From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 93 23:19:57 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Internet is Not the Long Term Solution
Message-ID: <9302250718.AA07261@netcom.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Marc Horowitz writes, referring to my comments:

>This is where I disagree strongly.  We are entering a time when the
>commercial advantages of internetworking are strong enough to cause
>the formation of a real, commercially built, non-government-controlled
>internet (small "i").  This network will be devoid of any AUP beyond
>simple legality, and will operate much like a common carrier:  They
>won't care what you put on the wire unless someone brings it to their
>attention.
>
>I highly doubt that FIDONET is the model of the future.  People are
>moving toward increased connectivity and real-time services, not the
>slow, store-and-forward model of FIDO and UUCP.  The example of
>encrypted, untraceable real-time video requires internet technologies.
>Mail forwarding just doesn't cut it.

I wasn't very clear, or detailed, about this. I certainly didn't mean "like
FIDONET" in the sense of a bunch of slow store-and-forward DOS-type
machines. I agree with Marc that fast networks are the way to go.

But the decentralized, privately-operated nature of FIODONET is intriguing,
especially if combined with high-speed fiber optic networks and such. 

And many of the packetized messages we expect to see in with digital mixes
will easily tolerate (and even require) some latency at each node. A large,
diverse system of store-and-forward nodes may be very suitable for much of
what we're talking about here. The long delays on the current FIDONET are
of course unacceptable. (No point in arguing how much latency, how much
delay is acceptable, etc., because it will all depend on the nature of the
communications.)

In summary, what I hope we get is a heterogeneous, decentralized,
market-oriented mixture of networks, some very high speed, some slower
speed, and some that are very slow but secure. So long as the Feds don't
force the development in one direction, this is what I expect to see.

>My major problem with this is that I'd rather not have to stamp each
>piece.  I'd like to see a remailer sell me an unlimited-use ticket for
>a month, say.  But this is what the free market is for.  I'm sure
>someone will see their way to offering the service I want to buy.

Like Marc says, perhaps someone will offer this, though I doubt it.
However, while passenger transportation systems can offer unlimited use
tickets, the same is not generally the case with freight transportation
(where someone might ship thousands of tons of freight on one ticket!). I
doubt anyone will offer unlimited data transport for some fixed time
period, for the same reason.

-Tim


--
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: 2^756839 | Public Key: MailSafe and PGP available.