canada@crash.cts.com (Diane Barlow Close) (12/21/89)
This message was posted by Dave Small to the atari newsgroup, and I have
many objections and some questions I'd like to pose to the net (so as not
to waste net $$ please direct all followups to news.misc or alt.flame):
-> Date: 19 Dec 89 06:00:28 GMT
-> >From: dsmall@well.UUCP (David Small)
-> Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
-> Subject: USENET -> GEnie uplink now working
-> Message-ID: <15097@well.UUCP>
->
-> It's time to announce that there is now a working uplink
-> from USENET to GEnie. Each note posted into comp.sys.atari.st is sorted
-> by topic, and uploaded to "Category 10" of the Gadgets RT on GEnie.[...]
->
-> The link is one way. GEnie makes its living selling information
-> bases to the public, and doesn't want them downloaded and distributed freely.
-> [...] I just want to get the maximum freedom of information
-> exchange possible between these networks; [...]
I object to this ONE WAY transfer of information. Dave talks about the
*exchange* of information. This is not an *exchange*, it is a one-way
transfer of Usenet information. I object to the rape and plunder
(*for profit*) of Usenet! A summary of Usenet, or perhaps ``this is the
latest from Usenet'' (1 or 2 articles follow), is acceptable. This wholesale
plunder of Usenet is not.
-> I wanted to let you know to prevent invading anyone's privacy.
-> [...] If someone has a real need not to have their notes forwarded to
-> GEnie, I will be happy to put a "filter" on to prevent it by request; [...]
I think this should be changed to ``only take articles from Usenet if a
person sends Dave his *approval*''. Why should I have to trust Dave to remove
my articles? What if he misses one? What if my mail can't get through?...
I also object most strenously to Dave limiting MY access to information by
scaring away Usenet posters who don't want the kind of publicity GEnie
offers. Usenet is supported FREELY by a conglomeration of machines (each
company covering a bit of the expenses) and I object very, very much to
GEnie profiting from other sites' generousity.
-> It seems to me like a benefit for everyone involved, especially
-> if/when 2-waymail gets going.
A benefit for *everyone*? It is only a benefit for *everyone on GEnie*.
Usenet people don't benefit *at all* from this one-way ``exchange'' of
information.
-> [...] other areas on GEnie are
-> expressing great interest in having a USENET uplink. Basically, folks,
-> USENET is perceived as the place where the people who know what they're
-> doing post notes.
Does this mean that soon *all* Usenet groups are going to be appearing on
GEnie? I hope we can stop this before it gets out of hand!
-> Why do it? Because a long time ago, on the CERL site on PLATO, a
-> person named Sherwin Gooch, ex-PLATO, ex-Atari, and now with Apple,
-> introduced me to the hacker ethic and freedom of information exchange as
-> its primary goal. (No, not illegal exchange, you know what I mean). [...]
I don't call a one-way exchange ``freedom of information''. I also don't
call *free information* being uploaded to a *pay service* ``freedom''.
The hacker ethic is AGAINST the *sale* of information (as GEnie represents).
If you want a TRUE example of the hacker ethic, then read a bit about
Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation. *They* represent the
hacker ethic!
-> If anyone feels this is wrong, I'll be more than happy to listen and
-> if convinced, drop the link. [...]
Write Dave Small and voice your objections TODAY, before it's too late and
Usenet becomes GEnie (and you have to pay through the nose for what was
formerly free)!
-> Well, enough said. I hope this leads to good things -- GEnie users
-> getting good information on time, for instance.
It's obvious from this sentence who is benefiting from this ``exchange'' of
information -- GEnie and no one else.
The more Usenet becomes publicized, the greater the danger of someone in
political power becoming ``concerned''. Perhaps concerned enough to pass
legislation like that currenly up for review in New York: a sysop must
validate each and every *message* that is posted to his BBS and must also
guarantee privacy of the message and guarantee that the message NOT appear
on any other service.
Is there anything (legal?) that we can do to stop this link? In general,
are there any ``net rules'' for this type of thing? Is GEnie in any danger
by uploading Usenet articles wholesale?
--
Diane Barlow Close
{nosc, ucsd}!crash!canada
canada@crash.cts.com
Free Canada -- Trade Mulroneygilmore@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Neil Gilmore) (12/23/89)
(all points I don't discuss deleted) In article <946@crash.cts.com>, canada@crash.cts.com (Diane Barlow Close) writes... >This message was posted by Dave Small to the atari newsgroup, and I have >many objections and some questions I'd like to pose to the net (so as not >to waste net $$ please direct all followups to news.misc or alt.flame): (I'd like to, but our reader is brain-damaged) (if someone else can, please put this in the appropriate place, thanks) >-> Date: 19 Dec 89 06:00:28 GMT >-> >From: dsmall@well.UUCP (David Small) >-> Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st >-> Subject: USENET -> GEnie uplink now working >-> Message-ID: <15097@well.UUCP> >-> It's time to announce that there is now a working uplink >-> from USENET to GEnie. Each note posted into comp.sys.atari.st is sorted >-> by topic, and uploaded to "Category 10" of the Gadgets RT on GEnie.[...] >-> The link is one way. GEnie makes its living selling information >-> bases to the public, and doesn't want them downloaded and distributed freely. >-> [...] I just want to get the maximum freedom of information >-> exchange possible between these networks; [...] In this case, the maximum is not enough to allow the minimum. >I object to this ONE WAY transfer of information. Dave talks about the >*exchange* of information. This is not an *exchange*, it is a one-way >transfer of Usenet information. I object to the rape and plunder >(*for profit*) of Usenet! A summary of Usenet, or perhaps ``this is the >latest from Usenet'' (1 or 2 articles follow), is acceptable. This wholesale >plunder of Usenet is not. I must second this opinion. Unless the 'article' link is both ways, forget it. >-> I wanted to let you know to prevent invading anyone's privacy. >-> [...] If someone has a real need not to have their notes forwarded to >-> GEnie, I will be happy to put a "filter" on to prevent it by request; [...] Thanks Dave. It would have been genuinely dishonest to make this link and not tell anyone... but I would have preferred discussion before the event, not after. Oh, well, at least we get to discuss it now. >I think this should be changed to ``only take articles from Usenet if a >person sends Dave his *approval*''. Why should I have to trust Dave to remove >my articles? What if he misses one? What if my mail can't get through?... If the link doesn't go away as I want it to, I think this is an acceptable alternative. Post only what has specific permission to post. (If you read this Dave, This is the ONLY one of my postings which I wish to go to GEnie. NO OTHERS may. Attempted mail to follow.) >I also object most strenously to Dave limiting MY access to information by >scaring away Usenet posters who don't want the kind of publicity GEnie >offers. Usenet is supported FREELY by a conglomeration of machines (each >company covering a bit of the expenses) and I object very, very much to >GEnie profiting from other sites' generousity. I'm afraid I don't understand this statement. Publicity? >-> It seems to me like a benefit for everyone involved, especially >-> if/when 2-waymail gets going. No objections, only encouragement for a mail link (both ways, of course). Dave, there is a mail link to CompuServe, but I don't have any details. Mail is fundamentally different than posting. It is an exchange between 2 people, not 2 organizations. >-> [...] other areas on GEnie are >-> expressing great interest in having a USENET uplink. Basically, folks, >-> USENET is perceived as the place where the people who know what they're >-> doing post notes. But have any USENET groups expressed interest in having their group uplinked to GEnie? Have any USENET groups even expressed interest in a 2 way link to GEnie. If USENET is preceived as the place for those who know their stuff, why did those others get GEnie accounts instead of accounts on public USENET machines? I know of only 3 (portal, madnix, and macc), but there must be many other machines out there on which anyone can get an account. >Does this mean that soon *all* Usenet groups are going to be appearing on >GEnie? I hope we can stop this before it gets out of hand! Agreed. Stop this now. >-> Why do it? Because a long time ago, on the CERL site on PLATO, a >-> person named Sherwin Gooch, ex-PLATO, ex-Atari, and now with Apple, >-> introduced me to the hacker ethic and freedom of information exchange as >-> its primary goal. (No, not illegal exchange, you know what I mean). [...] Sounds like a defferent hacker ethic than what I was raised on... I don't follow any of that crap they fed me when I was younger. >-> If anyone feels this is wrong, I'll be more than happy to listen and >-> if convinced, drop the link. [...] I think you're getting an earful of what we think. >Write Dave Small and voice your objections TODAY, before it's too late and >Usenet becomes GEnie (and you have to pay through the nose for what was >formerly free)! Sorry. Emotional argument of this type doesn't cut it. I don't believe that USENET will cease to exist because of this link, but it won't help it any either. >-> Well, enough said. I hope this leads to good things -- GEnie users >-> getting good information on time, for instance. Dave, you are known to us as a doer of good things. Your reputation is impeccable, at least in your business dealings. I believe that you intended to do good by this, but I believe more strongly that, ultimately, this will do no good for those who are generating the information that you wish to pass along, instead doing good for persons having no real connection with the originator. >The more Usenet becomes publicized, the greater the danger of someone in >political power becoming ``concerned''. Perhaps concerned enough to pass >legislation like that currenly up for review in New York: a sysop must >validate each and every *message* that is posted to his BBS and must also >guarantee privacy of the message and guarantee that the message NOT appear >on any other service. Bad news to me. Blast this and other similar legislation, except for privacy of private email. Also unenforcable, as no sysop can guarantee that no person ever will download a message and upload it somewhare else. Make the originator responsible for their postings, not the sysops. >Is there anything (legal?) that we can do to stop this link? In general, >are there any ``net rules'' for this type of thing? Is GEnie in any danger >by uploading Usenet articles wholesale? I hope that Dave will understand our sentiments and close down the link until such time as the Net Gods can pass judgement. I would think that any postings which specifically say that their information may not be distributed for profit would be incorrect for uplinking, as GEnie would be profitting from their posting to USENET. This pretty well leaves out any of the binaries and sources groups, as well as most of the code fragments in postings. As Dave does not profit, he should be in no trouble. Who will monitor every message to be certain which may be distributed and which may not be? That is what it would take to ensure copyright compliance. >Diane Barlow Close > {nosc, ucsd}!crash!canada > canada@crash.cts.com > Free Canada -- Trade Mulroney +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Kitakaze Tatsu Raito Neil Gilmore internet:gilmore@macc.wisc.edu | | Jararvellir, MACC, UW-Madison bitnet: gilmore@wiscmac3 | | Middle Kingdom Madison, Wi | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
dsmall@well.UUCP (David Small) (12/24/89)
This note is only in effort to cap the discussion. The link was suspended the instant I got mail pointing out difficulties I had not foreseen; it was permanently stopped when more mail arrived. I am writing this in hopes of not filling comp.sys.atari.st full of GEnie -> USENET replies to this reply, etc. I've posted a longer, and this time, a lot more complete explanation of what happened. I'm sorry to have wasted so much of people's time and worry; the link was already down by the time most of it was going on. If anyone knows a better way to "turn off" the replies, please do. I have NO INTEREST in maintaining a permenant, 1-way link to GEnie; it was only one little step towards a full, two-way link, with email, that I think would be beneficical to both systems. (With everyone's approval as a condition). I could have handled this better, and I apologize. -- thanks, Dave / Gadgets
fyl@fylz.UUCP (Phil Hughes) (12/24/89)
Let me throw my hat into the ring. This machine is a Usenet news
site. There are a few people that pay for the right to use it to
access Usenet. So, first off, you already have people that pay for
Usenet access.
I have considered setting up an account that is read-only access to
Usenet. In other words, the equivalent to the one-way link to GEnie.
Does this make me a horrible person or whatever?
Now, my reason for the read-only access is to protect the net from
users that I don't feel would be an asset to the net. In other words,
I would not trust them to be a conscientious user.
On the GEnie end, as people on GEnie read stuff on Usenet they may
decide they want write access as well. This will inspire them to seek
out someone that can provide this service. And, maybe, they will pay
for it.
What's the problem?
--
Phil Hughes - FYL - 8315 Lk City Wy NE - Suite 207 - Seattle, WA 98115
(206)526-2919 or LAMB-919 for the strange
{amc-gw,uunet!pilchuck}!ssc!fylz!fylsteve@thelake.UUCP (Steve Yelvington) (12/25/89)
In article <946@fylz.UUCP>, fyl@fylz.UUCP (Phil Hughes) writes ... >I have considered setting up an account that is read-only access to >Usenet. In other words, the equivalent to the one-way link to GEnie. >Does this make me a horrible person or whatever? If you're an ogre, you'll have plenty of company. Not only are many university sites set up that way (for beginners), but it also is the norm for Citadel BBSes that receive Usenet newsgroups. The whole thing is much ado about nothing. -- Steve Yelvington at the (very, very cold) lake in Minnesota UUCP: ... umn-cs.cs.umn.edu!thelake!steve