[56] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: competition [answer to the question]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kent England)
Tue Oct 30 16:57:40 1990
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 90 16:42:12 est
From: kwe@buitb.bu.edu (Kent England)
To: bzs@world.std.com, com-priv@psi.com
> From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
> Subject: competition [answer to the question]
>
> I've never heard "non-commercial" defined as "mostly non-commercial"
> before.
>
> I always thought it was like pregnancy, you can't be "a little"
> pregnant and you can't be "mostly" non-commercial.
>
> This is all very strange.
>
> -Barry Shein
>
Like Marty, you are confusing the status of the members of a
network with the status of the network itself.
Marty was saying that NEARnet was mostly commercial, meaning
that a majority of its members were commercial organizations.
I said that NEARnet itself is entirely non-commercial, no
matter what the status of its member organizations.
--Kent
