At 02:02 PM 6/29/99 -0400, Ronda Hauben wrote:
>
>From: "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>1) there has never been anything in human history as big, diverse or
>>ungovernable as the Internet.
>
>That's not the point. The point is that the Internet has grown
>up from a special environment
>From: "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>1) there has never been anything in human history as big, diverse or
>>ungovernable as the Internet.
>
>That's not the point. The point is that the Internet has grown
>up from a special environment at ARPA's IPTO (the Information Processing
>Techn
Unfortunately I don't have more time to comment on this thread, but briefly:
* The Internet is used for many things, including commerce.
* This doesn't mean that noncommercial uses of the Internet should be
disregarded.
* I don't like being thought of as a faceless consumer.
* It's fine to l
From: "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>1) there has never been anything in human history as big, diverse or
>ungovernable as the Internet.
That's not the point. The point is that the Internet has grown
up from a special environment at ARPA's IPTO (the Information Processing
Techniques O
At 09:10 AM 6/29/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Richard J. Sexton wrote:
>
>
>
>> "I don't wish to offer an opinion about how the net should be run;
>that's
>> like offering an opinion about how salamanders should grow: nobody has
>any
>> control over it, regardless of what opinions they might have"
On 29 June 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh) wrote:
>
>Mark,
>
>I think you are confused as to what was the basis for this discussion.
>As a consumer you are a part of a market, you make certain choices.
>These choices include which TLD to register under, which internet
>provider to use,
Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> "I don't wish to offer an opinion about how the net should be run;
that's
> like offering an opinion about how salamanders should grow: nobody has
any
> control over it, regardless of what opinions they might have" - BKR
For a contrary view, see David Post, "G
>>>The Internet was not the "market" when it was born and it isn't
>>>and won't be a "market now or in the future.
>>
>>>It is a communication medium.
>
>>So is a newspaper, and by Jesus look at the ads in that thing.
>
>Is that what you wish as the model for the Internet?
"I don't wish to offe
>On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 21:39:04 -0700, "Cthulhu's Little Helper"
> Mark C. Langston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 29 June 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh) wrote:
>>Those decisions are what make you a part of the market.
>Perhaps, William, perhaps. However, *I* will *choose* to be a m
"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [IFWP] Computer science or the "market", government or
ICANN
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 01:34:08 -0400 (EDT)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Status
Mark, William and all,
Actually you both are right as far as it goes, that is. William is
correct in that we are all part of the market, in one form or another.
Mark is correct in that each individual has the ability to choose
what part of the market he/she/it chooses to be.
Cthulhu's Little
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 22:30:04 -0700, "Cthulhu's Little Helper"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>On 29 June 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh) wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 21:39:04 -0700, "Cthulhu's Little Helper"
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>The net is no more a market-enabling tec
On 29 June 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh) wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 21:39:04 -0700, "Cthulhu's Little Helper"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>The net is no more a market-enabling technology than the phone is. I =
>mean
>>that literally. As in, the phone enables me to make more
>The Internet was not the "market" when it was born and it isn't
>and won't be a "market now or in the future.
>
>It is a communication medium.
So is a newspaper, and by Jesus look at the ads in that thing.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
"They were of a mind to govern us and we were o
Mark,
I disagree completely. The phone is, indeed, a merket-enabling technology.
Whether you wish it to be used as a method to be targeted for selling to
you, the potential is there... the market is enabled.
The method in which the potential is used has little to do with the
potential which is
>It would seem you need idea of the history and development of
>the Internet to understand the Internet *not* some theories
>that don't work outside of the Interent, and are certainly inappropriate
>to the nature of a communications medium.
Now we get to the crux. You don't believe in a free op
TED]>; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 21:13:10 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IFWP] Computer science or the "market", government or ICANN
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 04:13:03 GMT
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 21:39:04 -0700, "Cthulhu's Little Helper"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>On 29 June 1999, Gene Marsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Rhonda,
>>
>>You may be missing the point.
>>
>>The Internet is not a merket, any more than the Interstate Highway system
>>is a market. It IS,
On 29 June 1999, Gene Marsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Rhonda,
>
>You may be missing the point.
>
>The Internet is not a merket, any more than the Interstate Highway system
>is a market. It IS, however, a market-enabling technology, just as the
>Interstate Highway system is. Without it, ou
Rhonda,
You may be missing the point.
The Internet is not a merket, any more than the Interstate Highway system
is a market. It IS, however, a market-enabling technology, just as the
Interstate Highway system is. Without it, our economy would not be nearly
as robust as it is.
In a similar man
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999 00:02:07 -0400 (EDT), Ronda Hauben
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Ronda,
>
>>What the internet started as is of no relevence.=20
>
>>What it is now, is exactly what I stated.
>
>
>>It is time for you to accept that the internet has changed, and move
>>on.
>
>The Internet was not
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh) writes:
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 15:14:17 -0400 (EDT), Ronda Hauben
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh) wrote:
>
>>>The internet, by definition, is a network of interconnected networks.
>>>These networks are not a "uniform" set of
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 15:14:17 -0400 (EDT), Ronda Hauben
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh) wrote:
>
>>The internet, by definition, is a network of interconnected networks.
>>These networks are not a "uniform" set of networks. They are diverse,
>>and the attempt to f
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William X. Walsh) wrote:
>The internet, by definition, is a network of interconnected networks.
>These networks are not a "uniform" set of networks. They are diverse,
>and the attempt to force on them a set of policies that are "uniform"
>in nature, when there is no compelling
24 matches
Mail list logo
