[8774] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: TIME magazine article spreads NSFnet MYTH
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Gordon Cook)
Sat Dec 4 16:02:17 1993
From: cook@path.net (Gordon Cook)
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1993 13:00:27 PST
In-Reply-To: "Carl Briggs, Public Relations" <BRIGGS@AB.WVNET.EDU>
To: BRIGGS@ab.wvnet.edu, COM-PRIV@psi.com
Carl Briggs writes:
Until the NSF issues some official "statement of phasing out," I don't plan to
build my life around some cryptic use of weasal words like "schedule."
I reply:
Oh yes! I agree with you completely....by all means beware of weasel words like
schedule..... That's precisely my point Carl.
Now philip dewit can say "well they will be phasing things out won't they? So
there I was right afterall."
What are we supposed to do? Pat him on the back for accurate reporting? After
April 1 1994.... When after?? Two days or two years..... that is a *BIG*
difference.
Let's make it CRYSTAL clear, my criticism was *not* the choice of phrase but
rather the other parts of the equation like the increase from 12 to 18 million a
year of which the reporter **does not inform us**. TIME in doing such reporting
is helping the Washington waltz of the NSF, big academia, big computer, big
telecom back scratching that appears to be wanting to continue for a new five
year cooperative agreement all the errors made back in 1990. And dewit hasn't a
clue that there are dissenting views because his "sources" appear to be all from
the inner circle with their own funding to protect and justify. Why am I irked?
Because this inner circle has their act so down pat with the mainstream press
that opposing views which do exist never get into print.
Ah but Gordon....what is your solution? What would YOU do if YOU were Tsar?
I would have the NSF *STICK* to the dealine date of 4/30/94 and ask for
contractual bids to provide service for two years. If the NSF can't buy via
contract (and I have seen strong evidence suggesting they could) then let the
Department of Commerce do so. Let a presidential panel, *equally balanced*
between academics and commercial network service providers have 8 months to
deliver a report outlining a way to run the American portion of the Internet in
such a way that the outcome supports the administration's avowed goals of
universal access rather than technology pork. Finally for those who say we need
a testbed to work out the kinks for ATM routing at OC-3 and above, go to those
miracle workers Bob Kahn and Vint Cerf at NRI and give them some fraction of the
NSF's planned increase to do an encore to the gigabit testbeds. *THESE* good
people seem to have been singularly successful since 1990. Why don't we
recognize their success and build on it?
And why can't TIME dig just a *little* deeper!?
