connectivity issues
Chris Janicki
Janicki at ia-inc.com
Sat Aug 11 00:04:41 EDT 2001
Your analogies are flawed. Receiving phone calls and snail mail are
essentially an unlimited part of the service, but making calls
(especially long distance) and sending mail cost a premium. Are you
suggesting that we protest to get free long distance calls too?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 8/10/01, 10:48:51 PM, John Chambers <jc at trillian.mit.edu> wrote
regarding Re: connectivity issues:
> --------
> Charles C. Bennett, Jr. suggests:
> | Cable companies are licenced by municipality. Every couple of years
> | your local town board gets to make the cable company jump through
> | hoops to be allowed to continue to provide service to the locals.
> |
> | Guess what... next time AT&T Cable's licence comes up for renewal in
> | Arlington, I'll be there with a bunch of other Arlington geeks to make
> | sure that unhindered internet service be a prerequisite for licence
> | renewal.
> |
> | Perhaps we can use Slashdot to make sure that this is done as a
> | concerted effort in municipalities everywhere.
> Good idea in general. But we do need to learn how to explain what
> it's all about in terms that the local regulators understand.
> One approach: Would you buy phone service that only allowed outgoing
> calls? Imagine if you and all your friends were restricted like that.
> How useful would your phone be? Yeah, you could make calls to
> commercial sites to order things. That's about all.
> Similarly, how useful would snail mail be if you could only receive
> mail, and only big companies could send it out?
> This is the model that the cable companies are working from. Saying
> "no servers" means you can't receive incoming connections. This is
> violation of the whole design of the Internet, which is based on
> point-to-point messaging. And it's no more acceptable than it would
> be for the phone or postal systems.
> The cable companies are basically TV services. They think of the Net
> as a new kind of TV ("with a Buy button", as someone remarked). They
> think the Internet was created back in '92 to run browsers. And
> browsers were built to give you a better way to see commercial sites
> so you can buy things.
> The only real way to convince them otherwise is if we do as Charles
> suggests, and try to bring pressure on them to deliver real Internet
> connectivity. Otherwise, they'll keep trying to move to an Internet
> in which only big commercial interests are allowed to "broadcast".
> -
> Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
> "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
> message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).
-
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).
More information about the Discuss
mailing list