[12812] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: was Re: What is required for information access? was
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Karl Denninger)
Mon May 30 00:22:06 1994
From: karl@mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
To: lcbginge@antelope.wcc.edu (Bruce Gingery)
Date: Sun, 29 May 1994 11:05:27 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: karl@mcs.com, frezza@radiomail.net, com-priv@psi.com,
alt-politics-datahighway@cs.utexas.edu, djw@eff.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.05.9405290028.B20079-d100000@antelope.wcc.edu> from "Bruce Gingery" at May 29, 94 00:59:31 am
> I wrote....
> > And therein lies the rub.
> > Those people who are in "do-gooder" mode and wish to play the subsidy game
> > have forgotten the most important issue in this debate -- that the computer
> > is still a thousand-dollar (or more) item.
>
> And therein lies a fallacy in the whole argument on BOTH sides. We need
> an ultra-high-speed network to handle interactive multi-media ... Of
> course we do. We need access available to prevent the further class
> separation of "haves" and "have-nots" -- a reversion to a system where if
> you don't have access to the (trade skills, cum) information you need,
> you'll ALWAYS be stuck in a rut. -- again true.
Yep. This has always been true, and will always be true. It is
particularly true for those who <choose> to opt out of the system, for
whatever reason. Some don't finish high school, some don't care, some do
care but for one reason or another get left behind.
> Yet, the technological answer of providing mindless pathways for
> communication by the illiterate does not address the problem of
> illiteracy, nor does it take one or more thousands of dollars for the
> computer/modem equipment which gives the possibility of connecting to a POP
> for minimal access. MOST computers (many of which are now hitting
> recyclers or headed for junk-yards) have the capacity of displaying text,
> of controlling and using a modem, and even 1200bps (today considered
> worthless) modems have the capacity of carrying plain text at a reading
> pace (which is faster than I've seen, ie Gopher work most of the time).
I take that position then the entire USA <ALREADY> has access to the
information highway of today, and will likely have it tomorrow. What
people won't have is the wiz-bang multimedia-marketing-droid access toys
of tomorrow. No amount of wishing or dreaming will make it so in these
folks' homes. We <might> be able to make it so in public access areas,
such as libraries, but there you will find limitations in what you can do.
Are they acceptable? I happen to think so.
> Perhaps there are social driving forces being overlooked on all sides
> of the question. Regarding libraries... Libraries are traditionally a
> place to "find something out". Yes they also carry entertainment
> materials, but that wasn't their ORIGINAL purpose. Is it possible for a
> library to move into the next century and provide it's traditional TYPE of
> service without interconnection via networking? I'd say not. Is it
> possible for schools to provide the education needed without some serious
> computer and networking use? -- again, I'd say not. Can such facilities
> ONLY be available at the local library, in a "rich person's home" in
> larger offices or local schools -- again -- NO!
Rich? No. Of modest middle-class means? Sure. Available <today>
A poor person cannot afford <BOOKS>. Therefore, they are <already>
disenfranchised, if the metric is being able to purchase their own
information and enjoy it on their own terms.
But the democratic process does not depend on that. Indeed, neither does
access to technology or learning. What it <does> depend on is the desire
to excel, to better oneself, and to learn. All of those things will lead
you right to the public information terminal IF you want to go there and
use it. If you don't, no amount of coddling by "big brother" is going to
make it so or change the balance.
Why not? Because you cannot force someone to care about themself or their
situation, nor to change for the better. You can only make it possible.
Today, right now, I claim the problem is solved for the 80th percentile IF
they want to make use of it. In the city or in the sticks. We have the
best, least-expensive long-distance phone system in the <world>, and it is
(not incidentally) the least regulated. Reducing the cross-subsidies over
time, in a controlled manner, from the long-distance to the local operating
companies will cause the price of continent-wide connectivity to continue
to come down. Competition right now for that long-distance dollar is
<fierce>. This is a good thing -- just as competition for online service
dollars is also fierce.
Can you play MUDs for 2 hours a night on a middle-class salary from the
sticks? No. But can you get the text of a few bills in Congress, or find
out the current price of an investment, or read and send email and mailing
list traffic? You bet. For a few bucks a month. Less cost than a 12 pack
of beer, and you can bet that many of these folks consume (and can afford)
that. Certainly it can be had nationwide for less cost than a night at
the bar.
The other 20% of the problem is more difficult, but bringing the net into
the libraries of the nation on publically-accessible terminals -- not so
people can write letters -- we already have a means to do that -- but so they
can participate in the electronic discourse and get at the vast information
stored here -- can enfranchise the other 20%.
No massive government subsidy is needed. A 28.8kbps nailed-up leased
circuit link to a library is sufficient. If you want to really make it
more friendly, go for a 56kbps link. Today, that's enough. And today,
that's affordable.
Yes, tomorrow we'll all want glass plugged into our brains directly. But
people of even well-off means cannot afford it today. Why build a link for
the poor which is vastly superior to that which even I, in a high tax
bracket and with a decent salary, cannot afford?
Its like giving a man on the street a Rolls while I have to drive a Chevy
because its all I can pay for!
> > If you wish to argue for subsidies for public institutions (ie: libraries)
> > so they can provide the computers and access for these folks, then make
> > those subsidies <DIRECT CASH PAYMENTS>. Those I can support.
>
> Here I agree with Karl. Transfer-payments end up costing too damn
> much in hidden administrative costs, in wastage, and in beaurocratic
> mis-management and "professionally obscured communications".
Correct.
The EFF and others can clamor for all the entitlement programs they want.
And, folks, that is EXACTLY what they are. This is not to say they are all
bad -- quite the contrary. But let's have the amount of money spent ON THE
TABLE AND IN THE OPEN so that the people of this country can count the
costs. That can ONLY be done through direct subsidy. As soon as you start
playing the cost-shifting and tax-shifting game, the costs get lost.
Nobody knows what's being spent. And I, for one, find that kind of
deliberate obfuscation insulting -- there ought to be a law to make it
illegal.
> trace the "pointers" through enough levels), but in overall effect, the
> cost becomes higher.
Worse yet, no accountability exists for these things. This is not a
decision for the EFF to make alone, or even in concert with others. It
is a decision for SOCIETY to make.
By the way, those of you who say it isn't being done today -- it is. North
Suburban Library System here in Illinois isn't paying for all of the
Internet installations out of their pocket -- they got a grant. A nice,
direct subsidy with plenty of accountability.
That is how it SHOULD work. And, how it CAN work.
Let's drop the "tax the man behind the tree" shell game. If a thing is
worth doing, it is worth doing in the open where all can see both the
benefits <and> the costs.
> Again -- what is needed is INNOVATION -- not so much argument and not
> particularly calls for compromise.
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
Modem: [+1 312 248-0900] | (shell, PPP, SLIP, leased) in Chicagoland
Voice/FAX: [+1 312 248-8649] | Email "info@mcs.com". MCSNet is a CIX member.
Ask me about Loyalty Pays(tm)| WWW: http://www.mcs.net, gopher: gopher.mcs.net
