From: Marc Horowitz <marc@Athena.MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 93 19:52:26 PST
To: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Subject: Re: Internet is Not the Long Term Solution
In-Reply-To: <9302250122.AA02771@netcom.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <9302250351.AA18094@steve-dallas.MIT.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>> * The current Internet, glorious as it is, is not the likely long term
>> solution. The various bans and constraints on business interactions, on
>> fees, on commercial use, etc., are major limits to what we're talking about
>> here. (Some alternatives exist, like Alternet (sp?), but Internet is what
>> most of us are now using.)

Agreed.  The Internet, in it's current form, is not going to be the
information center of the future.

>> * "Remailing fees" are the natural, free market solution to the costs of
>> transmitting, decrypting, storing, and forwarding messages. But these fees
>> run afoul of various Internet rules.

Yup.

>> * These new kinds of networks may look more like descendants of FIDONet
>> than of the Internet, in the sense of being more decentralized and outside
>> the control of institutions and government agencies. (Some have argued that
>> the Internet is already transnational and is already beyond the control of
>> governments. This sounds plausible in theory, but in practice most Internet
>> users _are_ subject to various rules about usage, about noncommercial use,
>> etc.)

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.

>> * Some on this list have expressed distaste that remailing will have to be
>> _paid for_ by someone (other than themselves). 

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.

		Marc