Activism Change

SAVE THE INTERNET

Question:

Thanks for the citation, Carl. I checked it and the follow-up article (Chronicle of Higher Education, 26 May, p. A17, entitled "NSF releases long awaited plan to reduce U.S. role in the Internet"). Basically, the National Science Foundation maintains the NSFNET, which is the "trunk line" to which all of the regional networks are connected to form Internet as a whole. The government provides $11.5 million annually to support NSFnet, and another $7,000,000 to subsidize the local networks. The local

They are called regionals, or mid-levels.  I mention this lest they be confused with "local area networks."  The regionals are much larger in scope than LANs, typically serving one or more states. networks’ other income comes from institutional fees (up to $40,000 per year for a big school) that depend up the institution’s size and not the volume of Internet traffic that it generates.

I have never heard of a regional that charges in that manner, though I can’t say I’ve studied the pricing of every one.  Cost usually depends on how much bandwidth — i.e., how big a pipe — the institution feels like paying for.  A big school (company, whatever) can buy a small pipe and vice versa.  At least for all the regionals I know about this is true.  It’s certainly true for the one I work for. Stephen Wolff of the NSF says: Since the beginning of the current NSFNET Backbone Service in 1987, a lively and competitive commercial market in Internet carriage has emerged, with multiple vendors offering robust, nationwide, commodity-level services. Continued centralized funding of a Backbone Service by the Foundation is no longer justified, as it would place the Federal government in direct competition with the private sector.

This is one reason I believe this is the right way to go.  I have seen the current NSF solicitation, and I’m not sure I agree with its plans 100% (I need to study it more to decide how much I agree), but I think it’s the right general direction.  I believe this despite the fact that the new plan could have some negative effects on the connectivity of my own employer, Rice University, and on Sesquinet, a regional network which serves Texas and which is operated by Rice.         Cathy The above is the personal opinion of the poster.  It does not constitute an official statement of any person or entity. — "You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered."       — Lyndon Johnson

Response:

Yes, there is a proposal in the works to take our net away and put it in the hands of commercial telecomm companies and others. Here is some relevant info: Article 27876 of misc.activism.progressive: Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive

Path: usenet.ins.cwru.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!wupost!mont!pencil.cs.missou ri.edu!daemon Followup-To: alt.activism.d Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu Organization: ? Distribution: usa Lines: 249 Here is the info that I have readily available.  A colleague showed me another article on this but I don’t have the cite.  Sorry if this repeats some of the o ther things I have posted. Precedence: bulk X-Listserver-Version: 6.0 — UNIX ListServer by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment:                   PROGRESSIVE SOCIOLOGISTS NETWORK Dear PSNers: So far, we have been enjoying the wonderful possibilities for exchanging ideas and building communities offered by Internet without asking ourselves how it is that we can actually avail ourselves of this technology.  The time has come to become aware of the dangers to our unrestrained use of Internet.  In fact, the future of PSN and countless other lists is in jeopardy.  So far, Internet has been subsidized by the government and is, for all practical purposes, a public good which can be put to a variety of uses within and outside academia. As the message forwarded below indicates, there is a bill in congress which is intended to end government subsidies and give control of Internet to the telephone companies.  Internet will become a commodity, prices will rise, many  universities and colleges already constrained by budget cuts might give it up while those that keep it will charge the users.  This will keep students and underpaid faculty without grants out of the networks and many academic and political listservs like PSN might have to disappear in virtual space sigh…. So, if you enjoy PSN and other lists, please write to your representatives in congress highlighting the importance of keeping Internet as a public good. This is not only something useful for us, academics living in  the wealthy "North;"  it helps keep progressive social thought alive in the poorer countries and facilitates communications among workers organizations and political activists (you might consider joining Labor-L for more information about that) , something which is of vital importance at a time when regional economic agreements like NAFTA are changing the economic and political space. In solidarity,                   |||||/                    "0.0"                   =(___)=                      U                               Martha   Forwarded message:  1993 Reply-To: Project Gutenberg Email List

Sender: Project Gutenberg Email List

To: Multiple recipients of list GUTNBERG

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Forwarded via Project Gutenberg–Reply to Specific Addressee, Please. Dear Professor Hart, you may wish to alert the readership of Gutenberg that the Internet as we know it may be shortly destroyed by our Congress.  A bill written by Rep. Rick Boucher (D, Virginia), chair of the House Science Subcommittee will remove government subsidies and place control with the telephone companies.  A likely consequence will be a substantial increase of cost to universities with the likelihood that some will drop out or charge for use by individuals.  This not only threatens Project Gutenberg, but all other academic uses of the nets.  Perhaps it is time to notify our representatives of the value of the internet for educational, scientific, and other scholarly uses. Additional information can be found in "Colleges and Telephone Companies Battle over the Future of the Internet", page A25, The Chronicle of Higher Education, vol. 39 #37, May 19, 1993. Keith Dennis —   Gustavo J. Llavaneras S.            University of California – Berkeley

Received: from MTUS5 by MTUS5.cts.mtu.edu (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 3915; Received: from KSUVM.KSU.EDU by MTUS5.cts.mtu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R1) with TCP; Received: from KSUVM.KSU.EDU by KSUVM.KSU.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R1) Reply-To:     History of the Iberian Peninsula Sender:       History of the Iberian Peninsula Thanks for the citation, Carl. I checked it and the follow-up article (Chronicle of Higher Education, 26 May, p. A17, entitled "NSF releases long awaited plan to reduce U.S. role in the Internet"). Basically, the National Science Foundation maintains the NSFNET, which is the "trunk line" to which all of the regional networks are connected to form Internet as a whole. The government provides $11.5 million annually to support NSFnet, and another $7,000,000 to subsidize the local networks. The local networks’ other income comes from institutional fees (up to $40,000 per year for a big school) that depend up the institution’s size and not the volume of Internet traffic that it generates. The current arrangements for the operation of the NSFnet come to an end on 30 April 1994, and NSF wants a much improved NSFnet with increases in transmission speed of 300-500 %. It intends to let out contracts for the establishment and the operation of NSFnet to private companies under government contract and intends to end its subsidies to local networks over a four-year period after that. The Clinton administration is reportedly in favor of direct grants to schools to defray their expenses rather than doing so indirectly through the local networks. The communications companies wish to divorce NSFnet from other Internet operations. Specifically, they want NSFnet to be reserved for high-speed communications between the several super-computer sites that crunch data for the sciences. They would be allowed to establish a privately controlled and operated "trunk line" for other Internet uses and to charge local networks for accessing that line. EDUCOM, a consortium of educational telecommunication "consumers," estimate that this arrangement would probably raise their costs from 10%-30%, but are more apprehensive that the private owners would turn from flat rate fees to charging either by traffic or on-line time. In point of fact, although not mentioned in either article, divisions of the telephone company have tried to establish traffic charges, in some states, based upon the volume of information transferred. These proposals have been struck down on the basis that the volume of traffic per unit time has no effect upon the companies’ costs and thus should have no effect upon their charges. If the companies operate a trunk line designed for information transfer and can appeal to the national rather than state governments, their requests might be viewed quite differently. Such a development would affect the Internet and our use of it quite dramatically. NSF has announced its plans, but it is not clear what relationship there is between these and the discussions in Congressional committees. At any rate, Carl has brought up a serious and pressing issue, and I thank him for doing so. Some of you, both users in the United States and those in other countries, may wish to express your opinion of this situation. Fortunately, the White House has just completed its e-mail system and has announced its wish that people communicate with it. I will search out that announcement and post it later for your information and for the e-addresses it contains. Lynn Lynn_Nelson Department of History University of Kansas Received: from MTUS5 by MTUS5.cts.mtu.edu (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 3883; Received: from csf.Colorado.EDU by MTUS5.cts.mtu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R1)

… read more »

Response:

Filed under: Activism

Related Posts

• Scott Ritter: How the British Spy Agency MI6 Secretly Mislead A Nation Into War With Iraq
• Chip Salzenberg -- standing-on-head proved
• Trent Lott, Race, and Hypocrisy
• Quotes from Richard Perle's new book, "An End to Evil"
• Swiftys Kicking KKKerry's Ass Again!
• peace & justice events calendar 6/20/98 Seattle
• Greenhouse Gases, Not Solar Activity, Cause of Global Warming
• Report: Up to 90% Iraqi Detainees Innocent
• NUCLEAR WATCHDOG NOW ADMITS: IRAN WAS FALSELY ACCUSED
• Mexican citizen executed in U.S.