HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bazooka@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Bob Anderson)
Subject: Re: Austin Free-net?
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: none
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 05:47:44 GMT

jsq> Could it be that the UNIX shell is not as hard to learn as some
jsq> have been led to believe?  :-)
 
There is always the techno/masters that couch their words in buzzwords
and jargon.  Not always out of malice, but it would sure be a
breath of clean fresh air to learn to talk english when conversing
with the settlers of this frontier region.
 
I'm with the late great John Cage that thot that computers
should make things harder to do, not easier. <grin> but that
is a different story for a differnt topic.
 
>>Someone brought up the subject of a front end and I thought we might
>>want to rememeber that EFF is at this moment engaged in developing
>>just such a thing.
 
jsq> Meanwhile, you can buy such applications for Macs and PCs off the
jsq> shelf right now.
 
Yeah, and those of us that will continue to access the net on other
platforms  will no doubt be left out of the picture.  No problem for
me, but what of the cultural elite, the porno artistes, the makers of
obscene gestures, the delighters in nonsense and absurdity, the salt
of the earth and the scumbags.  :-)

Now if I can only figure ou this %&^%&^% editor
-- 
   Robert Anderson    \   
bazooka@well.sf.ca.us  \  I'd rather be surfing but Barton is flat  
+1 512-451-4610 & 7117  \   
Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: max@underg.uucp (Max Cray)
Subject: Re: Austin Free-Net?
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: Underground Computing Foundation
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 18:13:59 GMT

petrilli@nextover.pe.utexas.edu (Chris Petrilli) writes:

> Well, there is one thing wo have to do when the machine is on Internet, and  
> that is conthe access to it.  Using Internet for services is fine, don't  
> think it's in the best intereste of UT or the FreeNet to givd Internet ac is 
> available the more likely it is to be abused.  I think the way that Cleveland
> and Youngstown handle it (through menus) is going to be the best way to go.

Hmm, how does having a menu interface prevent abuse? I mean I can see how
it might make it easier to use for newbies, but I don't see how it will
prevent abuse, unless the menu interface is designed to prevent you from
doing things. If it is designed to prevent certain things, exactly what
will it prevent you from doing? Will this take value away from advanced
users?

                                          -= Max =-
..!uunet!underg!max
..!cactus.org!underg!max
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I program in C because it turns women on...


Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: jim@tadusa.uucp (Jim Thompson)
Subject: Re: Austin Free-Net?
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: none
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 01:00:57 GMT

Dell is connected via T1, not 56k.  MCC also has much bandwidth.
Alternet has a 256k circuit that is as good as 'on the Internet'.  Lots
of smaller sites in town are connected at 56k or Nx56k.  (H*ll, Tony
Sanders (BSDI, here in town) has a 56k to his apt!)

UT is the major Internet site in Austin because:

1) UT is a major part of at least one (THEnet) and, I think, two (SESQInet)
(John, correct me if I'm wrong) NSF regionals.

2) UT has the greatest potential Internet user-base.  (50k students + staff.)

3) UT has been here longer.  :-)

Corporations are not inherently evil.  (Management is, however. :-)

UT has sufficent reason (lack of resources) to not support a
"FreeNet-style" resource, I suspect it will never happen.

Personally, I think the *wrong* thing to do is to provide any kind of
'login' account, even if the shell is hidden behind menus.  In order to
properly enpower people, you need to give each individual a network
connection of her very own.  Only then will she be able to fully
exploit the resources of the network.  Give people PPP (or SLIP for the
protocol-limited) connections.  Erect a for-profit mail/news hub.  (Get
yer news via NNTP, get your mail via POP.)  (Note that this (these) 
"protocol hub(s)" need have nary a single dial-in line.)


Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: petrilli@nextover.pe.utexas.edu (Chris Petrilli)
Subject: Re: Austin Free-Net?
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: none
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 15:23:21 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.231349.17605@tic.com> jsq@tic.com (John Quarterman)  
writes:
> It's already been done, for both Macs and PCs, and is commercially  
available.

Unfortunately (fortunately) this isn't a commercial project therefor I  
think it's absurd to require people to pay money for something.  If they  
want to invest in a Alternet/PSI connection, more power to them, but that  
shouldn't be required. 

> I remember it too, but most people on this newsgroup probably don't
> know what NCP, PIP, or SIP are.  Maybe someone would like to post
> an explanation.

Hmm... I'll try and give it a quick shot... if you want more info, dig up a  
back issue of "Ask Mr. Protocol" in SunExpert which is excellent :-)

NCP (Networkrotocol) --- The original ArpaNet system, between the Ps, had a  
host limit of 256 which at the time was deemed "Infinite".  Infinite  
eventually became too small :-)  The brought about "D-Day", the day when  
the entire network was switched to IP, and some machines were left behind.

IP4 (Internet Protocol) --- The current protocol run on "Internet" (the IP  
Internet anyway) which has a 32 bit address limit broken into octets, and 3  
classes of networks.  There is now a shortage of Class B networks  
(A.B.XXX.XXX), but there are plenty of address left in C and A.

PIP (Proposed IP) --- Originated by Paul Tschuiya at Bellcore with about  
half a dozen people working on it (myself included) that is intended to  
replace IP4 to allow the INternet to continue to grow unhindered.

Hope this helps.  These are all the low level protocols under INternet, and  
Internet is built on other protocols above it:

TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) -- stream protocol that guarantees data  
delivery (used for telnet, etc)

UDP (User Datagram Protocol) -- datagram (Packet) protocol that doesn't  
guarantee anything (used for NFS and others that build another protocol  
layer over it). 

Chris
--
| Chris Petrilli
| petrilli@nextover.pe.utexas.edu, petrilli@gnu.ai.mit.edu
| All opinions are my own, if they even belong to anyone.


Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: nia@nuchat.sccsi.com (NIA Newsletter)
Subject: Recognized by National?
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: NIA - Network Information Access Magazine
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 08:28:51 GMT

I was browsing thru comp.org.eff.news and saw this well-written
piece of news about "all the EFF groups and their activities..." It
had tons of info about Cambridge and Washington, but Austin was not
mentioned at all.

Did anyone bother to tell those guys about EFF-A?

 :Chris

-- 
C. Kerstiens               | Editor - NIA Magazine
macduff@nuchat.sccsi.com   | Subscriptions/Submissions to:
                           | nia@nuchat.sccsi.com


Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: jsq@tic.com (John Quarterman)
Subject: Re: Austin Free-Net?
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: Texas Internet Consulting
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 17:00:26 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.230446.17167@tic.com> petrilli@nextover.pe.utexas.edu (Chris Petrilli) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.225349.27183@tic.com> jsq@tic.com (John Quarterman)  
>writes:
>> In article <1992Sep29.133024.17415@tic.com>  
>petrilli@nextover.pe.utexas.edu (Chris Petrilli) writes:
>> >>> Dell is connected via T1, not 56k.  MCC also has much bandwidth.
>> >>> Alternet has a 256k circuit that is as good as 'on the Internet'.
>> 
>> An odd way to put it.  AlterNet has direct IP connectivity, and thus
>> is on the Internet by definition, as is PSINet.  Both have points of
>> presence in Austin.
>
>I didn't say that, I quoted that :-)

I didn't say you said that.

>> Yes, THEnet and SESQUINET are the NSFNET regionals in Texas.
>> THEnet is based at UT Austin, and SESQUINET at Rice.
>
>I was under the impression, from your book, that THEnet ran DECnet  
>protocols, thereby making it not part of the "real" Internet (ie NSFnet)

Just because a network runs other protocols in addition to IP doesn't
imply it's not part of the Internet.  Many NSFNET regionals carry other
protocol traffic.  The Internet itself is defined as multiprotocol by
the IAB, the Internet Architecture Board that is responsible for
oversight of the TCP/IP protocols.

>> ?  UT already has networks.  However, if you're trying to reach former
>> students who no longer have access....
>
>I would like to reach EVERYONE, without regard to their standing  
>financially or academically.

If you try to do everything all at once, nothing will get done.

>> Personally, I think the freenet approach has its benefits, mainly
>> in very low end access for people who otherwise wouldn't be able
>> to get on the net.  It also has its drawbacks, mainly in being difficult
>> to scale, because revenues are not directly related to expenses.
>
>There's no reason you can't have spinoff projects that get integrated.  But  
>I think you have to make the minimum requirements reasonable, and not  
>limiting it to people with 486/33s running MS-windows.  What about the  
>people who still have C64s?  Are they unimportant because they don't (or  
>can't) spend a couple thousand on a new computer?

If you don't have a telephone, you can't get telephone service.
Commodores can handle UUCP quite handily, though, so such people
could have mail service.

>  In a way that smacks of  
>extending the class system even farther and being a "technological bigot"  

Could we dispense with the namecalling?  I for one, am not going to respond
to any more messages with such in them.

I am also not going to spend more time saying once again that I was
listing some possible options for various purposes, none of which is
perfect for all purposes.  KA9Q, for example, was developed for use over
2400 bps modems, but I wouldn't use it to carry a full news feed.

Less rhetoric and more listening, please.

John


Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: shiva@pro-smof.cts.com (System Smof)
Subject: Re: BBS Liaison Committee
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: The SMOF-BBS: Science Fiction Online Since 1985 [512-467-7317]
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1992 06:02:33 GMT

Oh, I would imagine that there are a FEW more bbs sysops out there than
just George Wentzel and Tom Parrish. <heh>

As always, I am at your service.
 ____________________________________________________________________
/                                |                            |      \
|SMOF-BBS 512-467-7317 PCP=TXAUS |"The World's First Online   | __|__ |
|    Proline:  shiva@pro-smof    | Science Fiction Convention"| \_|_/ |
|    Internet: wixer!pro-lep!pro-smof!shiva@cs.utexas.edu     |   |   |
\________________________________|____________________________|______/
Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: hagbard@pro-smof.cts.com (Jon Wiley)
Subject: Re: Austin Free-Net?
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: The SMOF-BBS: Science Fiction Online Since 1985 [512-467-7317]
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 03:48:05 GMT

I think that the Free-Net would be a great asset to the educational
community. It is one of the goals of my high schools computer club to hook
my high school LAN to the Internet. Having a node on the Free-Net (if that
would be possible) would be an appealing notion.

                                                     Hagbard
----
ProLine:  hagbard@pro-smof
Internet: hagbard@pro-smof.cts.com
UUCP:     crash!pro-smof!hagbard
ARPA:     crash!pro-smof!hagbard@nosc.mil
Prodigy:  jckn20a



Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: jsq@tic.com (John Quarterman)
Subject: Re: Austin Free-Net?
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: Texas Internet Consulting
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 21:22:57 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.223633.26440@tic.com> petrilli@nextover.pe.utexas.edu (Chris Petrilli) writes:
>As for connecting a HighSchool to Internet, it has been done, however,  
>there are a lot of responsibilities that whoever does the work is going to  
>have to take on.

Is it necessary to discourage them?

>  Being on Internet is not a "simple" thing, and there is  
>more to it than jsut connecting your network to the nearest midlevel  
>network.  First there are (or soon will be) minimum host requirements, and  
>most PC boxes don't meet them, as they haven't the multitasking capability  
>to handle the multiple daemons (in Unix parlance) that are needed.

The host requirements RFCs have been out since 1989.  In addition,
low level access networks like PSINet and AlterNet are perfectly capable
of connecting a DOS machine or a Mac in a way that can provide initial
access without worrying about that.

>Secondly, there MUST be a technically competent administrator to support  
>the machines, as there are routing and communications problems that must be  
>dealt with.  It has been my experience that most HS don't have the  
>knowledge to manage what computer resources they have, much less handle the  
>load of a FULL Internet link.

They don't have to do everything all at once....  Just setting up a UUCP
link with mail using waffle on a DOS box would give them mail, which would
help drum interest for a later Internet connection.

>I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, I'm saying it needs to be considered  
>carefully.  Internet is in it's pure form a research network,

No.  It used to be.  It's not now.

> and when it comes down to it, NSF WILL protect the network from abuse.

NSF doesn't run CIX.

>  I would hate to  
>see the quality of the network degraded by dumping a thousand ill-prepared  
>students on it.

Ah, I've seen that argument before.  The average ill-prepared student
won't really know how to get into much trouble.  And there are ways
of limiting access if necessary.

>  I know that many colleges are no better, but the odds are  
>a little better.  In the end you have to weight the costs, including those  
>that aren't "material" againt the benefits (which are almost never  
>material).  A link costs a good bit more than the phone line and a router.

That is quite true.  Administration is the biggest cost.

But they don't have to do everything at once.

John


Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: swisher@cs.utexas.edu (Janet M. Swisher)
Subject: "Free"Net and nonprofit status
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 15:20:37 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.222807.11356@tic.com>
petrilli@nextover.pe.utexas.edu (Chris Petrilli) writes:

>Also, I don't believe in for-pay having ANY place in this system.
>Period, no exceptions.  This should be a non-profit group, in the
>business to provide information, not a for-profit oganization designed
>to further the pocket books of it's members.

I realize I'm taking this out of context, but I want to make a
slightly different point.  Many people don't seem to realize that
being a non-profit does not preclude charging for services.
Non-profits have to get their operating funds somewhere, and grants
for general operations are hard to come by after the first few years.
Charging fees to recover costs is one way to do it.  A non-profit can,
and probably should, have a budget surplus (profit); the surplus
simply gets reinvested.  But as Chris said, the mission of a
non-profit is not to make money, it's to provide a service, in this
case providing information.

That said, I agree that an Austin FreeNet should be free as much as
possible.  But charging is not precluded by non-profit status.
Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: regnad@gnu.ai.mit.edu
Subject: Austin FreeNet
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: none
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 17:34:38 GMT

I have been following this discussion since its beginning and would be very
pleased to see a FreeNet type public access site in Austin.  I would
certainly be a user of such a system if I could, which brings me to my point.

Any requirement for the users equipment to support some sort of GUI, or
handle complex communications protocols would effectively prevent people like
me from using the system.  My current hardware platform consists of a Morrow
CP/M computer.  4 MHz Z-80, 64K RAM, 2 384K floppies, and 2400 baud modem.
"Low end" computers such as this are still adequate for many people's needs,
and what's more, they are very inexpensive and are becomming increasingly
available.  An investment of less than $100 can allow access to computer
communications.

I believe that one of the main objects of an Austin FreeNet should be to
provide access to information and communications as a service to the
community.  This means allowing for connections from as wide a base of user
platforms as possible.  Even something as simple as a dumb terminal with a
modem should not be excluded, and the previously mentioned idea of public
access terminal sites should be given strong consideration.

There is nothing wrong with allowing higher speed and more efficient
connections as an option, but if the intent is to reach the greatest
possible number of users, then a simple ASCII text type interface would seem
to be a requirement.


Paul Prescott
regnad@gnu.ai.mit.edu


Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: jon@bodedo.ucm.org (Jon Boede)
Subject: Re: "Free"Net and nonprofit status
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: none
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 04:26:00 GMT

Janet Swisher writes:
>Chris Petrilli writes:
> 
>>Also, I don't believe in for-pay having ANY place in this system.
>>Period, no exceptions.  This should be a non-profit group, in the
>>business to provide information, not a for-profit oganization designed
>>to further the pocket books of it's members.
> 
> I realize I'm taking this out of context, but I want to make a
> slightly different point.  Many people don't seem to realize that
> being a non-profit does not preclude charging for services.

True... and if you're running a BBS-like service, you can expect that they'll
have to charge around 40 cents an hour for service... more if they're going
to actually *pay* someone to administrate it.  But then, you can't sit on a
wooden stool in an air-conditioned room in the dark for less than 40 cents an
hour, so you don't have much ground to complain from.

Jon

-- 
Jon Boede                     (jon@ucm.org, ...!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!bodedo!jon)
1402 W. 51st Street, Peoples Republic of Austin, TX 78756-2608, +1 512 467-7189


Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: petrilli@nextover.pe.utexas.edu (Chris Petrilli)
Subject: Re: Austin Free-Net?
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: none
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:53:04 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.223421.26344@tic.com> shiva@pro-smof.cts.com (System  
Smof) writes:
> The substantial difference is the fact that corporate sponsorship for
> hardware and other vital things seems a tad more likely now.

And probably the only way to make it FREE, which I see as a must.

> By the way, I happened to have an old issue of LINK-UP which was a debut
> article about the Cleveland Free-Net; it said that they would license  
their
> software to other city's free-nets for a dollar a year. I wonder if that
> offer is still in force?

No, it's been taken over my another company and is now $850 for a five year  
license.  I was told CWRU (the people that wrote it) decided they wanted to  
profit after all.

Chris
--
| Chris Petrilli
| petrilli@nextover.pe.utexas.edu, petrilli@gnu.ai.mit.edu
| All opinions are my own, if they even belong to anyone.


Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: jsq@tic.com (John Quarterman)
Subject: Re: Newsbyte Re: EFF Local Chapters
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: fnord
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 22:50:25 GMT


In article <1992Sep21.142807.22446@tic.com> polekat@tic.com (Ed Cavazos) writes:
> Godwin And Figola Speak To NY Group About EFF Affiliation 9/18/92
> NEW YORK, NEW YORK, U.S.A., 1992 SEP 18(NB) -- Mike Godwin,
> in-house counsel of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Cliff
> Figola, director of the EFF's Cambridge, Massachusetts office, speaking to
> a group of New York computer activists, stressed EFF's desire to establish
> a network of local chapters.

They spelled Cliff Figallo's name wrong throughout, I see.

Both he and Mike Godwin have contacted EFF-Austin about defining
our relationship with EFF national.  Godwin is a former Austinite.

> EFF currently has offices in Cambridge and Washington, DC and a local
> chapter in Austin, Texas. Additionally, a group in Berkeley, CA is
> presently going through the same type of affiliation decision process that
> the New York group is engaged in.

One person from the SF group will be at the EFF-Austin meeting Monday
at MCC.  That would be a good place to ask her what's going on there.

John


Newsgroups: austin.eff
From: george@wixer.cactus.org (George Wenzel)
Subject: Re: Austin Free-Net?
Originator: riddle@aahsa.tic.com
X-Submissions: eff-austin@tic.com
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1992 16:02:27 GMT

Something of interest regarding the Austin Free-Net issue...

I have been talking with someone from a group that may want to help out
with this, perhaps by footing some of the bill.  I have another contact
with a company that might provide a free leased line (T1) for the purpose.
I have another company with cash in-hand wanting to throw a few thousand
dollars into the project.  Combine all of this with my contribution of a
host system and host site, and we have the start of something that could be
a possibility.

I would like to hear from other people that would like to work in this
direction.

George
-- 
George Wenzel                    |  Real/Time Communications
george@wixer.cactus.org          |  "faster, smarter and costs less..."
cactus.org!wixer!george          |  "Hardware solutions for the real world."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------



Newsgroups: austin.eff