[12554] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Ruining the Internet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Gary A Bolles (via RadioMail))
Sat May 21 07:39:19 1994
Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 15:55:46 PDT
From: Gary A Bolles (via RadioMail) <bollesg@radiomail.net>
Reply-To: gbolles@radiomail.net
To: com-priv@psi.com
No wide spread access to the nuts of the world is not a good idea. We
need more lawyers sending ads like we need a larger backbone. What I am
saying is that the network as it was has changed. CB radio changed as
well. When cheap acces to CB was avail. alot of low life get on an
trashed the band. The internet has enough low life now. Mass access will
cause mass problems. I for one don't care because, I can always go back
to a bbs system. Or a second network for those that are not satisfied
with the way the Internet is going. Just thoughts...
Joseph Stroup
//Sure, it's everyone's prerogative to go somewhere else. That's the nice thing
about cyberspace, it's a quasi-infinite resource, unlike national parks and
coral reefs. Create a new world, then crawl inside and close the door behind.
However. I'm not trying to single out M. Stroup. But my concern is that there's
an undercurrent in some of the perspectives I hear, a deep belief that the
great unwashed will ruin this really neat playground we're all running around
in. That's the kind of dangerous elitism I've mentioned before, that somehow
others aren't worthy. Anyone venturing outside of alt.scum should be metashot
on sight.
And how exactly are we going to identify them? "Unsubscribe" messages sent to
the main listserv? Reverse-order smilies? Poor spelling? Anyone who logged onto
the Internet after its first mention in the Wall Street Journal? It seems that
the definition of "community" has limits after all.
Sure, some people are going to tromp all over the virgin cyberscape - a honking
big lot of them. They're going to broadcast junk email and ask stupid questions
and not learn the rules and scour the net for Playboy scans. They're going to
flood news groups with perspectives that will make Roseanne Barr look like Bill
Buckley. They're going to do business over the 'net, gawd forbid. These things
are absolutely inevitable.
But c'mon, these are also people with ideas and perspectives that are in short
supply on the 'net, people not so steeped in the computer culture that they can
bring views from the real world to a world that's not completely real. These
are people we trust enough to vote, for chrissake. How is their interaction in
cyberspace *not* worthwhile? To me, wanting to shut out the impending waves of
the common horde is the worst of a creeping academic mindset; slap enough ivy
on the walls, maybe the outside world won't intrude. Or of the mainframe
environment; all those messy users think they know what they want, but we
control the technology so we'll give them what we know they need.
I think of the time spent so far in crafting the 'net as a time of preparation,
of exploring in fits and starts the ways that electronic interaction affects
the building of information resources and metaculture. The masses are now at
the door; if we've laid the groundwork right, and we patiently educate (and get
educated), lots of exciting things can happen. And they can happen for lots of
people, maybe enough to have some echo effects back into the real world.
Or we can each retreat. But we can't stop it.//
Gary A. Bolles
