jet@karazm.math.uh.edu (J. Eric Townsend) (12/10/90)
Abernathy really makes me ashamed to say I'm a degreed journalist and that I've done no small amount of reporting... In article <BcuVT2w163w@dogface> writes: >To Joe Abernathy (the Chronicle reporter) >and to the AP reporter, I must say that I'm still waiting for the facts. I talked to Abernathy on the phone soon after his big "porn on the internet" story. I tried to explain to him several times that USENET is *not* the Internet, and that they aren't even the same sort of thing. (One's a network, one's information.) And he said something to the effect of "yes, but they are they same thing, really." He went on to say that "he was on the Internet". Well, chron.com is a uucp-only site to uunet, and Abernathy has an 8bit apple that somehow gets mail via the pro-something network (which has a gateway to USENET and email)... I explained that he was not on "the Internet", and told him what the Internet was (again, including mention of being able to ping, telnet and ftp), and he still insisted he was on the Internet and that the Internet was the same as USENET. Abernathy should stick to writing 8bit Apple articles for whatever magazine he used to write for and let the *real* reporters handle the news stories. Especially ones involving any understanding of computing... umount ~jet/soapbox -- J. Eric Townsend Internet: jet@uh.edu Bitnet: jet@UHOU Systems Mangler - UH Dept. of Mathematics - (713) 749-2120 Skate (UNIX || AmigaDos) "This meme's for you..."
zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Sameer Parekh) (12/14/90)
You speak of a pro-something network. It is pro-line.
Just wanted to clear that up, otherwise, I agree with your points.
(I haven't read the article though, I should)
--
zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM
john@qip.UUCP (John Moore) (12/21/90)
In article <1990Dec10.042944.1860@lavaca.uh.edu> jet@karazm.math.uh.edu (J. Eric Townsend) writes:
]
]I talked to Abernathy on the phone soon after his big "porn on
]the internet" story.
]
]I tried to explain to him several times that USENET is *not* the
]Internet, and that they aren't even the same sort of thing. (One's
]a network, one's information.)
]
]And he said something to the effect of "yes, but they are they same
]thing, really."
]
]He went on to say that "he was on the Internet". Well, chron.com
]is a uucp-only site to uunet, and Abernathy has an 8bit apple that
]somehow gets mail via the pro-something network (which has a gateway
]to USENET and email)... I explained that he was not on "the Internet",
]and told him what the Internet was (again, including mention of
]being able to ping, telnet and ftp), and he still insisted he was on
]the Internet and that the Internet was the same as USENET.
]
In this sense I tend to agree with Abernathy. We are a uucp site, but
most of our feeds come to us via the internet, and I exchange a lot
of email through the internet. Since many gateways exist between
the internet and usenet, it is IMHO reasonable to consider them to
be one big net. True - the modes of transfer and interaction are
different. Usenet doesn't have TCP utilities (finger, ftp, etc).
But - from the point of view of transportation of "pornography", I
am reasonably sure that the "pornography" that we and many other
usenet sites receive comes over the Internet. I think you are picking
at a nit and missing the important point.
--
John Moore HAM:NJ7E/CAP:T-Bird 381 {ames!ncar!noao!asuvax,mcdphx}!anasaz!john
USnail: 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale,AZ 85253 anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
Voice: (602) 951-9326 Wishful Thinking: Long palladium, Short Petroleum
Opinion: Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment!
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are all my fault, and no one elses.ggw%wolves@cs.duke.edu (Gregory G. Woodbury) (12/22/90)
In article <5884@qip.UUCP> john@qip.UUCP (John Moore) writes: >In <1990Dec10.042944.1860@lavaca.uh.edu> (J. Eric Townsend) writes: >] >]I talked to Abernathy on the phone soon after his big "porn on >]the internet" story. >] >]I tried to explain to him several times that USENET is *not* the >]Internet, and that they aren't even the same sort of thing. (One's >]a network, one's information.) >] >]And he said something to the effect of "yes, but they are they same >]thing, really." >] >]He went on to say that "he was on the Internet". : : >]being able to ping, telnet and ftp), and he still insisted he was on >]the Internet and that the Internet was the same as USENET. > >In this sense I tend to agree with Abernathy. We are a uucp site, but >most of our feeds come to us via the internet, and I exchange a lot >of email through the internet. Since many gateways exist between >the internet and usenet, it is IMHO reasonable to consider them to >be one big net. True - the modes of transfer and interaction are >different. Usenet doesn't have TCP utilities (finger, ftp, etc). >But - from the point of view of transportation of "pornography", I >am reasonably sure that the "pornography" that we and many other >usenet sites receive comes over the Internet. I think you are picking >at a nit and missing the important point. The problem is that it is a damned important nit! I run sites that are both uucp/usenet only AND that are INTERNET connectible. There is a major difference - the INTERNET site has a FORMAL agreement in place concerning the behaviour of the machine and its users in terms of the network connection. (Note: I say internet connectible. It currently follows all the rules of the INTERNET even though the net is not directly connected at this point in time. I have an official registered IP address set and will be totally ready once I get a physical wire from the site to another site for use!) This message is being posted, however, from the usenet/uucp site and there are no formal agreements binding it or me. There are several mutual understandings between me and mail site connections, to the extent that they feel comfortable allowing my machine to use them as mail forwarders and to accept news and messages from my site. In various ways, I WISH I could get a real internet connection at home for the same cost and ease as my usenet/uucp connections come to me! To iterate some definitions that I have heard. The INTERNET is a formal network and protocol suite that requires specific agreements and behaviours. UUCP is a protocol suite that defines how certain machines can exchange data. No binding aregeements are *required* to use uucp per se. (Sites may have various degrees of agreements) USENET is an ad hoc collection of sites (on several different networks and using several different protocols) that exchange messages in a compatible format and nominally all subscribing to the group named news.announce.important. If anything USENET is a logical network that interesects in many cases with the INTERNET. As J.Eric pointed out, Abernathy is being willfully ignorant (yes - STUPID!) by insisting there is no difference. -- Gregory G. Woodbury @ The Wolves Den UNIX, Durham NC UUCP: ...dukcds!wolves!ggw ...mcnc!wolves!ggw [use the maps!] Domain: ggw@cds.duke.edu ggw%wolves@mcnc.mcnc.org [The line eater is a boojum snark! ] <standard disclaimers apply>