[9978] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: networkMCI ads
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marty Salo)
Tue Feb 1 00:45:46 1994
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 1994 00:03:25 +22311151 (EST)
From: Marty Salo <msalo@garnet.acns.fsu.edu>
To: "Rob Raisch, The Internet Company" <raisch@internet.com>
Cc: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>, com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.85.9401311550.A6313-0100000@hmmm>
OK, I wrote a paper (of roughly 1,000 words) for a class. I showed it to
a few people, and it was even suggested that I should try to get it
published. I submitted it to Information Society (anderson@rand.com), but
he said it was too current, the earliest possible publication date would
be august, or somesuch. If anyone wants to use this (in part, or whole)
please notify me.
I was thinking this could go here, then I started reading the list for
awhile, and noticed a decidedly pro-money-making bent, and shyed away from
posting this. But Rob Raish mentioned that he thinks that it would be
best if we were not charged by the byte, and that brought to mind the
small "typical phone/cable/internet bill" (somewhere near the midpoint).
Enjoy, I believe it's an easy read. Feedback welcomed.
Private Sector Responsibilities in the Information Age
What they should do
Prepared by Marty Salo
msalo@garnet.acns.fsu.edu
Let's examine who the private sector is, along with its reasons
for existing. Let's also be careful to examine a possibility that might
have dangerous consequences for the future of the information highway.
Then we can look at some of the literature to be found on the 2-lane
highway. And we can conclude with a thought about the accuracy of the
Internet. The question of exactly what will the private sector be
responsible for in the Information Age, depends, in large part on what one
chooses to define as the private sector. If the private sector is the
not-for-profit organizations (NPOs) or libraries or citizen's groups, one
gets a vastly different answer than if we choose to define as the private
sector, the Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs) and the large cable
TV corporations. Indeed, with the RBOCs as the private sector (or cable
TV corporations), we will arrive at a different answer than we would if we
decided the computer manufacturers (IBM, Apple, Microsoft and Sun
Microsystems) would be our target private sector. Another aspect of the
question that needs clarification is what exactly is meant by the term
responsibility. There are two aspects at work here. The first has to do
with the responsibility of performing an important duty. While the second
deals with being held accountable for other actions.
Each of the groups has at its center a different core set of
values, and objectives which they hope to achieve. The first group (NPOs,
libraries and citizen's groups) have as a goal to prevent the RBOCs from
taking advantage of John Q. Public. Their position is sound, and
admirable. At the same time, the corporations are in business to make
money, and in this capitalistic society, "greed is good." Separating the
latter two groups is tangible goods vs. infrastructure. Computers are
wonderful machines that can be (and are being) used to help people of
geographically disparate areas meet. In order for people to meet over the
computer, some form of infrastructure needs to be in place; this is not
bad. It would be bad if they were to itemize the features, such as in
this example:
Summary of Charges:
$15 Basic Phone Service
$15 Basic Cable and Extended Channels
$3 TV Lookup Service
$4.30 22 minutes FTP to wpi.wpi.edu
$2.01 32 minutes TELNET to vm.marist.edu
$5.55 40 minutes FTP to mit.edu
$5.00 Surcharge for 5 Megs of FTP transfers
$7.00 Misc. TCP/IP and UDP services
$1.13 Federal Tax
$0.79 State Tax
$58.78 Total
Itemization as in this example would serve to discourage the use of the
information highway, and encourage the stagnation of the mind. The average
cost-conscious parent would see that the #'s for computer time, even when
only 1 hour and 34 minutes are charged, is more than either the basic
phone, or the basic cable.
The text of Vice-President Gore's speech to the Television Academy
read nicely, but it was short on the details, and as at least one
.signature line that I've seen goes "The devil's in the details." There
are several executive summaries around, notably, the _American Library's
Association - Washington Office Newsletter_ volume 3, number 3 and a
summary by Brock Meeks (meeks@well.sf.ca.us). Meeds's summary was better,
because Meeds is more "net-conscious." In his summary, he says that we are
in trouble because buried deep in the speech is a sentence where Gore
pledges "to help law enforcement agencies thwart criminals and terrorists
who might use advanced telecommunications to commit crimes."
Summarizing the ALA-WON summary of the Gore speech, he said that
by the year 2000 he hoped that all schools, hospitals, clinics and
libraries would be connected to the information super-highway. However,
the only incentive that was mentioned was a nebulous "reduced universal
service requirements to those providers who offer to connect the schools,
hospitals, clinics and libraries. The administration's proposal to go
before Congress would open up the local exchanges to competition from
long-distance providers, cable companies and electric utility companies.
In exchange, the RBOCs will gain the ability to offer information services
within their own area, but the RBOCs could not publish electronically.
Separate affiliates would be required for that. Gore said that the
Administration's proposal would keep us from developing into "a society of
information 'haves' separate from a society of information 'have nots'."
Also in the _ALA-WON_ was Ron Brown's announcement of the 27
appointments to the National Information Infrastructure Advisory Council.
Only two educational representatives were chosen. They were Dr. Toni
Carbo Bearman, dean of the School of Library and Information Science at
the University of Pittsburgh, and Bonnie L. Bracey, an Elementary school
teacher at Ashlawn, in Arlington, Virginia. Most of the other appointees
were drawn from large corporations. Co-Chairs of the advisory council are
Delano Lewis, President, National Public Radio, and Edward McCracken,
President, Silicon Graphics.
On the newsgroup comp.org.eff.talk, there were several interesting
posts by an62770@anon.penet.fi in the past week or so. First he mentions
encryption, and the pivotal role it will play in the next few years. He
reprints an article from _The Washington Post_ Sunday 2 January 1994 by
Bill Sweetman, entitled "With Inman's Arrival, Will the 'Black Budget'
Grow?" Then he reprints an article from _Strategic Investment_ November 11
1993 by James Bennet, entitled "Escape to Cypherspace: The Information
Revolution and the Demise of the Income Tax." I'm not too sure that I
agree that the feds will lower the income tax to the point where "it
becomes less burdensome to pay the tax than to avoid paying the tax."
Although, I did finally get a grasp of the private key/public key
encryption method, thanks to reading this article. He also reprinted an
article from _The Chronicle for Higher Education_ 12 January 1994 by
Richard E. Sclove on "Democratizing Technology." This article bemoans the
fact that Information Policy is a top-down decision, and suggests that we
should have more citizen input into technology decisions. Lastly he
reprinted the speech that Al Gore gave at Royce Hall, UCLA on January 11.
Now I'm reasonably certain that he violated a few copyrights by
posting this information to the net, but he did it through an anonymity
server, and I am glad that he did. Under normal circumstances, I would
not have found those articles and would not have gotten a grasp of the
private key/public key encryption algorithm. Of course, these documents
came from the net, and as such could have been altered in many different
ways, but I do have confidence that alteration of existing documents was
not performed.
1. Aaron (aaron@halcyon.com), post on comp.org.eff.talk. _Usenet_ January
21 1994.
2. _ALA-WON_ Volume 3, Number 3. January 22, 1994.
3. Al Gore, speech. Royce Hall, UCLA on January 11 1994.
4. Bill Sweetman, "With Inman's Arrival, Will the 'Black Budget' Grow?" _The
Washington Post_ Sunday 2 January 1994.
5. Dan Newcombe (newcombe@aa.csc.peachnet.edu), post on comp.org.eff.talk.
_Usenet_ January 19 1994.
6. James Bennet, "Escape to Cypherspace: The Information Revolution and
the Demise of the Income Tax." _Strategic Investment_ November 11 1993.
7. Richard E. Sclove "Democratizing Technology." _The Chronicle for Higher
Education_ 12 January 1994.
-----
I seek the truth that you have, Diogenes seeks that one good man,
What do you seek?||||msalo@garnet.acns.fsu.edu|||(Marty Salo)||||
On Mon, 31 Jan 1994, Rob Raisch, The Internet Company wrote:
>
> Good point, Russ. But I feel that we should be enabling people to
> communicate, not putting limitations in their ways. If there were only
> mirrors and no direct online publishers, we would have vastly different
> Internet today. Mirrors require funding. And although so does direct
> connect, it is easier to provide ancillary value from a pipe you own and
> control than if you had to directly pay for each byte you wished to share.
>
> -- </rr> Rob Raisch, The Internet Company
>
>
