IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

If I am found dead: Memo for Record

Mentifex mentifex at scn.org
Mon Oct 26 13:59:19 EST 1998

Since I am well known in the newsgroup bionet.neuroscience,
I am taking out a little insurance policy:

Re: Internet community and the privatization of DNS

[DNS = "Domain Name Server" function of the PUBLIC Internet.]

Author: Ronda Hauben
Email: rh120 at aloha.cc.columbia.edu
Date: 1998/10/26
Forums: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.domains, alt.internet.media-coverage,
Message-ID: <711vhn$h12$1 at apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>
Distribution: inet
Organization: Columbia University
References: <70t792$r2n$2 at apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>
            <3632797a.0 at news.victoria.tc.ca>
Reply-To:  rh120 at columbia.edu

Mentifex (mentifex at scn.org) wrote:
: Ronda http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/dns_proposal.txt Hauben
: has once again dared and made bold to speak up for the freeedom of
: all us taxpayers' http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook Internet.
: Meanwhile, did everybody see the blatant exploitation of the death
: of Jonathan Postel (The Wall Street Journal editorial page A22) in
: the form of a 22.oct.1998 article by K. N. Cukier, a senior editor  
: of Communications Week International?  Well, George, or should you
: be called one of the "new Internet pipsqueaks" as Cukier calls us?
: Your Doublethink Duckspeak has lived beyond 1984 in the WSJ, where
: Mr. Cukier wrote how lucky Jonathan Postel is to have died and not
: have seen how "a handful of small-town Internet entrepreneurs snip-
: ing from their e-mail soapboxes have been calling on the U.S. gov-
: ernment to exert control over the new IANA."  The still warm body
: of Jonathan Postel is exploited:  "His vision was of a communica-
: tions network beyond the control of government."  Please!  Mr. 2X
: double-talk Cukier, the only avenue of control by ALL Netizens is 
: demo-(that's Greek for PEOPLE, Mr. Cukier)cratic government.  You
: end "The Internet Loses Its Head" by mouthing, "It's important to
: get the new institution up and running, and make sure governments     
: stay out."  Translated out of Doublespeak:  Down with the people! 

Good to see your account of this piece foul propaganda in
the name of a eulogy for Jon Postel published in the WSJ on Thursday,
October 22, 1998.

It was full of lots of other falsifications as well.                

It was interesting that the WSJ hadn't carried any account of the   
DNS giveaway but suddenly puts on its editorial page this piece of  
clear propaganda.

For example: 

WSJ article falsification: 

"Indeed, the Internet was created by privately owned data networks 
that voluntarily agreed to interconnect for mutual benefit,        
and recognized the need for a central authority to make uncomfortable
yet binding decisions."

Internet history:

The Internet was created as a result of government funded and directed
computer science research and development by the U.S. government and
other governments around the world who supported the linking up of
the government or university developed networks in their countries.

In the process there were cooperative procedures like the Requests
for Comment (RFC's) and the IETF and Usenet newsgroups and
ARPANET and later Internet mailing lists that developed to make
possible collaborative processes to help solve many of the problems
that developed so people could work together and help each other
to use and spread the Internet.

This cooperation was supported by an Acceptible Use Policy where  
the networks could be used reciprocally by different those in different
nations arounworld as long as certain rules were followed and  
the networks were open to the university or education community in
the diverse countries.
This is what has made it possible to have an international network.

One of the first points of the Acceptible Use Policy (the AUP) that 
governed the early U.S. backbone to the Internet (the NSFNET) was:

"Communication with foreign reseachers and educators in connection
with research or instruction, as long as any network that the     
foreign user employs for such communication provides reciprocal
access to U.S. researchers and educators." (See chapter 12     
in "Netizens")

WSJ article falsification:     

"If governments get to plunge their flagpoles into cyberspace,  
his (Postel's) vision risks being destroyed. The Internet moves        
too fast for governments to control. And since it is a weave of    
private international networks, it's not clear what government    
institution has legitimacy to determine Internet policies such
as adding new domain domain names--the `.com' or `org' suffixes
of many of today's Internet addresses. Why not a `.med' for        
accredited medical institutions, for examle? Such questions are
much better left for industry itself to decide."

Internet history:

Government have been a crucial part of creating the Internet,
or as this WSJ propagandist calls it, cyberspace.              

And Jon Postel worked for the U.S. government under a contract
and so to use him as a way to attack governments being involved
in the Internet is a gross misrepresentation.

The U.S. government and other governments played a *good* role,
not a bad role, in the development of the Internet.            

The role the U.S. government played, was *not* one of control,
but of support for the networking community, and for cooperative
and collaborative processes that made it possible to develop   
and maintain the Internet.

There are Internet processes and procedures for deciding what
should happen such as the IETF and Usenet newsgroups and Internet
mailing lists where problems of deciding whether or not to add
new domain names can be discussed to figure out what it makes
sense to do. However, instead of the U.S. government and     
other governments supporting the use of such procedures,
they are being pressured by big corporate entities to turn
over the ownership and control of decisions like these        
of assets like IP numbers and domain names to private      
corporations under the guise of privatizing these functions.

Cukier and the WSJ are campaigning for this great giveaway     
of Internet assets and policy making power to "industry" by
this article.

WSJ article falsification:

 "Or so reasons-believe it or not- Ira Magaziner, the failed health-
care commissar reborn as cyberpunk. Mr. Magaziner spearheaded an
international campaign to forge consensus among governments around
the world to defer to the authority of a new, private-sector-based
IANA. And when key parties in the process of building the new 
institution failed to come to terms, he persuaded them to continue
discussions, knowing the consequences would otherwise be an
open door for Congress or Geneva buraucrats to storm through."

Internet recent history:

Where and how this whole privatization process of essential 
Internet functions was conceived and begun needs to be unraveled,
but advisors to the U.S. government with interests in big 
corporate entities are pressuring for this privatization   
similar to how they pressured for the privatization of the
NSFNET backbone to the Internet.

Magaziner has been traveling around the world and encouraging
other nations to go along with the privatization. 

He has been offering other nations seats on the board, despite    
fact that this is to be a supposed "private corporation."     

Thus we are to have governments represented but under no obligations
to be accountable for this representation.                 

This is a new model that is being crafted under the advice of
some of the Internet guru's from the Internet society and other
such institutions of how to give away Internet assets and
policy making processes to the private sector.             

Congress, according to the WSJ propaganda, should stay out.

But it is good to have Congress intervene and all sectors 
of the U.S. govt intervene. The Office of Inspector General
of the NSF (who traditionally functioned under the authority of
Congress) issued a report on this all saying that this       
would create a concentration of power that was very dangerous
and probably contrary to U.S. law.

And the report said that government cannot transfer policy making
power to private entities.

The U.S. people and people around the world need to know
what is happening and to have some way to intervene.

There needs to be broad public discussion, *not* silence and   
propaganda press releases.

WSJ article falsification: 

 "All this reached a crescendo when Postel was hospitalized last
week for heart problems. So close to realization, his vision may
become the first casualty of the revolution he helped unleash: A
form of Internet self governance founded on the authority of the
Internet itself--the companies that invest in it and the individuals
who benefit from it. It's imoprtant to get the new institution up
and running, and make sure governments stay out."

Whose Vision of the future?

Internet and Usenet have been created as a users networks,
where the users have created the content and the software
that has made them possible. (See testimony submitted to
Congress http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/testimony_107.txt )

And there has been a good role played by the U.S. government
and governments around the world to support those who have
worked to create and develop the Internet.

Also much taxpayer money of people in the U.S. and elsewhere    
around the world has helped to fund the networks that are       
now make the Internet a worldwide network of networks.          

But this WSJ brand of supposed "Internet self governance"           
is to replace the users and the support by government            
for the cooperative processes and collaborative practices
with the "companies that invest" (i.e. reap the windfall of
the greatest giveaway in the history of the world), and
where users are reduced to "individuals who benefit from"
i.e. companies making profit off of them, is only the vision  
of a very narrow set of interests who have no understanding
of nor concern for the Internet or the global communication
that it makes possible.

When I spoke with Jon Postel in Geneva this past summer,    
explaining to him that I was a user, and that users       
were left out of this IFWP (International Forum on the
White Paper) process that Magaziner had created, Postel
didn't tell me anything about this so called vision that    
the WSJ is promoting. Instead he said to present what    
I was saying to the meetings that were to be held about
the IANA privatization.

Thus to be promoting this giveaway in Postel's name, 
and even in what is pretended as a eulogy for him,       
is a demonstration of how little those promoting the       
privatization of the Internet care for the Internet    
and the people who have worked to make it possible.      

ronda at panix.com

Re: Internet community and the privatization of DNS

Author:   Ronda Hauben                 
Email: rh120 at aloha.cc.columbia.edu
Date: 1998/10/26
Forums: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.domains
Message-ID: <711qvd$ejh$1 at apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>
Distribution: inet
Organization: Columbia University
References: <70t792$r2n$2 at apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>
            <3632797a.0 at news.victoria.tc.ca>
Reply-To:   rh120 at columbia.edu
Steven J. Sobol (sjsobol at nstc.com) wrote:
: Rumor has it that mentifex at scn.org said
: >Ronda http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/dns_proposal.txt Hauben
: >has once again dared and made bold to speak up for the freeedom of
: >all us taxpayers' http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook Internet.
: >
: >Meanwhile, did everybody see the blatant exploitation of the death
: >of Jonathan Postel (The Wall Street Journal editorial page A22) in
: What date, and is it on the WSJ's website?            
It was in the WSJ Thursday, Oct. 22, 1998 on page A22. The title
was "The Internet Loses Its Head" by Kenneth Neil Cukier.
I don't know about the WSJ website.
ronda at panix.com

                  Netizens: On the History and Impact
                    of Usenet and the Internet
                also in print edition ISBN 0-8186-7706-6


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net