[net.news] the satellite keeps spinning...

lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) (12/16/84)

[LONG MESSAGE]

Well, let's hit a few points...

Who would pay for satellite netnews?  Or for satellite time?
As it stands right now, the main thing that even makes this
project theoretically feasible is that we've attracted the
interest of an "existing" cabletext broadcast base.  That is,
the satellite carrier was already broadcasting data over their
vertical interval, had room to spare, and was interested in
the communication possibilities of Usenet (they just couldn't
believe at first that so many large and small concerns have
banded together in a "cooperative" network of this sort--they'd
never heard of such a thing before and are fascinated--they
want to join in the fun.)

There is NO WAY that we (whoever we actually is as an operating
entity) could EVER expect to pay the actual rates for sending
data over WTBS, or over any other satellite carrier for that matter.
The rates are normally extremely high for nationwide delivery,
even over services that are satellite-only (that is, not carried on
cable systems).  If we had to pay those rates, we could just forget
the whole thing from square one, that much was obvious early on.

However, the difference here is that the carrier is interested in the
project itself, and sees it as a way to get good publicity, and probably
make some money as well (they do operate for profit, after all, just
like most companies, and they have a whopping bill to pay for the
satellite transponders they use).  Since they have the basic vertical
interval equipment in place, know how to maintain it and avoid the various
pitfalls associated with it, AND they have the capacity, it wasn't too
difficult for them to make a segment of space available for the
experiment, from a technical standpoint anyway.  (From a non-technical
standpoint it's another matter, since I suspect they never "gave away"
any free satellite time before and it's certainly a unique situation.)

Given the lack of standards for data transmission cabletext, they
use their own system and have worked closely with Zenith for the
development of demods/decoders that could be plopped down in almost
any location with a minimum of hassle for them and for cable companies.
It is no longer the case in many areas that cable companies will
happily let you connect any strange box up to your cable.  Some areas
have laws specifically requiring cable company approval before attaching
new equipment, and while an individual may feel fine about building
a strange circuit and attaching it without permission, this sort of
thing certainly can't be sanctioned as a national policy, particularly
by the satellite carrier who must meet all sorts of regulations and
has to deal with sometimes irate cable companies.  (The cable companies
are getting harder and harder to deal with as time goes by.  Many
are now trying to demand money from the providers of vertical 
interval services, or else they threaten to chop off the vertical
interval and insert their own [which is somewhat expensive, but which
certainly can be done]).

In our particular case, it appears likely that the satellite carrier
will be some sort of partner in the operation, perhaps with
Usenix (this has to be worked out between them and Usenix; I'm trying
my best to stay out of the political aspects of this situation and
letting them talk among themselves).  Under such an arrangement,
it is unlikely that there would ever be a direct charge for the
satellite time to the project, since the carrier would be a direct
participant in the project.  

I didn't originally visualize it this way.  My original proposal
was to find someone who currently didn't run vertical interval
data and try talk them into it.  It quickly became obvious that
this was impractical.  Broadcasters are by and large fully aware
of how valuable that area is, and it seemed clear that they would
only be interested in operating on a "lotsa money up front" basis.
Some suggested monthly fees in the five figure range, just for the
basic transponder time.  And these were all "low penetration" cable
services (religious broadcasters and the like) who are not seen
in all that many cable systems across the country.  Some weren't seen
in any cable systems at all but were satellite-only in nature.

At about that point, I started to figure that the whole project was
hopeless, that the amount of money required would be excessive
(you wouldn't BELIEVE the shoestring expense budget we have now)
and that it was a nice idea that wouldn't work in our situation.

About that time, I got in touch with SSS, and finally found someone
who was interested in the project for its own sake, and who could
view it as something other than a short term moneymaker.  At first,
given existing equipment, it appeared that a demod/decoder pair
would cost close to $1000 (the decoder I have now for testing
costs around $800 or so).  However, they had been working with Zenith
for a long time on getting the costs down to try make greater
market penetration possible.  There were all sorts of considerations,
including error rates, cable company acceptance, approvals, and all
sorts of other things that I get a headache to think about.  The prices
of basic cable equipment have been creeping upward due to tighter
standards for intermodulation interference and other factors, and
getting the prices on something to go down, without really mass
production, must have been quite a trick.

Since the equipment, to attract enough demand, had to be usable with
a variety of services and be secure for the transmission of sometimes
"expensive" data (commodity reports, stock tickers, etc.) the 
addressing and data encoding features were designed into the boxes
from the beginning.  Cable companies pretty much demand such features
these days as a matter of course for much equipment.  Given that 
Zenith and SSS are pioneers in the cabletext/teletext area (the
first national teletext magazine runs on WTBS right now) they feel,
quite rightly in my opinion, that they deserve some protection from
competition when it comes to the data transmission, encoding, and
processing systems they've developed.  The encoding techniques and
decryption standards are their's to do with as they please, not mine.
I don't even know what they are.

The satellite carrier has told me that if someone honestly thought
that they could manufacture demods/decoders and have the end-user
price be under $500, while meeting the specs necessary for broadcast,
cable company, and U.L. acceptance, they'd love it!  And so would I.
In that case, I'm sure they'd be happy to make the specifications
available to a legit party.  On the other hand, I'm pretty sure they
would not be happy to go tossing out their keys to their system,
which would go far toward compromising other, very expensive
services, just so that a few people could try build homemade 
decoders and get transmissions for free.  I can't blame them, either.
 
I think they've done more than their share in going along with
the project as far as they have without receiving service payments
in exchange (Usenix will only be paying for some phone cords,
phone lines, and such items that had to be installed just for the
project -- we can't expect SSS to pay for EVERYTHING).

This is getting very long, so I'm going to try finish this up
quickly.  Usenix and SSS are going to talk regarding how, and if,
a production environment can be established, and on what terms.
While it has never been done before in cabletext on this level,
I am strongly suggesting that decoders be rentable on some basis,
to keep costs down for sites that can't afford the full costs.
This presents a numbef of logistical hassles, but I'm hoping that
it can come off.  Obviously, SSS is going to want some return
for the use of their facilities, especially as we move to higher
data rates and eat up more of their interval.  The assumed concept
is that some sort of monthly fee would be assessed, flat rate,
for satellite netnews.  How much this would be, who would collect it
(Usenix or SSS?, and in what manner?  The cable companies
would NOT be the collection point in any case, and would only
be peripherally involved) and similar items are
still at the most basic discussion stages.  It may NEVER happen
at all if the experiment or political factors indicate it is
undesirable or impractical.  

I emphasize again that this is ONLY AN EXPERIMENT.  If nothing
comes of it, it will at least have been an interesting (if
time consuming) episode in satellite communications.

Oh yes, about cable access.  While many commercial areas do not
now have cable, many such areas are now being cabled as cable
companies realize the possible commercial benefits of connecting
such areas to their systems.  Many commercial firms have cable
passing right by, but of course never subscribed.  Firms that
want to participate but don't have cable could indeed get
small satellite earth stations -- they are available for $1K or
even less in some cases at the wholesale level (and we could
deal at that level).  However, cable industry stats indicate
that commercial areas are being cabled at a high rate, so 
WTBS penetration into these areas is becoming more and more 
available even without satellite equipment.

What some people don't realize, as netnews comes feeding merrily
in for "free" on someone else's phone bill, is that the phone
costs of keeping the network going are growing massively, and
as more sites join the network the situation is getting
steadily worse.  For many firms and even many individuals, the
satellite delivery plan would result in massively reduced
phone bills.  My personal feeling is that much of the "free call"
nature of Usenet is a bubble that's going to burst someday soon,
and that a lot of people who get netnews for "free" now, courtesy
of other sites, will soon find themselves paying for their
own calls, and suddenly realizing how much netnews really costs
to send around the phone network from point to point.  

One last issue.  For a moment, let's forget the fact that many
cable companies will scream bloody murder if they find out 
about homemade equipment hooked up to their cable, and that
cable and other industry standards for equipment would require
a high degree of quality control for any legit cable interconnect.
There is a bottom line to the whole project.  That line is the
cost of satellite time and the widespread availability of 
the received signal.  It does not seem likely that anyone is
going to offer us massive amounts of satellite time totally
out of the goodness of their heart, particularly on a service that
is widely available by cable.  If anyone did, I'd be very
suspicious that they would toss us off as soon as somebody with
more bucks came along bidding for that space.

The key with the current project is that the carrier, having been
a pioneer in the area of cabletext broadcasting, is very interested
in the "fun" technical aspects of Usenet and the project as well
as in the prospect of getting public relations value (and indeed,
money) from the operation.  It appears very unlikely that we'd
be tossed in favor of a more profitable operation, since all 
scenarios would include them as part of the project.  Their
direct participation (they may have a guest account on vortex soon,
so you may be able to talk to them directly at some point via
UUCP) in the project is all that makes it practical.  I don't
begrudge them making money on the project if it ever gets to that
stage.  They could make a lot more money dealing with almost
ANYBODY else.  Satellite time costs one hell of a lot of bucks.
We are damned lucky, much luckier than I *ever* expected, to
have gotten to the current position and be dealing with
a large carrier whose management appears to be extremely
enlightened and reasonable.

Nobody is ever going to be forced to participate in the project.
Those who want to ignore the project are absolutely free to
do so, those who want to join in can do that as well.  Even with
all the effort and support, it may never come to pass.  Given
the amount of support I now see is present in the community,
I will continue to work on the project so long as it seems
reasonable.  The experiment isn't asking for your money.
I'm not asking for your money.  Your moral support, and
your time if you can spare it, is what the experiment (and I)
need most right now.

I don't have enough time to generate too many messages
of this magnitude, but I wanted to clarify a few points.
Private mail discussing various details is welcome, of course.

Thanks much.

--Lauren--