[9445] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Aikens last (but long) posting/comments on ISOC and related issues
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vernon Schryver)
Wed Jan 5 17:17:42 1994
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 94 14:47:52 -0700
From: vjs@calcite.rhyolite.com (Vernon Schryver)
To: com-priv@psi.com, ietf@cnri.reston.va.us, isoc-trustees@cnri.reston.va.us
To: ietf@cnri.reston.va.us, com-priv@psi.com, isoc-trustees@cnri.reston.va.us
Bcc: vjs
Subject: Re: Aikens last (but long) posting/comments on ISOC and related issues
> The Internet is just like the railroad business and the oil business
> of the 1870s and 1880s. There were vast fortunes of money to be made.
> And there was no overall control. Take a look at the ways in which
> the robber barons like Gould, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, etc made a mess
> of things. It took the intervention of the courts and the government
> to straighten things out.
>
> Collective/government control isn't always good, but it isn't always
> bad either.
>
> Of course, since I'm an attorney, I'm required to say these things. :-)
>
> With the amount of money that the future Internet represents, it won't
> surprise me to see some pretty rough, unethical, but powerful players
> come to the scene.
>
> I want a good governing body. I'd like it to be composed of good people
> who are interested in more than just money. If that be ISOC, great.
> If that be the government, great.
>
> If there is a governance vacuum, it will be filled by those who are
> out to make a profit.
>
> --karl--
Einar Stefferud is right, and you are dangerously wrong.
There is no "governance vacuum" in Internet society (not ISOC) today.
There are only some new players, including the ISOC and perhaps (or perhaps
not) some large corporations that want to change the current scheme and
take over. None of these new players (some composed of familiar people)
are "evil," and none have more "goodwill" than any other. All claim (and
will claim), just like the organizations that included Lenin and Thomas
Jefferson, to be doing it out of "goodwill" and only to "save the Internet
from bad guys and bad events."
You should look into history a little more and discover exactly how what
evils the robber barons committed. Do not read only the populist
politicans who had (and have) their own agendas. There are serious and
honest people who say the "straightening out" done by the U.S. government
was simply a new bend to the advantage of a new set of crooks. The Food
And Drug Act had some good effects, but do you want something like the
modern FDA to run the Internet?
The notion that anyone has ever been involved with the Internet (or the
ARPANET) purely for "goodwill" and not for "profit" is somewhere between
simply wrong and dishonest. It has always been a matter of self-interest,
albeit enlightened and occassionally long-term. Some of those involved
wanted personal fame, and some sought the satisfaction of an interesting
(and very well paid!) job done well instead of a commercial empire, but
it has never been a charity and never an unpaid hobby. (The cost of TIP's
was just too high.)
If the pretense that "goodwill" has been a major contributor to the success
of the Internet and TCP/IP is belived, than consider what will happen when
something bad happens, as is inevitiable. The organization providing
"governance" will try to increase the available "goodwill", and will do
so using the only tools ever available to goverments, by imposing taxes
or sending out press gangs. In an instant you will have PUC's, rate
payers, consumer activists, tariffs, and all of the rest, including only
lawyers in charge of absolutely everything.
Remember that the worst governments have always been those that have
professed the greatest interest in the welfare of their citizens. It's
a cliche, but please look at the results in Eastern Europe and Asia of
the great effort in "goodwill" started by Lenin and Stalin.
One of the worst things that might happen to the Internet is that it will
be captured by self-professed altruists who will fix things for our own
good, but will achieve no more than the "helping professions" have done
with welfare. Practically all of the money will go to bureaucrats, lawyers
and case workers, and we'll all be forced to starve on sufferance.
In the best of all possible worlds, any person or organization professing
to want to "govern" the Internet (or any part of it such as the RFCs) out
of "goodwill" would be automatically disqualified. Of course, since we
know this is the best of all possible worlds, I recommend finding some
books on gardening. And maybe some books on masonary to build stout walls
around your gardens.
Vernon Schryver vjs@rhyolite.com
