[10313] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
"Ask Dr. Internet" for June, 1996
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (PACS-L Moderator)
Fri Jun 21 21:17:20 1996
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 18:31:16 -0500 (CDT)
From: PACS-L Moderator <libpacs@UH.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list PACS-L <PACS-L@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU>
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU>
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>From: Michael Hart <mhart@limbo.cso.uiuc.edu>
>Subject: "Ask Dr. Internet" for June, 1996
>
>"Ask Dr. Internet"
>
>Questions and Answers from mid-May to mid-June, 1996
>
>
>Q0
>Please keep us posted on the growth of the Internet.
>
>Q1
>What has been happening in the cases in which providers
>refused to allow the word "breast" on the Internet?
>
>Q2
>More About The Wastefulness of Talk/Chat/Phone programs.
>
>Q3
>Please Keep Us Posted On Current Events
>
>***
>
>
>Q0
>How Big Is The Internet?
>
>A0.
>
>The Internet Is Hitting The 10 Million Host Milestone.
>
>If the past ratios are still holding, that means there will
>now be approximately 100 million Internet accounts, and the
>total number of computers in the world is now approaching a
>billion computers. [That's an American billion, or million
>million in other numerical systems.] These ratios have had
>a remarkable consistency over the years, but as percentages
>of computers on the Internet grow, obviously the ratio of a
>predictable multiplier must decrease, and the ratios should
>drop from 10 accounts per host and from 100 world computers
>for each one on the Internet.
>
>
>The official count passed 9.5 million hosts in January.
>
>
>We are not sure why this hasn't been more widely announced,
>perhaps there is some reason for delaying the announcements
>until some particularly opportune political moment, such as
>a reversal of the way they stopped announcing national debt
>figures well before the US national debt hit $1 trillion [a
>recent, very calm, announcement revealed it is now passing,
>or has just passed, $5 trillion.
>
>Only about 2.5% of these hosts are in the World Wide Web...
>but these 2.5% are the ones getting all the attention.
>[252,685, as per the June Netcraft Web Server Survey.]
>
>
>
>Q1
>What has been happening in the cases in which providers
>refused to allow the word "breast" on the Internet?
>
>A1
>
>Of course, most of you probably heard the recent court's
>decision to ban the Computer Decency Act, and that it is
>the goal of the United States government to appeal these
>rulings all the way to the Supreme Court.
>
>But. . .did you know. . . .
>
>***
>
>The United States takes a stand on the word "breast."
>
>32 cent "Breast Cancer Awareness" stamp ends the issues.
>
>The United States Postal Service has had the final word,
>too bad they didn't make it the first word, and then our
>various ISP's [Internet Service Providers] wouldn't have
>had the opportunity to delete all messages including the
>word "breast" in a frenzied fascist over-reaction to the
>pressures from the right-wing extremists who feel that a
>use. . .any use. . .of the word "breast" or such will be
>marking the end of the civilized world.
>
>You can walk in or call in to your local post office, to
>order these stamps, or to get a pamphlet describing this
>new stamp and the efforts that have brought it about.
>
>You could even write down your comments and mail them to
>CompuServe, AOL, or perhaps even to other countries, and
>include at least one of these stamps to validate freedom
>of speech.
>
>
>Q2
>More About The Wastefulness of Talk/Chat/Phone programs.
>
>We got several inflammatory notes from people who want a
>particular favorite program of their listed as being not
>as wasteful as others.
>
>Obviously these programs are not identical in performing
>their tasks, with some sending a packet for every letter
>you type, others sending a packet every word or even for
>every several words, and some even waiting for a return,
>to mark the end of a line.
>
>However, even if you average 50 characters per line, the
>waste is still over 90%, if your link is using 512 bytes
>per packet, and over 95% if packets are 1024 bytes. The
>wasted bandwidth ratio is obviously even higher in those
>programs that send packets even more often.
>
>If you had to pay by the bandwidth you used, this should
>never be contested, as it would show up in your bill for
>every packet sent. You would also see how expensive the
>audio or video programs actually are to run.
>
>
>Q3
>Please Keep Us Posted On Current Events
>
>RAM prices are falling drastically.
>
>I sold 4 1M SIMMS to a friend a while back that I bought
>for $125 a little earlier. By the time he got around to
>paying me, I bought 16M [2@8M SIMMS] for the $100 he was
>paying me.
>
>***
>
>In the same vein a Pentium 133 I ordered for $285 is now
>going to cost me about $140, if I wait until July 1; the
>first price, I believe, was cost +10%, while the second,
>as I understand it, is just cost.
>
>***
>
>[US] House Resolution 2441 passed from committee with 14
>to 2 votes recommending it. This is one of the bills to
>not only virtually eliminate materials from ever getting
>into the Public Domain, and thus postable as an Internet
>resource without fees, but also designed to remove books
>and other materials from the Public Domain. The current
>legal machinations are designed not only to preserve the
>20 year copyright extensions lobbied into law just about
>20 years ago, and to add another 20 years of extensions,
>but also to remove all materials published between 1906-
>1921. . .including: Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, Edgar Rice
>Burroughs, Sidney Lanier, Anne of Green Gables, etc.
>
>The Net result will be that Public Domain information is
>going the way of the dinosaur, along with your rights in
>the Information Age.
>
>Copyrights that were paid for on the basis of expiration
>in about 50 years are going to last about 100 years. . .
>if these new bills become law, as they have in countries
>in Europe already.
>
>Books you bought that included your right to republish a
>half century after initiation of copyright are likely to
>have your rights stripped away.
>
>Copyright is a two-sided coin, and our lawyers say these
>laws are likely to be unconstitutional, depriving rights
>paid for by contract.
>
>***
>
>Copyright issues between the United States and China are
>getting more press than general human rights issues of a
>lethal sort, not to mention the selling of organs on the
>order of "spare parts."
>
>Obviously the Information Age will have information as a
>primary value with all other rights becoming subservient
>to the rights of the publishing corporations.
>
>For those who actually believe the drivel that copyright
>of 100 years will persuade publishers to publish more...
>your major publishers of billion dollar titles have just
>announced they are cutting publishing in half.
>
>Just where is the Information Age going?
>
>The same way all other ages have gone: divvied up among
>the richest and most powerful political powers, while it
>appears the rest of us will have to get along on what is
>referred to as: "The Trickle-Down Theory of Economics."
>
>The rich get it all, and we get what trickles down.
>
>Just where would the computer revolution be with Woz and
>Jobs?
>
>Who. . . ?
>
>****
>
>Ask Dr. Internet has moved to its own subdirectory /drnet
>
>Please update your links or bookmarks.
>
>The Ask Dr. Internet archives are available at:
>
>http://promo.net/drnet/
>
>We also modified the design of the site, please feel free
>to send us your comments, opinions and suggestions.
>
>***
>
>[This is not an "Advice" column: we merely try to answer
>the questions of general interest people send us, period.
>We reply directly to all messages we receive directly....
>if we do not reply directly, then please presume the note
>you sent did not reach us: and send it to us again. Not
>all questions can be answered in the column, of course.
>
>We try to send a note in those cases, explaining that the
>question does not fall in our areas/levels of expertise--
>and we often try to suggest where answers can be found.
>
>As in our disclaimer which comes out twice a year, or so,
>we do not believe in being authorities, or authoritative,
>so we throw in something once in a while that is not true
>We want you to do you your own research if interetested--
>not just take our word for anything.]
>
>***Quick Answers***
>
>Q
>How do you become an Internet Service Provider?
>
>A
>You buy a connection and sell access to it.
>
>
>Q
>What Equipment would you suggest to get or need?
>
>A
>Computers, modems, routers, software. If you want
>to go big time, you have to market ISDN lines, too.
>
>
>Q
>How do you connect directly to Internet?
>
>Directly? An interesting word to choose, it is like how
>do you connect directly to the telephone system.
>
>Expensive lines can carry more data faster. . .if that's
>what you mean. Or perhaps the answer would be to go for
>a close physical connection to high speed wires.
>
>***
>
>Q
>What is a cablemodem?
>
>A
>A modem that sends/receives data through your cable wire.
>
>***
>
>Q
>How do you make a homepage?
>
>A
>Please see previous issues of DRNET and the HomeBrew Home
>Pages released as Shareware.
>
>
>Q
>How do you contact a WEBSITE? I've tried to get http://www.wttw.com.
>I've tried a number of search engines, but nothing turns up! I've
>tried it both with and without the http://. What am I doing wrong?
>Is there any easy way to contact any website?
>
>A
>This is one of things I like least about the web. . .at least ftp
>programs tell you that a connection could not be made, was dropped,
>the site name was not in the lookup table, etc. Also, I would think
>and SERIOUS attempt at a web site would include backup sites, preferably
>that would automatically replace the main site at the main address,
>but at least there should be a second address for you to try.
>
>Possibilities: the site could be full or down. A necessary gateway could
>be down, though, again, should be more than one in all required places.
>
>
>Kids 15 years old and younger are spending more time on computer than TV.
>No wonder the big producers are trying to take over the Internet.
>
>End
>
>
