[10832] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Road kill & the new TeleRead (see CoSN gopher)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Rothman)
Fri Mar 11 18:13:11 1994
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 94 13:29:01 -0400
To: "David Rothman" <rothman@netcom.com>
From: "David Rothman" <rothman@netcom.com>
Reply-To: rothman@netcom.com
We keep hearing more stories of road kill or near-road kill. Just
yesterday, the owner of a cable TV system close to DC filed for
bankruptcy; Maryland Cable Corporation had overpaid for the property,
surprise of surprise. We also know about the Bell Atlantic-TCI
nonmerger. Meanwhile, trials in test markets show that Americans are not
as gungho--about TV-delivered encyclopedias and the rest--as the
ballyhoo would make us believe. As badly as we need the *right* kind of
regulation to protect schools, libraries, community nets and the like,
the big quandary remains:
Just how do we finance the new technology without either gouging
consumers or treating corporations unfairly.
Enter the TeleRead plan, on which I testified last November at an
inter-agency NII hearing. Instead of dividing up the information market
and setting rich against poor, TeleRead would help expand the market
through new applications and by diverting wealth from paperwork-related
activities to knowledge-spreading ones.
TeleRead proposes:
(1) A government-industry program to drive down the cost of small,
sharp-screened computers fit for reading, writing, K-12 networking and
other worthwhile uses. I'm not surprised that some demo projects for
TV-delivered text have floundered. Screens are too fuzzy. And HDTV won't
necessarily have the right aspect ratio--forget about costs of the
first-generation sets. Besides, who wants to tote a 32-inch HDTV to read
on the beach? And care to argue with the kids about online homework vs.
60 Minutes?
(2) A national library with books and educational software for rich and
poor alike--and fair compensation for publishers and writers. Americans
should be able to dial up the library directly or download material
through K-12, civic and community nets. Here's to the spirit of Andrew
Carnegie. Bookstores and copy shops, however, would be free to print and
sell books from this library; and commercial services such as Mead Data
and CompuServe could repackage material and add value, as could Netcom-
and Digex-style providers. This is the era of hypertext links and
computer conferences; that's why commercial services could actually come
out ahead under TeleRead compared to alternatives. Remember, consumers
have only so much money and time to spend. If nothing else, TeleRead
would provide more of a market for text-heavy services by encouraging
mass production of TeleReaders when the technology allowed--making the
right machines more affordable. Furthermore, via more money for teacher
training, TeleRead would blend the technology into the school systems
and build consumer demand. So in the end the national library could
simultaneously help children and corporations alike.
3) Cost-justification through use of the same TeleReaders for electronic
forms for government transactions. Americans spend several hundred
billion a year on paperwork just for the federal government alone,
according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Suppose that the right
hardware and sofware reduced the paperwork by just a little. Then we
could cost-justify the national library. Yes, wonderful tax software and
the like exist; but such programs are nowhere near as smart as
electronic forms could be with a TeleRead-style approach. What's more,
the right hardware-software combination could minimize fraud and data
security risks.
Now there is a new wrinkle to the plan--TeleRead as a way to promote
such interactive TV services, including, yes, home shopping.
I know. Many librarians, educators and writers will blanch at the
thought of advancing TV technology. People on the Ednet list already
know my own intense loathing of Channel One, which forces millions of
American children to watch commercials. However, after hearing Al Gore
talk up the NII with Hollywood so much in mind, and after seeing the
composition of the NII advisory council (exactly one librarian and one
K-12 educator out of close to 30 members), I'm even clearer about
Washington's priorities. Even more than we knew, video-oriented commerce
is coming ahead of schools, libraries, or anything else. That means that
any information plan must aid commercial interests. My own priority
happens to be books, as opposed to TV, but ironically the best way to
help the cause might be a direct appeal to the ambitions of the
video people.
And so I've updated TeleRead and added a suggestion that TeleReaders
could be used as accessories for interactive TV--control devices to
augment the usual set-top boxes and RC sticks.
With TeleRead's smart forms capacity, for example, the worst technoklutz
could record programs in advance, freeze images, or spit the screen to
receive more than one channel at once. Communications with the set or
set-top device could be through radio links, which could also be used
for TeleReaders to exchange information with each other. TeleReaders
with RF links would be a terrific way for schools to succeed with
cooperative learning plans--while at the same time it would offer the
technical means to track usage and protect creators.
Too, TeleReaders could be a boon for the home shopping interests. We
hear talk of people someday ordering clothes after "trying"
them on a TV version of themselves. Some say this could be as far as a
decade off. But suppose we could use TeleRead's pen interface to
control the images on 32-inch screen on the actual TV and help
consumers experiment with the right size, color and the rest. Then home
shopping would get just as much a boost as e-text would.
Needless to say, the remote boxes could be used to download books or
educational software for TeleReaders--and to back up or augment the
TeleReaders' mass storage. That's what *I* want.
Not all TeleReaders would work with TVs; who says every household can
afford cable and the new video gadgetry? I'm merely interested in
seeing universal set-top standards that would allow this option.
If all televisions today must be able to receive UHF, is it that
unreasonable for Washington to require that TVs or set-top boxes should
be able to communicate with portable computers optimized for text, K-12
and community networking, and electronic forms? Maybe. I'm still
thinking this through. But if such technical capabilities are not an
actual requirement, shouldn't Washington at least work with industry to
promote the spread of the proper set-top protocols?
For a copy of the full TeleRead proposal, check out the CoSN gopher.
On your command line, type: gopher cosn.org
Within the CoSN gopher you'll reach TeleRead this way:
Root gopher server: cosn.org
--> 7. Networking Information/
--> 5. Reference/
--> 11. TeleRead Proposal.
The pointer is:
Name=TeleRead Proposal
Type=0
Port=70
Path=0/Networking Information/Reference/TeleRead Proposal
Host=digital.cosn.org
Feel free to spread teleread.txt on the 'Net, AOL, CompuServe, GEnie,
etc., as widely as you would like; no permission needed.
Please reach me at rothman@netcom.com if you have any problems. For
those without gopher access, I'll be delighted to e-mail teleread.txt
(185K). Don't be shy about writing if you're outside the U.S.,
especially in Canada; many of the concepts in TeleRead are most
portable.
Note: Teleread.txt is an expansion and refinement of my writings in
Computerworld, the Washington Post, the Baltimore Sun, and elsewhere.
It's an idea, not a group or branch of an organization (public or
private--including Netcom, of which I'm merely a customer). The opinions
are mine only, not necessarily those of the Consortium for School
Networking, although I'm grateful for the feedback I've gotten from
individual members of the CoSN list and others. Further suggestions
welcomed!
**************************************************************************
David H. Rothman "So we beat on, boats against
rothman@netcom.com the current...."
805 N. Howard St., #240
Alexandria, Va. 22304
703-370-6540(o)(h)
NOTE TO PEOPLE REPLYING *PRIVATELY* TO MY LIST POSTINGS: PLEASE DIRECT YOUR
RESPONSES ONLY TO ME (ROTHMAN@NETCOM.COM) RATHER THAN
TO THE ENTIRE LIST. BE CAREFUL THAT YOUR SOFTWARE DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY
SEND YOUR NOTE TO EVERYONE ELSE, TOO.
I *encourage* online reproduction of my public postings.
Permission hereby granted--implicit, explicit, whatever. Down
with unnecessary restrictions on the flow of knowledge!
**************************************************************************
