Re: The un-BBS

> 
> Mike Ingle writes:
> 
> > There are occasional waves of actions against BBSes. The most recent ones
> > are for porn. Before that it was pirate software and phone codes. The next
> ...
> 
> > What we need is a totally decentralized BBS. It would be something like
> > running Usenet over UUCP. There would be newsgroups or SIGs or whatever
> > you want to call them. Anyone could leave their computer and modem on,
> > and anyone else could call them and get an update. There would be no BBS
> > to call and log into. You'd just call your friend's computer and update
> > your newsgroups, and someone would call yours and update his. The network
> > would grow outward, with no organization or structure. Anyone could create
> > a new newsgroup, and if his friends chose to take it, it would spread.
> ...

I'm pretty perplexed: What's wrong with the current Netnews (Usenet...),
Email, etc. setup?  It's very flexible and you can get access for
very reasonable amounts of money (even for a server).  The software's
free, the net is huge, etc...

I dislike BBS's alot compared to standard Internet services.

It's only expensive if you want online, realtime access, gigabytes/mo.
of traffic, etc.

> This is FIDONet (or FidoNet). In most essential features, this is what
> FidoNet has been doing for the past half dozen years. Distributed,
> decentralized, dial-up lines, banyan-type architecture (sort of), etc.
> 
> Tom Jennings, one of the main architects of FidoNet, was once on our
> list, as were a couple of others, but they don't seem to be any
> longer.
> 
> There are some interesting issues here, which I'll just list:
> 
> * since the FidoNet is not subsidized by others the way the Internet
> is, operators of FidoNet nodes (I don't know the exact term) often end
> up subsidizing the costs themselves.

Most systems/people on the Internet are not subsidized.  This is well known.
The critical mass of users has obviated the need for it.

I've been grappling with what features I'd like in the perfect
communications / BBS / Internet / online system.  Does anyone have
strong opinions about which features are important?

For instance: I find that my Unix Internet mail/news tools are an
order of magnitude more efficient than any BBS message base reader
I've ever encountered.

sdw
-- 
Stephen D. Williams  Local Internet Gateway Co.; SDW Systems 513 496-5223APager
LIG dev./sales       Internet: sdw@lig.net
OO R&D Source Dist.  By Horse: 2464 Rosina Dr., Miamisburg, OH 45342-6430
Comm. Consulting     ICBM: 39 34N 85 15W I love it when a plan comes together
Newbie Notice:				(Surfer's know the score...)
     I speak for LIGCo., CCI, myself, and no one else, regardless of
     where it is convenient to post from or thru.

> > There are some interesting issues here, which I'll just list:
> > 
> > * since the FidoNet is not subsidized by others the way the Internet
> > is, operators of FidoNet nodes (I don't know the exact term) often end
> > up subsidizing the costs themselves.
> 
> Most systems/people on the Internet are not subsidized.  This is well known.
> The critical mass of users has obviated the need for it.

The subsidies are as follows:

- universities that provide "free" access to students, faculty,
researchers, etc. (all those ".edu" accounts)

- corporations that provide similar access to some or all of their
employees

- government labs, offices, etc.

The number of Internet users who are going through commercial services
like Netcom, Panix, Portal, etc., or through services like CompuServe
and Prodigy, is currently a small fraction of the overall total. This
will grow, but for the present discussion, most Internet users are not
paying their own bills for their usage of the Net (let alone paying to
ship NetNews around the world).

And even the commercial service providers cross-subsidize in various
ways (Netcom, for example, is reported to be making real money in its
T1 links...).

My point was not at all that FidoNet is a superior service (it isn't).
What I said was that the Internet is subsidized--I didn't elaborate on
by whom, and I certainly wasn't saying ARPA or NSF pays for it
all--and that this accounts for much of its explosive growth.

--Tim May


-- 
..........................................................................
Timothy C. May         | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,  
tcmay@netcom.com       | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
408-688-5409           | knowledge, reputations, information markets, 
W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA  | black markets, collapse of governments.
Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.
"National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

...
> > Most systems/people on the Internet are not subsidized.  This is well known.
> > The critical mass of users has obviated the need for it.
> 
> The subsidies are as follows:
> 
> - universities that provide "free" access to students, faculty,
> researchers, etc. (all those ".edu" accounts)
> 
> - corporations that provide similar access to some or all of their
> employees
> 
> - government labs, offices, etc.
> 
> The number of Internet users who are going through commercial services
> like Netcom, Panix, Portal, etc., or through services like CompuServe
> and Prodigy, is currently a small fraction of the overall total. This
> will grow, but for the present discussion, most Internet users are not
> paying their own bills for their usage of the Net (let alone paying to
> ship NetNews around the world).

Unusual use of the word 'subsidized'...  Most of the above I would
just call indirectly funded.  I don't think you'd say that corporate
employees get subsidized pencils just because it's an expense item for
the corp. and they buy in bulk.

I guess what you meant was 'institutionally supported'.  'Subsidized'
normally means gov. grants to me.  (Yes, a fraction of the above
examples get gov. grants specifically for Internet expense, but not
most.)

Thanks for the clarification.
sdw
-- 
Stephen D. Williams  Local Internet Gateway Co.; SDW Systems 513 496-5223APager
LIG dev./sales       Internet: sdw@lig.net
OO R&D Source Dist.  By Horse: 2464 Rosina Dr., Miamisburg, OH 45342-6430
Comm. Consulting     ICBM: 39 34N 85 15W I love it when a plan comes together
Newbie Notice:				(Surfer's know the score...)
     I speak for LIGCo., CCI, myself, and no one else, regardless of
     where it is convenient to post from or thru.

Stephen Williams writes:
...
> Unusual use of the word 'subsidized'...  Most of the above I would
> just call indirectly funded.  I don't think you'd say that corporate
> employees get subsidized pencils just because it's an expense item for
> the corp. and they buy in bulk.

When the costs are underwritten by others, and the marginal cost to an
employee or student is zero or near zero, I call that a subsidy. The
pencil example is indeed a subsidy, just as when we often hear things
like "Intel is subsidizing the costs of lunch for its employees."

(Subsidies occur for various purposes.)

Oxford English Dictionary, Second

subsidy -- 1. help, aid, assistance   (and many related variants)

American Heritage, Third

subsidy -- 2. Financial assistance given by one person or government
to another.  (and so on)

> I guess what you meant was 'institutionally supported'.  'Subsidized'
> normally means gov. grants to me.  (Yes, a fraction of the above
> examples get gov. grants specifically for Internet expense, but not
> most.)

See above. This meaning of subsidy is commonly used, at least by me
and the dictionary makers. When a father angrily says to his son,
"Look, who do you think is subsidizing your little adventures?," this
is the meaning. Or the lunch example.

Regardless of such nit-picking about exact meanings of words, there is
no doubt that for most people on the Net today, their costs are
subsidized (paid for all or in part by others) and thus their market
decisions are skewed or distorted by this process. The millions of
college students with Net access through their schools can hang out in
MUDs and MOOs for many hours every night, knowing their costs are
fixed (that is, the costs are folded in to their fees, possibly, or
don't exist at all....who can say). 

The point is that this "free" (marginally, at least, and largely free
even in overall terms) service will generally outcompete one which
offers similar services but which requires the user to pay for his use
in a standard sort of way.

And, yes, these same arguments apply to why corporate and government
users, whose access to the Net is provided by their employer, will
also pick a service that has zero marginal cost to them over a service
(like FidoNet) that may cost them hundreds of dollars a month for a
feed (I won't get into the range of FidoNet connections, or what
telecom pricing trends will means, etc.).

(Again, I am making no arguments here for or against the subsidization
of students or employees. Merely commenting on a competitive fact of
life about the Net.)

--Tim May




-- 
..........................................................................
Timothy C. May         | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,  
tcmay@netcom.com       | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
408-688-5409           | knowledge, reputations, information markets, 
W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA  | black markets, collapse of governments.
Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.
"National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

...
> When the costs are underwritten by others, and the marginal cost to an
> employee or student is zero or near zero, I call that a subsidy. The
> pencil example is indeed a subsidy, just as when we often hear things
> like "Intel is subsidizing the costs of lunch for its employees."
> 
> (Subsidies occur for various purposes.)
...
> The point is that this "free" (marginally, at least, and largely free
> even in overall terms) service will generally outcompete one which
> offers similar services but which requires the user to pay for his use
> in a standard sort of way.
> 
> And, yes, these same arguments apply to why corporate and government
> users, whose access to the Net is provided by their employer, will
> also pick a service that has zero marginal cost to them over a service
> (like FidoNet) that may cost them hundreds of dollars a month for a
> feed (I won't get into the range of FidoNet connections, or what
> telecom pricing trends will means, etc.).
> 
> (Again, I am making no arguments here for or against the subsidization
> of students or employees. Merely commenting on a competitive fact of
> life about the Net.)
> 
> --Tim May

I yield... I was overly sensitive to anything that might be
construed to be continuing the idea that the Internet is mostly Gov.
funded...  I should have known that you knew better.  (I'll plead
cronic exhaustion: 15 hour days for the last week to finish a
project...  slippery fingers deleted 1500/5MB worth of email last
night...  One way to catch up.)

I agree with your point.

sdw
-- 
Stephen D. Williams  Local Internet Gateway Co.; SDW Systems 513 496-5223APager
LIG dev./sales       Internet: sdw@lig.net
OO R&D Source Dist.  By Horse: 2464 Rosina Dr., Miamisburg, OH 45342-6430
Comm. Consulting     ICBM: 39 34N 85 15W I love it when a plan comes together
Newbie Notice:				(Surfer's know the score...)
     I speak for LIGCo., CCI, myself, and no one else, regardless of
     where it is convenient to post from or thru.

> When the costs are underwritten by others, and the marginal cost to an
> employee or student is zero or near zero, I call that a subsidy.

I call that "flat-rate".  Netcom charges $30 a month (I think) with
no marginal costs (right?); Harvey Mudd charges $20K a year with no
marginal costs (and certain other benefits, to be sure).

> The point is that this "free" (marginally, at least, and largely free
> even in overall terms) service will generally outcompete one which
> offers similar services but which requires the user to pay for his use
> in a standard sort of way.

The reason that most access providers don't charge by the packet for
Internet traffic is that it's not economical to do so -- a T1
doesn't care how much you put across it.  As a result, they do flat
rate service, users generate more traffic, and users see a slower
network connection.  But until people aren't willing to pay
per-packet fees in order to deter excess traffic, this will continue.

   Eli   ebrandt@hmc.edu
         finger for PGP key.
The above text is worth 
precisely its weight in gold.