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: Mon, 21 Sep 1992 16:44:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep21.144853.22787@tic.com> max@underg.uucp (Max Cray)  
writes: 
> I think corporate involvment would be a good way to reach the goal.
> Dell might also be interested in helping. I understand that they
> were going to set up CACTUS, but that CACTUS was not interested in
> providing Internet accounts for various reasons.

Well, Dell is on Internet at 56K and from what I understand they use most of  
it, so UT is the only MAJOR internet link here in Austin (multiple T1 lines  
as I recall).  I think the more we avoid corporate involvement the better. I  
don't mind donation of machines, so long as there are NO strings attached. I  
don't want IBM or someone else deciding they need a "fair use" policy and  
trying to turn this into a censored advertisement medium.  Basically we would  
need a contract taht states that the equipment is donated and there are no  
further ties to the company beyound support.

>    However I think that donations from individuals could also be
> significant. The most important thing I think is for some way to
> assure people that the project will really happen.

Right, individuals could be very helpful, and then they could be no help.   
Remember that FreeNet is going to be a BIG machine, not something most people  
are used to dealing with. I've had 13 years of computer experience (10  
programming) and 8 of those are under Unix and i still don't qualify as a  
wizard. This machine is going to require a full time staff to handle backups,  
etc, which MUST be done if the machine is going to be reliable.  If it isn't  
reliable, nobody will use it.  An overlap with the Computation Center staff  
at UT-Austin might be possible, I would have to talk with people here, and  
present a prosposal, etc.
  
> Another option would be to not use the Freenet software. Just give
> everybody shell acces, and perhaps hack together a beginners shell
> or some other custom software. The important thing is the TCP/IP
> access.

Trust me, you don't want to do this.  You will end up supporting more people  
who don't know what they are doing. Unix isn't easy.  I think you should  
provide shell access to those who want it, but... I don't think most people  
are going to want it.. certainly not most teachers and students who would  
rather have a nice neat menu.  I said the agreement was weird, but it's not  
unreasonable.  Certainly no more limiting than the Genearl Public License.

I would rather see time spent on information than trying to create our own  
software.

> It would be nice, but I do not think it is vital.

well, considering the size, it will be.  You are going to have problems with  
SWBT eventually, especially if they try to get into the information process.  
You have two choices to avoid this. 1) get SWBT involved in providing lines  
2) get a large politcal base to support you.

I'm just trying to think realistically.

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