy officer. `What
we have is a group of people who feel compelled to dictate policy for
the community. It's not in their mandate.''
People close to ICANN say they believe Network Solutions is throwing
sand in the works to keep the lion's share of registration fees as
long as it possibly can, and to deny ICANN the funds it needs to get
off the ground, a charge Network Solutions officials deny.
The fact that no current ICANN director was elected has been a
source for a good deal of the ammunition its critics have been using.
Recognizing the public relations problem, the Commerce Department
letter says ICANN's priority should be putting nine elected
directors on the board by November. Sims says that has always been
the group's goal.
In its letter to Bliley, ICANN said the group is carrying out its
mandate, as defined in a federal ``White Paper'' that set out issues
and solutions; a memorandum of understanding with the Commerce
Department; contracts they have with registrars; their bylaws; and
their articles of incorporation.
While getting the election process up is indeed the priority, the
group feels compelled to simultaneously proceed with other efforts
which are also critical to the process. Critics who say the group is
violating its agreements are wrong, ICANN officials say.
``The assertion that the intent was that we not do anything is
clearly not true because we have this contract that says we will do
these things,'' said Michael M. Roberts, the group's interim
president and CEO, and a former deputy director of information
technology services at Stanford, who was interviewed before the
Commerce Department released its letter Friday.
By far the most controversial decision by the organization is a
requirement that registries pay ICANN up to $1 a year for every
domain name registered, a fee that was expected to raise more than $5
million.
Bliley's June letter suggested that ICANN had acted illegally in
establishing the fee. The Commerce Department defends the fee as
legal and says it may even eventually be viewed as appropriate. But
the, letter said, ``it has become controversial,'' and the agency
recommended that no permanent financing method be adopted until
after board members are elected. The letter promises to help ICANN
get the resources it needs to function until then.
``It would be a lot easier to accept that recommendation if there
was another source of funds,'' Sims said.
The Commerce Department also suggested that ICANN should never have
a closed board meeting -- a goal Sims said could be met only at the
cost of candid discussions on some topics -- and should write its
contracts with registrars to reassure critics that the group has no
intention of influencing such matters as free speech on the Internet.
Sims said that the group was fully behind the concept, and reiterated
that ICANN's bylaws and articles of incorporation prevent it from
controlling behavior on the Internet.
Critics aren't convinced.
``In fairness to ICANN, they have not done anything else that is
clearly beyond anything contemplated say in the `White Paper',''
says Temple's Post. And he says he does not doubt the motives of
those on the board today.
But he argues that those who want to impose their own way on
Internet users, whether for ideological, corporate, or political
reasons, are likely to try to work through the domain name registry
system, the only focal point in the global network where such changes
could be imposed. ``I want to see structural adjustments to reassure
the Internet community that what we're worried about can't happen.''
Sims says anyone injured anywhere in the world by ICANN's actions
can take the group to court if ICANN goes beyond the limits in its
bylaws.
Critics aren't buying it.
``They will say it's not in their mandate. But I can find things in
the bylaws that say they can do this kind of stuff,'' said James
Love, director of the Consumer Project on Technology, one of Ralph
Nader's consumer advocacy groups. ``Okay, maybe I'm crazy. But I
think I think ICANN has no limits on its ability to tax people and
attach conditions to participation on the Internet. This is about
governance, it's about power, it's about control.''
A weary Esther Dyson, ICANN's interim chairman, -- interviewed
before the Commerce Department letter was released -- said that,
after seven months of taking flack from all sides, ``I have never
felt less powerful in my life.''
But she added, `I understand these concerns. They are legitimate
concerns, and these people are asking legitimate questions. We
believe we have legitimate answers.''
- ---------------
Also in this issue:
- - U.S. Commerce Department calls for scrapping of $1 Web address fee (US)
The U.S. Commerce Department said on Friday that a nonprofit
corporation formed to privatize the Internet's address system should
drop a controversial $1-a-year fee on Web site addresses.
- - Europe's Internet at crucial stage, Morgan Stanley says (Europe)
Morgan Stanley, Dean Witter said on Friday that companies and
investors across Europe need to develop Internet strategies now if
they do not want to lose business in coming years.
- - Counting the Couch-and-Mouse Potatoes (US)
Do Americans watch TV and surf the Net at the same time?
- - Hackers to release new computer bug (US)
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Hackers at the annual Defcon conference in
Las Vegas are set to release a new program to the Internet that can
let intruders automatically take over Microsoft-powered computers,
industry experts and hackers warned on Friday.
- - High-tech `Cyberjaya' rises in Malaysian jungle (Asia)
CYBERJAYA, Malaysia - Malaysia opened its version of Silicon Valley
yesterday, cutting the ribbon on a high-tech cityscape in a giant
clearing where wetlands and rubber trees once stood. Prime Minister
Mahathir Mohamad unveiled phase one of the futuristic city named
Cyberjaya - a project expected to eventually cost $5.3 billion and
usher Malaysia into the information age.
- - New skirmish breaks out in Net domain war (US)
WASHINGTON -- Internet flame wars -- spirited electronic debates
that degenerate into hysterical exchanges between participants who
don't distinguish between fact and paranoid fantasy -- are legendary.
But the real-world debate stirred by the U.S. government's move to
create competition in the market for the Internet's most critical
infrastructure makes a flame war look like tea party banter.
- - Online Student Loans Overnight (US)
Student loan management company Sallie Mae has developed Laureate,
an Internet-based student loan application process that allows
students to get loans at hyper-speed.
- - Virgin Weblantic (UK)
During the month of August, Virgin Atlantic will offer their
frequent flyers in the United Kingdom Internet access.
- - Punjab to have its own web page (Pakistan)
LAHORE (July 10) : The Punjab government is planning to launch a Web
Page to provide information to the people about the changes and
amendments to be made in the provincial laws, rules and regulations.
- - Workshop on web authoring (Pakistan)
KARACHI (July 11) : The Sustainable Development Networking Programme
(SNDP) conducted a three-day workshop on topic of web authoring for
the development sector, attended by members of Karachi-based human
rights associations, NGOs and local educational institutions.
- - Deals Push Teledesic To 'Internet In The Sky' (US)
Teledesic, the satellite communications network bank-rolled by Bill
Gates, said Friday that it has signed a launch contract with
Lockheed Martin and an agreement with Motorola to build the company's
planned "Internet-in-the-sky" network.
- - New Lists and Journals
1) Mathematics and Computers in Simulation
2) Nonlinear Analysis
3) Topology and its Applications
4) Topology
5) Contact Point Bulletin
6) Seventeenth Century
7) Journal of Transport History
8) International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education
9) International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education
10) Research in Education
11) Literature and History
12) Journal of Crystal Growth
- - Sunday Supplement
EDITORIAL This week Bernadette Burke considers the Internet
censorship bill in Australia and the wider
implications for society.
BRAND :Poor Brand Awareness of E-Retailers
:Brand Unimportant to Young Net Consumer
BUSINESS USE :Two Thirds of B-to-B Sites To Turn A Profit
DEMOGRAPHICS :Over 2 Million Net Users in Argentina by 2005
:6.7 Million Online in China by Close of 1999
E-COMMERCE :Global Ecommerce to Top USD95 Billion in '99
:Ecommerce to Top USD1 Trillion by 2003
:Direct-to-Consumer Sales to Surge by 2010
:Irish Users More Willing to Buy Online
:Slow Download Time Will Cost Ecommerce
:Loyalty Schemes A Draw for E-Consumers
GOV/LEG :Australia Passes Censorship Law
INFRASTRUCTURE :Telecoms & Cable Companies Vie for Networks
ISPS :AOL to Offer Free Net Access in the UK
:220,000 Have Subscribed to French Free ISPs
USAGE PATTERNS :Increasing Number of US Farmers Online
- - RESPONSE OF THE INTERNET CORPORATION FOR ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS TO
QUESTIONS CONTAINED IN JUNE 22, 1999 LETTER FROM CHAIRMAN TOM BLILEY
TO ESTHER DYSON
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
- -------------------------------
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #317
******************************
