1996-03-21 Craig A. Johnson @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:29:26 EST From: “W. Curtiss Priest” <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: How many Members of the Joint Federal-State Board is Required by Statute X-To: “Todd M. La Porte” <•••@••.•••>, La Porte comments: >Nicely done! I hope this goes somewhere! Thanks. I had a very odd conversation with … Read more…
1996-03-21 Sender: •••@••.••• (Andrew Hagen, symbolic analyst) Was it just me or did I miss the granting of the power to regulate the Internet to the FCC. Apparently this is just what the telecom bill did, along with the handing out many other tasty treats. 😉 The phone companies see a threat in Internet telephony … Read more…
1996-03-21 Sender: •••@••.••• (Marilyn Davis) > > Sender: Robert Cannon <•••@••.•••> > The idea that there might be an online non-governmental court which would > banish people is, I would suggest, legally suspect. Those who did the > banishing would likely find themselves liable for harm caused to the > banished. Vigilantes are liable for … Read more…
1996-03-21 Sender: •••@••.••• (sandi kohler) >Sender: John Whiting <•••@••.•••> > >My rhetorical lament on the passing of the Internet seems to have >sparked off a serious discussion of alternatives. > >There are still poets among us. Even on the World Wide Web, it’s >possible to turn off the graphics. > John, Thank you. The whole … Read more…
1996-03-21 I am going to respond to Marilyn with some personal comments, not speaking as moderator. Between Marilyn and Richard we have a really big challenge. There are so many issues (technical, financial, political) caught up in the question of how to charge for Internet use that I cringe from even the attempt to list … Read more…
1996-03-21 I’m reporting my own interests here, not acting as moderator. In their hope to avoid government censorship, companies that depend on the Internet for business have been crafting a rating system for the Web. So far, it is not clear how much the system depends on each site’s willingness to rate itself, versus having … Read more…
1996-03-21 Sender: John Whiting <•••@••.•••> If, in his vision of the future, Michael Strangelove were to substitute “art” or “poetry” for “cyberspace”, I would be forced to agree with even his most ecstatic proposals. John Whiting London ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~-~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~ Posted by Andrew Oram – •••@••.••• – Moderator: CYBER-RIGHTS (CPSR) Cyber-Rights: http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/nii/cyber-rights/ ftp://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/nii/cyber-rights/Library/ CyberJournal: (WWW or FTP) … Read more…
1996-03-21 Richard Moore David S. Bennahum wrote: >Your distinction about consumer-hours being the only scarce resournce >online and that therefore controlling access to the home is a natural >monopolistic objective makes sense. >There is, however, another essential >variable in the equation that’s missing, which acts as a bulwark against >monopoly control, and that’s ownership of … Read more…
1996-03-20 Sender: •••@••.••• (Marilyn Davis) Charles Bell wrote to Richard K. Moore: > It would be easier to gain the respectful attention of such people if you > would avoid the use of inflammatory terms such as `monopolistic > robber-baron capitalist. Maybe Richard writes to only some of us. He certainly reminds *me* where my … Read more…
1996-03-20 Sender: •••@••.••• (David S. Bennahum) Richard, Your distinction about consumer-hours being the only scarce resournce online and that therefore controlling access to the home is a natural monopolistic objective makes sense. There is, however, another essential variable in the equation that’s missing, which acts as a bulwark against monopoly control, and that’s ownership of … Read more…