On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 "Glenn Gilbreath Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: (and writes, and writes, ...) <big grin> (and so will I).
--- Hi Glenn, You left out important elements that coexist with your resistant, somewhat subversive, anti-M$, alternative strategies - that is ... the sharing of files and information via floppies, CDs, plain-jane email attachments, BBSs, and every other 'medium of exchange'. Ron Clarke once sent me, as an email attachment, a zipped file of his entire web site. It was small enough to fit on a floppy disk. Unzipped, it easily fits on a CD. Consequently, I could subsequently share that information with others via several channels (floppy, CD, email, public kiosk, etc.). Theoretically, as those individuals (who receive from me) further share the information, the network expands exponentially in ways similar to the internet. Such a scheme for sharing information (programs, files, photos, data, ideas, etc.) is almost unstoppable. Even IF M$ (or any other corporate or government group) were able to control the internet, the exchange of information could go forward without completely successful interference. If, as Michael claimed, Arachne was developed to enable the freedom of information exchange, then we shouldn't forget the various options associated with that exchange. For the sake of the diversity of options (and the insurance against excessive control that such diversity brings), we should continually work to develop multiple paths for exchanging information. The point being this ... If Arachne is just about being a browser, then it's doomed to an eventual death. If it's more about enabling the freedom of information exchange, then there is potential for a much longer life cycle. When I asked recently about possible BBS functionality as a component of Arachne, I didn't get much of an enthusiastic response from the programmer community. Several users responded, but we are all outsiders looking in - we don't have the source code. To be really effective, the code should be integrated to maximize the strength of Arachne in a BBS mode. That was always the strength of DOS, before bloat ware. If, as you predict, someone eventually will control ALL of the internet, then it will not matter how Arachne functions - unless you can completely bypass the ISPs. Without connectivity, Arachne is just an elaborate HTML viewer and media player (and a fairly good one, at that). Only by exercising ALL of the various alternative schemes for exchanging information will you prevent a monopoly by M$ (or others). And that means integrated BBS code, peer-to-peer connectivity, simplified file writing and sharing, and all the other exchange schemes - at a level simple enough for the novice Arachne user. Case in point, there are no Arachne users in Iraq (at least, in the area formerly controlled by Saddam). Why not? Because Saddam controlled the ISPs. But people had phone lines, which could have been used in certain situations in a peer-to-peer capacity. The same situation still exists under other hardline dictatorships. The future which you predict bears many similarities to those dictatorships. Why, then, do you argue solely about the browser capability of Arachne and against the schemes of M$? Would not our efforts be more effective if we focused more holistically upon "the freedom to exchange information" in all its various configurations? Although I agree with the core of your argument, I think it's misplaced. The dialog is bigger than just javascript or the *evil schemes of a corporate giant*. The fight isn't against M$ or for Arachne - it's a fight to allow people the freedom to communicate. That's a battle I'd be willing to join. Butyl Bob, the organic radical (doesn't that take you back a few months?) - ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
