From: sdw@meaddata.com (Stephen Williams)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 94 14:07:52 PDT
To: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Subject: Re: The un-BBS
In-Reply-To: <199404240925.CAA24754@mail.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <9404242105.AA00934@jungle.meaddata.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> 
> 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.