Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 413
Netizens-Digest Sunday, February 16 2003 Volume 01 : Number 413
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
[netz] What is the Internet?
Re: [netz] What is the Internet?
Re: [netz] What is the Internet?
[netz] controversy over the Internet's birthday
Re: [netz] controversy over the Internet's birthday
[netz] Open architecture and the Internet: What is after ICANN?
[netz] Netizens and the Feb 15, 2003 demonstration in NYC
[netz] TELEPOLIS: Massive Anti-War Protest in New York Cit... (fwd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 23:07:27 -0500 (EST)
From: jrh@ais.org (Jay Hauben)
Subject: [netz] What is the Internet?
Hi,
A friend has shared with me his intention to write a little book on
the Internet Revolution. I thought his project is interesting so I wrote
to him the following note.
I wrote:
Your little book in progress sounds interesting to me. I too do not
know whether there is an Internet Revolution or what a social
revolution tied to a technological leap is.
I am reminded of the discovery or invention of iron ore smelting in
ancient ancient Greece. There was a shortage I think of tin in Greece
in the 11th century BC. Without tin the manufacture of bronze was
thus scarce. Bronze was for the time being replaced by iron which
actually was stronger and took a sharper point and blade edge. The tin
supply however was renewed, bronze became possible again and it wasn't
for three or 4 hundred years that the great changes iron brought to
society were experienced. Likewise we can not yet know the fate of
the Internet let alone the lasting effect it will have on society.
A necessary question for me is the question I raised at the beginning
of my workshop in Maastricht: "What is the Internet?" Just now there
has been a little flurry of people commenting on whether or not Jan 1
2003 is the 20th birthday of the Internet. You can see some of this at
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,57013.00.htm .
The interesting difference is that those who think the Internet is a
mass connection of computers argue that the Internet was born in late
1969 when the ARPANET began. But for me the Internet is a mass
interconnection of networks. This interconnection of networks was made
possible by the development of TCP/IP and the cutover on the ARPANET on
Jan 1 1983 from the NCP protocol to the TCP/IP protocol.
The significance is that the interconnected networks are independent
of each other and are under diverse technical, political, and economic
administrations. Still they can interconnect. That is what might turn
out to be "revolutionary". A prototype technology has overcome
national, political, social boundaries to interconnect the people of
the world despite their geographic separation and despite their living
under hostile regimes or political systems. What long range effect
this will have and on what time scale remains to be seen. But for me
the Internet creates the potential for greater democracy and a greater
coherence of the human species.
- ------------
I told him of my interest in his efforts to better define what is a
revolutionary process in terms of societal change and welcomed the
conversation with him. I also pointed out to him that the coming of the
Internet brought forth a new social player: the netizen. Netizens while
remaining citizens of their nation states also take responsibility for the
Net which is international. So they are social players already in a
citizen like relation to a global entity.
I hope others on this list might want to add their thoughts what is the
Internet and whether the Internet is "revolutionary".
Take care.
Jay
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 10:39:48 -0500
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [netz] What is the Internet?
At 11:07 PM -0500 1/13/03, Jay Hauben wrote:
>Hi,
>
>A friend has shared with me his intention to write a little book on
>the Internet Revolution. I thought his project is interesting so I wrote
>to him the following note.
>
>I wrote:
>
>Your little book in progress sounds interesting to me. I too do not
>know whether there is an Internet Revolution or what a social
>revolution tied to a technological leap is.
>
>I am reminded of the discovery or invention of iron ore smelting in
>ancient ancient Greece. There was a shortage I think of tin in Greece
>in the 11th century BC. Without tin the manufacture of bronze was
>thus scarce. Bronze was for the time being replaced by iron which
>actually was stronger and took a sharper point and blade edge. The tin
>supply however was renewed, bronze became possible again and it wasn't
>for three or 4 hundred years that the great changes iron brought to
>society were experienced. Likewise we can not yet know the fate of
>the Internet let alone the lasting effect it will have on society.
>
>A necessary question for me is the question I raised at the beginning
>of my workshop in Maastricht: "What is the Internet?" Just now there
>has been a little flurry of people commenting on whether or not Jan 1
>2003 is the 20th birthday of the Internet. You can see some of this at
>http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,57013.00.htm .
>
>The interesting difference is that those who think the Internet is a
>mass connection of computers argue that the Internet was born in late
>1969 when the ARPANET began. But for me the Internet is a mass
>interconnection of networks. This interconnection of networks was made
>possible by the development of TCP/IP and the cutover on the ARPANET on
>Jan 1 1983 from the NCP protocol to the TCP/IP protocol.
I think you are projecting today's computer designs onto those of
1969. A large computer back then might support tens to hundreds of
user terminals, so the computer carried out the function of a LAN
today. The important point was that these computers could share
resources, an ARPANET design.
TCP/IP certainly accelerated decentralized computing, but the initial
implementation were for BSD 4.2 UNIX, which were well beyond the
level of hobbyist computers. I think your concept of interconnected
user computers is fusion of TCP/IP, large-scale routing, and the
availability of personal computers.
But one can go back to the telegraph (see Tom Standish's _The
Victorian Internet_) and ham radio to look at decentralized
communications. Long distance direct dialing fits in there
somewhere. In other words, the ARPANET and alternative SNA and X.25
networks of the same vintage, and the NSFNET, etc., are evolutions.
>
>The significance is that the interconnected networks are independent
>of each other and are under diverse technical, political, and economic
>administrations. Still they can interconnect. That is what might turn
>out to be "revolutionary". A prototype technology has overcome
>national, political, social boundaries to interconnect the people of
>the world despite their geographic separation and despite their living
>under hostile regimes or political systems. What long range effect
>this will have and on what time scale remains to be seen. But for me
>the Internet creates the potential for greater democracy and a greater
>coherence of the human species.
>------------
>
>I told him of my interest in his efforts to better define what is a
>revolutionary process in terms of societal change and welcomed the
>conversation with him. I also pointed out to him that the coming of the
>Internet brought forth a new social player: the netizen. Netizens while
>remaining citizens of their nation states also take responsibility for the
>Net which is international. So they are social players already in a
>citizen like relation to a global entity.
>
>I hope others on this list might want to add their thoughts what is the
>Internet and whether the Internet is "revolutionary".
>
>Take care.
>
>Jay
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 20:05:54 -0500 (EST)
From: jrh@ais.org (Jay Hauben)
Subject: Re: [netz] What is the Internet?
Hi,
I wrote:
>> The interesting difference is that those who think the Internet is a
>> mass connection of computers argue that the Internet was born in late
>> 1969 when the ARPANET began. But for me the Internet is a mass
>> interconnection of networks. This interconnection of networks was made
>> possible by the development of TCP/IP and the cutover on the ARPANET on
>> Jan 1 1983 from the NCP protocol to the TCP/IP protocol.
Howard Berkowitz answered:
> I think you are projecting today's computer designs onto those of
> 1969. A large computer back then might support tens to hundreds of
> user terminals, so the computer carried out the function of a LAN
> today. The important point was that these computers could share
> resources, an ARPANET design.
> ...
Howard suggests that the difference I base my conclusion on is less than
I see it as. He says time-sharing computers had enough terminals that such
computers and their terminals were like local area networks. The ARPANET
which connected together such time-sharing computers was therefore almost
like an internet. Therefore, if I read Howard correctly, the change from
ARPANET to Internet was evolutionary more than revolutionary. That would
explain why some people say Sept 1969 was the beginning of the Internet.
My analysis is that by allowing networks under different political,
technical, economic and geographical administrations to interconnect, a
level of connectivity was made possible that would have been impossible if
networks like the ARPANET existed without a protocol suite like tcp/ip.
Howard misses my main point. The ARPANET could not interconnect with
Cyclades in France not because such an interconnection was technically
difficult. It was because the French government would not allow its
computer network to become part of the US ARPANET. Also, technically
different networks were being created in different places which would have
required major changes if they were to interconnect into one large network
like the ARPANET. It is the development of a protocol like TCP/IP that
allows computers in France to connect to those in the US today. TCP/IP
solved the political and technical problems that had to be surmounted
before universal interconnection could be possible and permissible.
Louis Puozin's conception of a "catenet" and Robert Kahn's conception of
an "open architecture" by allowing totally autonomous networks to
interconnect without giving up autonomy or sovereignty or their own
technology are the essence of the Internet. So for me the change from the
ARPANET to the Internet symbolically represented by the cutover on the
ARPANET from NCP to TCP/IP is a most significant event to be understood
and celebrated.
Take care.
Jay
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 13:11:27 -0500 (EST)
From: <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] controversy over the Internet's birthday
I thought folks on the netizens mailing list would find this
of interest
http://www.circleid.com/articles/2561.asp
A Closer Look At The Controversy Over
The Internet's Birthday!
I welcome comments on the article.
with best wishes
Ronda
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:22:09 -0800 (PST)
From: regina e walls <regewalls@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [netz] controversy over the Internet's birthday
- --0-680588097-1043378529=:47841
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Please removemeformthis mailing list.
Regina Walls
ronda@panix.com wrote:
I thought folks on the netizens mailing list would find this
of interest
http://www.circleid.com/articles/2561.asp
A Closer Look At The Controversy Over
The Internet's Birthday!
I welcome comments on the article.
with best wishes
Ronda
- ---------------------------------
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 20:31:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Open architecture and the Internet: What is after ICANN?
"Forms grow out of principles and operate to continue the principles they
grow from" wrote Thomas Paine in "The Rights of Man"
The Internet and ICANN have grown out of different principles and
the forms they represent are incompatible.
The article "The Internet and Open Architecture: Determining How
to Replace ICANN" describes the principles of the "open architecture"
of the Internet in contrast to the closed architecture of ICANN.
It also describes the importance of the netizen in the development
of a form to replace ICANN, rather than substituting "vested interests"
or "stakeholder interests", as ICANN has tried to do.
Also the article looks at a recent article in the November-December 2002
issue of Foreign Affairs. where Zoe Baird describes the problem represented
by ICANN, but puts forward but another proposal for a new form based
on principles that are similarly incompatible with the "open architecture"
of the Internet.
See "The Internet and Open Architecture" http://www.circleid/articles/2567.asp/
Also see "Internet Governance" http://www.circleid.com/articles/2565.asp/
for a more detailed discussion of the Foreign Affairs article
A summary of the Foreign Affairs article can be found at:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20021101facomment9989/zoe-baird/
governing-the-internet-engaging-government-business-and-nonprofits.html
Ronda
ronda@panix.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 19:08:21 -0500 (EST)
From: <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Netizens and the Feb 15, 2003 demonstration in NYC
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: NYC Demonstration against War in Iraq
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Organization:
Summary:
Keywords:
Report from the NYC anti war demonstration February 15, 2003
The NYC goverment wouldn't allow a march.
Thus in New York City today there was a demonstration but not a march.
There were alot of people, some said between 70,000 and 1 millions.
There many homemade signs and people all ages and sizes and shape.
But the treatment of people in NYC shows that democracy is not
something the US federal government or NYC government have any
respect for.
People lined first avenue, from the around 51st to the mid 80s.
There were people lining second avenue and third avenue and
Lexington.
But people were kept from seeing each other.
And there were reports that police on horseback hurt demonstrators
on third avenue and on Lexington Avenue.
Most of the people who had come from all around New York City and
other cities and states around the US were kept from getting to
the demonstration on First Avenue.
The march was a victory despite the police tactics in NYC and the federal
and city officials who were allowed by the U.S. federal district court to
prevent a march in New York City.
But the treatment of the demonstrations in New York City on February
15, 2003 showed that the U.S. government and the New York City government
have no interest in supporting democracy at home or abroad.
Below is a leaflet about netizens and communication and the war against
Iraq given out at the march.
"Communication Not Annihilation, No War on Iraq. Netizens Unite"
Today's marches around the world demonstrate the power of the Netizens.
There is a need for global communication to be utilized to solve the
enormous problems in our modern world. More citizens and netizens around
the world can now participate in helping each other to solve what
otherwise would be impossible difficulties.
What is a Netizen?
The concept of Netizen grew out of research online in 1992-1993. This was
before the commercialization of the Internet. Contrary to popular
mythology the numbers of people connecting to the Internet was growing by
large numbers each year. There began to be Free-Nets springing up to
provide community people with access to the Internet.
A student doing online research, Michael, writes:
"The story of Netizens is an important one. In conducting research . . .
online to determine people's uses for the global computer communications
network, I became aware that there was a new social institution, an
electronic commons, developing. It was exciting to explore this new social
institution. Others online shared this excitement. I discovered from those
who wrote me that the people I was writing about were citizens of the Net,
or Netizens."
from Preface to "Netizens: On the History and
Impact of Usenet and the Internet"
http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/
The Internet was making it possible for people who got access to
communicate with others around the world. And there were people online who
did what they could to connect others to the Internet and to make the
Internet something valuable for people around the world. The student
documented this development in his paper "The Net and Netizens: The Impact
the Net has on People's Lives".
The paper was posted online in 1993. The concept of Netizen spread round
the world and has been adopted by many who continue to contribute to the
development of the Internet as a global commons and to spread access to
the global communication the Internet makes possible.
We need the vision of the Internet and the Netizen, that both its early
pioneers and the users that the student in 1992/3 found online, have
embodied. This is as a network of networks linking people around the globe
where online users act as netizens helping to solve the problems of the
Internet and of the society.
People online and people who aren't online, can help to make the vision of
the Internet pioneers and users a reality. We don't want war in Iraq. We
don't want war in North Korea or Iran. We don't want war against the
Palestinians. We want to communicate with each other and collaborate
together to have the wealth of society go to its people so that the better
world that is now possible, becomes a reality. It's a hard and difficult
struggle. But with lots of netizens around the world, we can forge a
better world.
Long live the Netizens Long live the Iraqi People Long live the American
People Long live the peace loving people everywhere
Let us honor the memory of those who have perished in the struggle.
NETIZENS UNITE AND SPREAD THE INTERNET SO EVERYONE HAS ACCESS
Let us continue to take up the challenge to make the Internet a global
commons that all can contribute to and build.
Dedicated to Michael (1973-2001). I have written this to honor his memory
and to try to continue his contributions to make the world a better place.
Ronda ronda@panix.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 11:30:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] TELEPOLIS: Massive Anti-War Protest in New York Cit... (fwd)
Here is an article I wrote for Telepolis about yesterday's demonstration
in New York City. The sentiment of people supporting each other around
the world for increased cmmunication and collaboration rather than
war and violence is one of the promises that the Internet and the
Netizens represent for the world.
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 17:21:15 +0100
From: ronda@panix.com
To: ronda@panix.com
Subject: TELEPOLIS: Massive Anti-War Protest in New York Cit...
Dieser TELEPOLIS Artikel wurde Ihnen
von <ronda@panix.com> gesandt.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Massive Anti-War Protest in New York City Demonstrates
Ronda Hauben 16.02.2003
the U.S. Government's Hostility to Democracy At Home and Abroad
There were marches in cities around the world on Saturday, February 15,
2003. Not, however, in New York City. Protesters were not only denied
the right to march, but massive numbers of people were also denied the
right to be part of the rally. Police on horseback charged protesters
and beat up demonstrators, preventing them from joining officially
approved rally on First Avenue. Yet estimates are that 1 million people
were in New York City on Saturday to protest the U.S. government making
war against Iraq.
"New York City politicians didn't want us here," commented one
protester. "They tried every single roadblock. We didn't let them win.
We are here."
Another protester explained, "Just think, people all over the world are
doing it. It's the only way to survive. Everybody came for the same
reason, No War."
Responding to the fabrication of a terrorist alert called "code orange"
used by city and federal government officials to deny protesters the
right to march on Saturday, a student from Cornell University said:
"The city did a lousy job. They give a permit to rally but then they
don't let people get there. The fact they didn't give the permit to
march is outrageous. The whole code orange is crap."
The U.S. federal government had sent representatives to join the New
York City government to ensure that an appeals court judge would back
the city's refusal to allow a protest march. The claim was, however,
that the protesters would be allowed to have a rally. As it turned out,
the police denied a great number of protesters the right to join the
rally on First Avenue.
It was a cold day (-5 C) in New York City on Saturday. People came to
protest the U.S. government plan to make war in Iraq. They came by
trainloads and busloads from other cities. They came from all over New
York by subway, bus, and on bicycle. There were young and old, students
and retirees, labor unions and churches, represented. The city had
granted a permit for the demonstrators to rally on First Avenue several
blocks North of the United Nations and further uptown. The rally of
people stretched from 51st Street to 84th Street on First Avenue,
according to reports. But people were enclosed in metal barricades
street by street, with police limiting and in many cases denying people
the right to walk on the sidewalks or on the cross streets to get to
First Avenue.
There were numerous reports that protesters were injured and arrested
by police blocking their right to join the demonstration. Many people
tried to get to First Avenue, but were prevented by the police.
Demonstrators who couldn't get to First Avenue because of police
blockades, filled 2nd Avenue, 3rd Avenue, and there were also
protesters on the next block, Lexington Avenue. On these streets,
protesters reported police on horseback beating up people and charging
people. Local television coverage later in the day showed protesters
being charged by police on horseback and being beaten by police.
On First Avenue there were protesters as far as the eye could see. But
even on First Avenue, the police blockaded protesters on each block
keeping them barricaded from other protesters on the next block. Those
who wanted to leave the blockaded areas were often told by police to go
to one street corner, and then the police at that street corner would
not let them go anywhere, but back to where they had come from. The
constitutional right of people to express their opposition to unpopular
government activity is seriously damaged when such tactics are used by
the police.
Despite all this, there were great numbers of people protesting in New
York City. There were many, many homemade signs expressing the disgust
of people with the bullying and warmongering activities of the U.S.
government.
Just a few of the slogans on the many homemade signs included:
"Thank you Belgium, Germany, France et al.", "Stop Mad Cowboy Disease",
"Listen to the People", "Bush the Terrible", "Danke Schon Deutschland,
Solidaritat","He's Not My President", "Drop Bush Not Bombs",
"Democracies Don't Start Wars, We End Them", "This War is 100% Bush
Shit", "Communication not Annihilation: No War Against Iraq, Netizens
Unite", "U.S.A. Says No to War Against Iraq","Another Mathematician
Against the war", and "I Want My Democracy Now."
A young child being carried on his father's shoulders wore a sign
"Dodge the Draft." Demonstrators who had traveled from the state of
Vermont who were asked their comments for an article in Telepolis,
answered, "We appreciate German attitudes. We represent the majority
opinion in our state. They accuse us of being the most liberal state.
That's why we are here." Another protester responded, "I would like to
thank Germany for taking a courageous stand against my asinine
government."
At 68th street and First Avenue, there was a confrontation between
demonstrators and police. From 68th Street up First Avenue, there were
demonstrators wanting to fill in the ranks of demonstrators below 68th
Street. Police, however, blockaded the demonstrators and wouldn't let
them pass from 68th Street. Demonstrators on one side of 68th Street
were effectively blockaded from demonstrators on the other side of the
Street. "Let them through, let them through," demonstrators on the
South side of 68th Street yelled. The police would let a few people
through and people would clap. But then the blockade would be set up
again by the police. Only at the end of the demonstration, around 4 pm,
did the police finally allow the demonstrators North of 68th Street to
join those South of 68th Street.
The speakers for the rally included an U.S. Army National Guard
reservist whose unit had been told it was only a matter of time before
it would be sent to Iraq. There was a Palestinian woman and a Israeli
refusnik officer. There were poets and elected officials. There were
clergy of many denominations. There were calls for peace in many
languages, including Arabic and Hebrew. There was a dissident who had
fled Iraq in the 1980s explaining how it is not possible to bring
democracy to the people of Iraq by bombing them.
One of the speakers on the platform said, "The world's worse leaders
have the world's worst weapons."
A German student from Ithaca, N.Y. expressed his surprise at the
experience he had at the demonstration. "It is different here than how
they handle it in Europe," he commented, describing how the police
denied protesters the right to walk to the demonstration. "We walked
from 59th and Lexington, a crowd of people moving, but the police were
channeling them. "Eventually he said it wasn't possible to get any
further. The people couldn't go on the sidewalks. "I never saw this
before." His German wife added that, "For the first time in 50 years we
are proud of our home country and Europe."
An American demonstrator noted that, "the New York City radio stations
weren't covering the rally, except for WBAI, the one anti-war radio
station." She commented, however, "This was the first time I feel
connected to the rest of the globe."
The assault on the rights of citizens demonstrated by the treatment of
protesters on Saturday in New York City demonstrates the lack of
respect for democratic rights by both the Bush administration and the
New York City government. There are those who wonder if the plan of the
Bush administration to attack Iraq is also a pretext being used to take
away the constitutional rights of those in the U.S.
While the American people are faced with an electoral system that only
allows what many feel is two parts of the same party to participate,
there is a long history of protest in the U.S. Often this protest has
been waged against vicious repression. But the activities of the U.S.
government within the U.S. demonstrate that there is very little
popular support for the policies of the government. It is only by
waging a campaign to spread fear and terror within the U.S. that the
Bush administration, with the support of many from both parties in
Congress, can carry out their assault on other countries and people
around the world.
The anti-war movement within the U.S. needs support from peace loving
people around the world to effectively stem the tide toward fascism of
the U.S. government. The marches and rallies around the world on
February 15 have demonstrated there is such support. People who were
doing what they could to protest Bush's policies' in New York City on
Saturday, were encouraged by the massive protests of people around the
world.
Links
Telepolis Artikel-URL:
http://www.telepolis.de/english/inhalt/co/14195/1.html
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 1996-2003. All Rights Reserved. Alle Rechte vorbehalten
Heise Zeitschriften Verlag, Hannover
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #413
******************************
