[9108] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: The Buffalo Free-Net / NYSERNet / PSI problems
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard Civille)
Fri Dec 17 14:00:05 1993
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 13:36:40 -0500 (EST)
From: Richard Civille <rciville@civicnet.org>
Reply-To: Richard Civille <rciville@civicnet.org>
To: "Martin L. Schoffstall" <schoff@psi.com>
Cc: Dave Bachmann <bachmann@austin.ibm.com>, com-priv@psi.com, nadeaut@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <9312161831.AA43865@schoff230.herndon.psi.com>
On Thu, 16 Dec 1993, Martin L. Schoffstall wrote:
> Yes we do have a position. But I'm sure that it will be a controversial.
Are you sure it has to be controversial?
> - the goal (and as far as we can tell what happened) was not to
> disturb the paying customer, SUNY Buffalo
Sounds to me like they were indeed disturbed, but perhaps not in the
manner you are thinking of here.
> - up until this event we believed that NYSERNet was behind our position and
> policy, all discussions prior led us to believe that. that day's face
> to face even reinforced that. but the email following it was
> definitely different!
I don't get the sense this has been entirely resolved, and understand
com-priv is not the best place to debate this. But considering the
close working relationship between NYSERNET and PSI -- and given
NYSERNET's long track-record of supporting rural schools, public libraries
and such, I'm a little puzzled why this issue had to reach a head in the
way it did.
> - we had wanted to do this much earlier but up until the week before were
> not 100% sure that the customer traffic wouldn't be affected, so we
> delayed (undoubtedly too long)
That is, working out the technical details of the filter in advance to
make sure that when you implemented the filter it would not affect the
University, only the Free-net, correct?
> - as part of one of our services we offer free dialups to students and faculty
> of our customers throughout the US as they travel, vacation or
> whatever. BuffaloFreeNet people were using capability
> removing the resource from our customers.
Uh...ok, I can just imagine these wild-eyed city officials from Buffalo
tearing around the country, jacking into PSI from distant Holiday Hotels
while poor students get busy signals. Waste, fraud and abuse with wild
abandon.
> There are many people that want something for nothing. Last night I began
> reading "Lenin's Tomb, the Last days of the Soviet Empire", chapter one
> discusses some examples of this and the implications on (Soviet) society.
> Possibly FREENet's are an example of this?
Oh, probably not. Most folks I talk to seem to think that PSI's approach
here fails to look on using public access systems as ways to open new
business and residential markets. So, someone else will provide service.
Freenets can't be run without costs and they have to be borne and they
have to establish some ways to generate revenue, and I believe they can.
But we all know that the Buffalo Free-Net placed no cost burden on PSI.
None. Your argument about abuse of free dial-up facilities needs to be
supported by some data -- at least. That is the only cost-related issue I
can imagine. Otherwise, all you can really complain about is some form of
"piracy" and you may well be correct. But here you ought to be more
explicit other than to equate a Freenet operating within an information
economy with a Soviet state industry operating within a command economy. It
begins to appear that PSI does not want the business of public access
systems, such as Free-Nets. Would this be an accurate characterisation?
You know I have to wonder: the Cleveland Free-Net boasts some 20,000
registered users I think. I watch the yearly fundraising drives of public
radio and television (which I sometimes contribute to but not always) and
I have to wonder why a public access service (and I use the term Freenet with
Cleveland would lose a few accounts this way, but it would enable the service
to improve and increase its viability.
So give Buffalo Freenet a few years and watch them come up with a cost
model that makes sense to their operation and their user base. Then ask
who they would like to do business with. PSI? Probably not. Now imagine
the time in the not too distant future when public access system spread
around the country like wildfire -- to 30,000 municipalities -- while
modems get cheaper and faster, more people have computers at home, etc.
How much of this emerging market will PSI service if it maintains its
present position?
> I'm sure none of this is Politically Correct (PC), but PC issues dominate
> politics they don't have to dominate society, economic systems, or
> institutions outside of the BeltWay.
No, I think this probably has something more to do with forcasting the
market and making good business decisions.
Rich
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Center for Civic Networking Richard Civille
P.O. Box 65272 Washington Director
Washington, DC 20035 rciville@civicnet.org
(202) 362-3831
------------------------------------------------------------------------
