debenedi@yale-com.UUCP (Robert DeBenedictis) (10/27/83)
Today while daydreaming during class I began to wonder about . . .
The FUTURE of USENET
What do YOU think it is?
I can't imagine life without USENET. As I begin to grapple with
the grandiose concept of USENET becoming an institution on the
order of Ma Bell, I say to myself: "USENET needs a slogan."
I came up with a few variations on the same basic theme:
"Now, You're Never Alone"
I also thought that USENET could be patriotically perverted
to stand for: United States Electronic NETwork.
Hey, let's get incoherently maudlin and self-conscious about the
implications of this medium. It is really different; really new.
It r e d e f i n e s who you are.
Remember, sense of self is closely tied to other's sense of you.
(See: GOFFMAN, "Presentation of Self in Everyday Life")
With stuff like USENET people have an additional way (maybe even just ONE
way) of defining themselves to others. In the past (currently) one was
(is) defined by socioeconomic status, race, creed, sexual preference, job,
appearance, etc. These are by and large e x t e r n a l attributes.
But now, with USENET et. al. people are being defined by their INTERESTS !!
(Maybe you net.philosophy people out there can add to this.) I think this
is closely related to the lack of censorship on the net. And HEY, GET THIS,
ADVERTISING WILL LEAD TO CENSORSHIP. Before anyone makes a decision about
advertising on USENET they have a responsibility to study the history of
advertising on TV and radio (as well as magazines). Advertising as we know
it is a relatively recent concept. If USENET accepts paid advertisements it
will LOSE its FREEDOM. At some point, the advertisers will demand a say in
content; and at that point, too many people will be dependent on the flow of
money that advertisers will be supplying. Freedom is always in short supply.
How people gain a sense of individuation is nothing to sneeze at.
Long ago, people knew who they were by where they were located.
No one else lives in my cave; AND when I meet these others, they have
strange and different customs. But, in the concepts/words of Marshall
McCluhan, we've been living in the Global Village for a while now.
People are no longer strangers. People are no longer sure of who they are
as individuals apart from the culture. (I think REISEMAN, "The Lonely Crowd"
talks about this.) One effect of this is to have people become absorbed in
themselves (LASCH, "Culture of Narcissism").
I think we are now, or will soon be, at a stage were I am/= my thoughts.
Our thoughts will soon be much more vocal than they were in the past.
How many of you have had that comfortable sense of privacy while sitting
at your keyboard, alone in your office, typing your soul out TO THE WORLD !
It's weird. It's confessional. It's like a diary that you show to your
psychiatrist; only, nothing's really bothering you SO who needs to show it
to a 'professional' when you've got ALL these bright, college-educated
professionals lying around to read what you say and comment on it if it
really is TOO anti-social.
Has anyone else but me noticed that readnews seems to come in on a
different modality? Are you all familiar with state-dependent learning?
I find that readnews is like DRUGS, ("man"). I (speaking just for myself
now) enter (almost) another world when I sit and read USENET. It's a
personal experience. They also say that TV is a personal experience.
But, hey, have you ever tried to do readnews WITH SOMEONE? I just can't.
Either I read too fast or too slow for the other person. And people seem
to have unspoken hangups about the supposed relationship between reading
speed and intelligence.
(slowly): Do you hear me? Are you out there? Is this ringing any bells?
Respond PUBLICLY; that's they key to this thing.
Be INVOLVED; Be FREE.
"Now, You're Never Alone."
Robert DeBenedictisphil@amd70.UUCP (Phil Ngai) (10/27/83)
It is strange, isn't it, that doing readnews with someone doesn't work
well, yet the whole point of news is communication.
Here's a question: How many people would have second thoughts about going
to a company which didn't have and probably wouldn't run netnews? Granted
it's not hard to bring up, especially if you've been active for a while
and have some contacts for a feed, would you go to a company which didn't
have news? What would they need to have that would make it worth it for you?
--
Phil Ngai (408) 988-7777 {ucbvax|decwrl|ihnp4|allegra}!amd70!phillaura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton) (10/27/83)
Freedom is a precious thing -- i couldn't agree more. However, I am a part of usenet and I am not in the United States, so your acronym has got to go... (sorry) Laura Creighton (ps private mail is neat too) utcsstat!laura
jsgray@watmath.UUCP (Jan Gray) (10/27/83)
Patriotic? "United States Electronic NETwork"? What about the Canadians and British and Netherlanders and ... BTW, what *does* USENET stand for? Jan Gray (jsgray@watmath.UUCP) University of Waterloo (519) 885-1211 x2730
smb@ulysses.UUCP (10/28/83)
The name "USENET" was chosen as a deliberate variant on "USENIX" -- at the time, we thought that the net might become the official network of USENIX. --Steve Bellovin
stimac@tymix.UUCP (Michael Stimac) (11/01/83)
This article gave me a little shake, and I thought about it for a minute. Yes, Robert, you did ring a bell. My reaction to the novelty and 'goodness' of USENET is not quite the same as yours, but I have been thinking about the potential significance of USENET. I feel that USENET (or any network of similar functionality and breadth) is as important a factor in man's intellectual progress as the invention of the printing press. The press amplified by orders of magnitude the NUMBER of peers intelligent people could communicate with, and USENET amplifies by orders of magnitude the SPEED with which communication can occur. A problem that has long been recognized is that of specialization and over-specialization; experts in one field are unaware of knowledge in other fields which is relevant. Synthetic (no, I don't mean artificial) thought is discouraged by the sheer mass of details and lack of access to summary knowledge in other fields. With USENET, we now have a community of intelligent, expert learners and teachers of a wide variety of human intellectual endeavor. USENET is fertile ground for the growth of synthetic thought; and should help to foster the re-emergence of the legendary "renaissance" man and woman. Is USENET a super-brain? Here we have a collection of some of the best organic minds in the history of the human race; interconnected by the electronic 'neurons' of USENET. I certainly find my daily dip in READNEWS to be exhilarating. I'd prefer to subscribe to every newsgroup, but sheer weight makes that impossible. I read as many as I can make time for; and I hope that most of the rest of us subscribe to more than just our major professional interest. Thoughts? Michael Stimac