[2789] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
The fate of Internet, further comments
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (drw@BOURBAKI.MIT.EDU)
Wed Jun 3 12:19:53 1992
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 92 12:18:24 EDT
From: drw@BOURBAKI.MIT.EDU
To: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <9206021802.AA00396@joker.xanadu.uucp> "hibbert@xanadu.com"
X-Name: Chris Hibbert
Is this mailing list really restricted to people who advocate
unrestricted expansion in all possible ways? :-) I thought it was
for discussing the possible directions that commercialization and
privatization might go, to consider alternative models, and to
give advice to the planners of these things. Seems to me that
calling particular parts of particular plans misguided is well
within the scope of the charter.
Well, maybe I'm mistaken, but how can you call something
"commercializing" or "privatizing" the Internet if you prevent people
from using it for making money? I'm being a bit picky here, but it
seems to me that there is a real watershed choice:
The Internet is a publically-subsidized benefit for research
and education.
vs.
The Internet is a commercial service available to whoever is
willing to pay the price.
Both possibilities have their advantages, of course.
There isn't too much middle ground between these possibilities --
mixing subsizided services with business leads to temptations to
corruption, charges of corruption at the very least. The present "ANS
wars" are a symptom of trying to split the difference between these
two visions.
Dale Worley Dept. of Math., MIT drw@math.mit.edu
--
If addiction is judged by how long a dumb animal will sit pressing a lever
to get a "fix" of something, to its own detriment, then I would
conclude that netnews is far more addictive than cocaine. -- Rob Stampfli
