Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: Defending Technology: Pt II (Usenet News) Draft for Comment
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 1 Oct 92 13:18:28 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1aci5eINNqv0@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, au329@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ronda Hauben) writes:
> 
> In a previous article, brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) says:
> 
>>In article <19jktcINNobv@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> au329@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ronda Hauben) writes:
>>>     Following is a revised draft of Part II of an article for 
>>>the upcoming Amateur Computerist Supplement on USENET News.
>>> 
>>>     When it was first initiated in 1979, the USENET network was 
>>>made possible as a result of the capabilities built into the UNIX 
>>>operating system and its networking capacity known as UUCP. (i.e. 
>>>UNIX to UNIX Copy Protocol) Now, however, this netnews network 
>>>involves most of the great variety of computers and operating 
>>>systems in use today. This network traffic is carried under a 
>>>set of standards known as the transmission control protocol/inter-
>>>net protocol, (i.e. tcp/ip (internet) protocol) called NNTP (Net 
>>>News Transfer Protocol).
>>
>>No, TCP/IP has nothing to do with USENET.  It's orthogonal.  And UUCP
> 
> What does orthogonal mean? 
> 
> Is it that the netnews is carried on various networks like
> the internet (which operates via a set of common protocols or
> standards?) and other networks as well like uucp ?

	TCP/IP (Transmission Control Protocal/Internet Protocal, I think) is a
transport mechansim.  It lets different computers pass message packets around. 
Like cars are not an inherent part of the highway, they simply propagate along
it.

...
>>Hey, Matt, whatever happened to you?  You still out there?
>>(Mark is where he's been for ages, he just doesn't post much any
>>more.  Smart man.)
> 
> No its sad that somehow some of the unsung heroes of usenet 
> are no longer active on it. It's clear to me that they 
> contributed a great deal.

	Times change, people move on.  Even Jobs and Wozniak left Apple.

>>>was conveyed. And the fact that posts were entered into the 
>>>"public domain" was established as an essential principle of the 
>>>net.
>>
>>Good lord, we just had 500 megabytes of debate on this matter, and
>>this mistaken notion still comes up?
>>
> Well, it doesn't help to say that there's been 500 megabytes of
> debate if there is no summary of it that can be given - 
> somehow objectively posts do enter into the public domain unless
> one is able to start registering copyrights at some point nad 
> also is prepared to go to court to defend violation. And it seems
> that that's not really what the majority of the people who post
> to usenet are interested in.
> 
> If there is some other conclusion that has been arrived at 
> via 500 megabytes of debate - please clarify.

	Rhonda, this probably isn't directed at you.  This happens a lot on the
net.  A large, lenghty debate about FOO is conducted (waged?).  Then someone
comes along two weeks later, unaware of the firestorm that just transpired, and
says "hey, what about this FOO thing?".

	Basically, unless otherwise stated, posts are not public domain. 
They're not *private*, but they certainly aren't rejections of copyrights, etc.

...
>>Nah, some people looking for a definition of whether a site was
>>on the net said, "it's if you get net.general."  This was ages before
>>things like comp existed.
> 
> When was net.general?

	Years ago in days of yore...there were a few groups (only!), and they
were prefixed with net.  net.general, net.bizarre, etc.

>>>which includes alt, gnu and other groups. A more informal 
>>>procedure is provided for creating an alt group. The guidelines 
>>
>>That's the understatement of the year.
>>
> But the alt groups seem to maintain much of the spirit of usenet :-)

	Yes, but as you can see from the spotty propagation, sites include
people who are much more conscious of their public image and potential
liability.

...
>>>"Netiquette" is a system of rules or standards that users on the 
>>>net are encouraged to follow. Also, commercial traffic and com-
>>>mercial uses of netnews are strictly limited and circumscribed be-
>>>cause of the public funds being expended for its development. (17) 
>>
>>This is false.  Commercial use of netnews is rampant.  The most popular
>>groups (read the group popularity stats) are mostly the commercial,
>>100% advertising ones.   It always has been rampant.  I do not know
> 
> But somehow commercial use is restricted - (though there seems an
> effort currently to change this unfortunately) - and somehow this
> restriction allows usenet to be something very different from what it
> would be if there wasn't the restriction. 

	Commercial use is usually restricted/policed by sites, and not Usenet
itself.

>>what the phrase "public funds being expended for its development" means
>>so I won't comment on it.  As far as I know there has never been any
>>official spending of public money on USENET, though there has been lots
>>of unofficial spending in private sector fashion by people at publicly
>>funded places.  (There's a massive difference.  The government buys
>>paper clips, this does not make the paper clip industry part of the
>>public sector.)
>>-- 
> Well, somehow there seems to be the obligation of those who are
> part of it to contribute to it, not to make it into something that
> is their own - 
> 
> (This in distinction to when I worked supposedly as a public school
> teacher at a private large corporation. The corporation took over the 
> public school and made it do what the corporation wanted of it - at
> public expense - It seems that usenet functions the opposite - that
> those who participate in it have an obligation to it, rather than
> to using it for their own private purposes.)
> 
> I have heard of universities that are public supporting people
> to contribute to usenet and help it develop - also in Michigan
> the NSF network is funded with public funds and is one of the networks
> that carries usenet. Those are two examples that come to mind, but
> I'm sure there are others.

	It's like a volunteer project that becomes a not-for-profit
organization.  Some people pay, others volunteer, etc.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!