kehoe@scotty.dccs.upenn.edu (Brendan Kehoe) (10/31/90)
In <4560@rsiatl.UUCP>, jgd@rsiatl.UUCP writes: > Weis said that Advanced Network will provide day-to-day management and >monitoring of the Internet, which connects thousands of military, educational >and private computer networks. It also will serve as a model for other such >partnerships that could help develop and promote the network's > services. What kind of monitoring? Like SNMP net monitoring, to make sure everything stays up? Or .. ? > IBM and MCI, both of which sell equipment and services vital to networking, >provided $5 million each in seed money for the new corporation. Translation: they bought their seats. > It will >actively seek further investment by industry, and will impose the first formal >fee structure on the network, which only recently evolved from an elite >communications tool for scientists. Oh fanTASTic. I've always been under the impression that Usenet & the Internet has been a place to get AWAY from the pay-for-a-few-minutes services like CompuServe, GEnie, et. al. (including Prodigy). It's probably the only place I've ever seen where people take the time to help each other simply because they WANT to and they're interested in sharing their knowledge whenever they can. Tell me traffic won't drop to a standstill once you have to start charging by the minute/second/whatever. (Imagine it .. companies have to have running accounts that sum to thousands of dollars a month? Not a chance.) > "Just as private contractors helped build the interstate highway system, > this new corporation will help build the national information > superhighways that today's information age demands,'' said Sen. Albert > Gore Jr., D-Tenn., the sponsor of the legislation. One wonders how "in touch" Senator Gore is with all of this. Does he have any concept of what he's playing with? I'd be interested to hear what he has to say at the networking conf in Washington DC in January. > In June, the Chronicle reported that the network was being used widely and >openly for purposes well outside its research mandate, such as political >activism and the distribution of pornographic art and literature. And at the Houston Chronicle, I'm sure all of the employees use paper equipment and time SOLELY for the purpose of doing their jobs (and not 'campaigning' for a bill, as this one does). I'm not endorsing some of the current uses of the net .. but I'm also not about to blindly tell people they can or cannot do something .. it's far from my place to do so. > and decided that a more formal structure on the national level'' > should be put into place, said Weis. Ever read Ayn Rand, Mr. Weis? How 'bout George Orwell? > The Department of Energy wants future control of the network, but the >agency's viewpoint is considered too narrow, according to congressional >sources. Read that sentence again. They seem to be sprayed throughout Sen. Gore's bill; far from being "shunned because of [their] narrow viewpoint". > The vision of the Science Foundation combined with the IBM-style management >of Advanced Network is expected to satisfy critics. Why IBM? Why not Dec, or Sun, or Hewlett-Packard, or FooBar Inc? Simply because they have the money to toss around? (Don't answer that.) > Advanced Network will have an eight-person board of directors, initially >consisting of: Weis; Joe Dionne, president of McGraw-Hill; Joe Wyatt, president >of Vanderbilt University; Myra Williams of Merck; Richard West, University of ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Personally, I think MIT, among others, should be involved at this level. (MHO) >>This is, Sooner or later, going to come to a head: either the screws will be >>>tightened, restricting the network to its narrowly-defined actual >>>purposes [the case that you fear], or else some set of folk will manage >>>to get the 'powers-that-be' [actually it is the 'powers-that-pay'] to >>>acknowlegd the utility of the network in its broader uses. In which case, news will probably end up off of the NSF-end of the Internet and drop down to high-speed UUCP connections, for example. (I'm curious .. what's the "official" use of Bitnet?) > My company is just one of hundreds or >perhaps thousands that DIRECTLY benefit from the network. While some >could argue that pay-as-you-go is the way to do it, I believe that >true inovation will occur only when the access is nearly free and people >do not have to worry about the cost of the data transmission. Personally, I've had more work-related problems answered within a day than I can count. Sometimes it completely stuns me at the speed of the responses. Rather than sit for 3 hours hacking until I can find the root of a problem, the odds are about 80% that at least one person out there has had the exact same problem that I have, at some point or another. Likewise, I've found innumerable cases where I've happened upon something that someone's struggling with. It's probably the last real example of a relatively "self"-less system in existence today. >13 (4) The United States currently leads the world in >14 the development and use of high-performance comput- >15 ing. However, that lead is increasingly being chal- >16 lenged, and American firms share of the multi- bil- >17 lion-dollar world market for both high-performance >18 computer systems and other computers is shrinking. Funny, I could've sworn that I've seen postings on the Internet from, oh, the UK & Japan -- they're not part of the US last time I checked, Mr. Gore. >19 (8) The Department of Energy, in order to fulfill >20 its mission to conduct energy research and direct the >21 Nation's nuclear weapons program I won't even *start* on this one. Suffice it to say, you can do plenty of particle physics work on the Internet without being on contract to the government to help develop further weaponry. Methinks the Dept of Energy's skitching a ride on the bumpers of the Ofc of Science & Technology. > 1 (3) ensure the appropriate transfer of high- > 2 performance computing technology to United States > 3 industry. In what form? Training? Publications? And who does the development of the technology for the gov't, so it can "share of the wealth" with the industry? I was always under the impression that the industry made the advances & the gov't used what they came up with, in the form of gov't contractual work. Not the other way around. > 8 DEPARTMENT OF HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING PLAN > 9 SEC. 3. (a) The Secretary is authorized to immediately >10 develop and implement long-range plan for high-performance >11 computing at the Department of Energy. The Secretary shall >12 develop the plan within one year after the date of enactment >13 of this Act. > The plan shall cover the fiscal year the plan is >14 implemented and at least the next four years. God, let's hope they don't handle it like the budget -- I barely put up with being told 4 times that I could be furloughed "tomorrow". Having to put up with a network going down Over The Weekend would probably cripple it. >15 (4) describe the levels of funding for each aspect >16 of high-performance computing, including basic re- >17 search, hardware and software development, education, >18 acquisition and operating expenses for computers and >19 computer networks, and education; So they'll give grants to companies that need systems? How does one classify as eligible for such a program? >24 (6) set a timetable for creation and implementa- >25 tion of technology transfer mechanisms to ensure that > 1 the results of research funded under the plan are read- > 2 ily available to United States industry. In other words, instead of publications, etc, as I suggested before, research scientists are going to, by rules of the grants provided by this bill, be required to divulge their work to all of industry in one fell swoop? Something tells me that a lot of scientists are going to be much more happy doing consigned work for an individual company for mega-bucks compared to what a grant could offer them. Also, it would keep the whole atmosphere "on its toes", as it were. Rather than have all companies theoretically adopt a new piece of technology, new technology would spring from many areas, as it is today. (The Internet, and particularly Usenet, help to distribute this information at a faster rate than a Monthly Newsletter or somesuch could ever do.) >10 the establishment of a national multi-gigabit-per- >11 second research and education computer network by 1996 To dream .. the impossible dream .. sounds something like the long-overdue Blue Route they've been planning here in Pennsylvania. They'd start it, then complications would arise (AFTER the existing network's been sufficiently disabled), and we'd be stuck for years while they tripped over their coattails trying to figure out what they'd done wrong. >14 (b) The network shall- >15 (1) link government, industry, and the higher edu- >16 cation community; How does industry become involved? Do they pay someone? If so, WHO? >17 (2) provide computer users at more than one thou- >18 sand universities, Federal laboratories, and industrial >19 laboratories with access to supercomputers, computer >20 data bases, and other research facilities; That's what is in place NOW. >21 (3) be developed in close cooperation with the >22 computer and telecommunications industry; >23 (4) be designed and developed with the advice of >24 potential users in government, industry, and the higher >25 education community; .. fluff that will never happen, IMHO ... >7 (7) be phased out when commercial networks can >8 meet the networking needs of-American researchers. Ahhh, here's the goose that lays the golden egg. They'll shut the thing down once Prodigy gets big enough, is that the idea? >9 (c) The Department of Energy shall- Now, I am really curious why the Dept of Energy is good ol' grandad in all of this -- I certainly wasn't aware that they had such an unbelievable interest in computer networking. (Do the words 'milk them for their research' mean anything?) > 4 (d) There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secre- > 5 tary for the purposes of this title, $10,000,000 for fiscal year > 6 1991, $15,000,000 for fiscal year 1992, $20,000,000 for > 7 fiscal year 1993, and $25,000,000 for fiscal year 1994, and > 8 $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1995. Oooooh, they're *begging* for misappropriation. ("Sorry, sir! This thinwire terminator costs $9,000.") > 3 (A) PREDICTION OF GLOBAL CHANGE.-The > 4 goal is to understand the coupled atmosphere, > 5 ocean, biosphere system in enough detail to be > 6 able to make Ion -range predictions about its be- > 7 havior and determine its response to man-caused > 8 releases of carbon dioxide, methane, chlorofluoro- > 9 carbons, and other gases. So force the auto industry to use ethanol, dammit. There's more information about how we're screwing up the environment than one person could read in a lifetime -- what more do you want? To say, "Well, we approached it from 97 different angles and go the same information every time, so we have to conclude that yes, trees are severely affected by acid rain." Yeesh. > 7 (F) ENHANCED OIL AND GAS RECOVERY.- > 8 The goal is to use supercomputer models to locate > 9 and better exploit oil and gas fields. Or look for alternative forms of energy, maybe? What a concept. > 6 (f) There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secre- > 7 tary for research and development on scientific Grand Chal- > 8 lenges, development of advanced software technology, and > 9 creation of high-performance computing research centers, in >10 accordance with the purposes of this section, $30,000,000 for >11 fiscal year 1991, $45,000,000 for fiscal year 1992, >12 $60,000,000 for fiscal year 1993, $75,000,000 for fiscal year >13 1994, $90,000,000 for fiscal year 1995. Never in my life have I seen so much Monopoly money in one place. >11 GOVERNMENT AND PRIVATE SECTOR COOPERATION >12 SEC. 8. (a) The Secretary may cooperate with, solicit >13 help from, provide funds to, or enter into contracts with pri- >14 vate contractors, industry, government, universities, or any >15 other person or entity the Secretary deems necessary in car- >16 rying out the Provisions of this Act. Necessary? And who will help the Secretary determine which people/companies/etc are necessary? Ah, this is indeed an interesting time. Brendan Kehoe | Soon: brendan@cs.widener.edu [ Well, in 1990 I hope. ] For now: kehoe@scotty.dccs.upenn.edu | Also: brendan.kehoe@cyber.widener.edu "It's a distinctly non-trivial task to decompile a stripped, encrypted binary into something that can be understood." - Keith Bostic, on the Internet worm
kehoe@scotty.dccs.upenn.edu (Brendan Kehoe) (10/31/90)
In <32032@netnews.upenn.edu>, I write: >In <4560@rsiatl.UUCP>, jgd@rsiatl.UUCP writes: >> Weis said that Advanced Network will provide day-to-day management and I must make a correction here .. although the article was by John DeArmond, the quoted information comes from the article he included by Joe ("Look At Me I'm A Networkin' Fool") Abernathy. No need for undue confusion. Brendan Kehoe | Soon: brendan@cs.widener.edu [ Well, in 1990 I hope. ] For now: kehoe@scotty.dccs.upenn.edu | Also: brendan.kehoe@cyber.widener.edu "It's a distinctly non-trivial task to decompile a stripped, encrypted binary into something that can be understood." - Keith Bostic, on the Internet worm
meissner@osf.org (Michael Meissner) (11/03/90)
In article <32032@netnews.upenn.edu> kehoe@scotty.dccs.upenn.edu (Brendan Kehoe) writes: | Oh fanTASTic. I've always been under the impression that Usenet & the | Internet has been a place to get AWAY from the pay-for-a-few-minutes | services like CompuServe, GEnie, et. al. (including Prodigy). It's | probably the only place I've ever seen where people take the time to | help each other simply because they WANT to and they're interested in | sharing their knowledge whenever they can. Tell me traffic won't drop to | a standstill once you have to start charging by the | minute/second/whatever. (Imagine it .. companies have to have running | accounts that sum to thousands of dollars a month? Not a chance.) When I was at Data General and we connected to the Internet via CSNET, I discovered that it cost something like $30,000/year for each of the two class B networks. Then you had to add the leased line monthly charges (X.25 vendors tend to charge on a per packet basis). Just because you don't see the bills, doesn't mean that somebody, somewhere is not forking out money to pay for things, TANSTAAFL you know.... -- Michael Meissner email: meissner@osf.org phone: 617-621-8861 Open Software Foundation, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA, 02142 Do apple growers tell their kids money doesn't grow on bushes?