while you are right, the net did loose some things when everybody hopped on.
there wasn't any spam.  internet services were unblocked.  &c.

on the other hand, network bandwidth was poor and there was very little
content available.  neither google nor wikipedia would exist without the
unwashed masses.

i don't think the evolution of the net (or computers for that matter) is a 
story 
of the good old days and constant regression or the converse.  i think it's a 
story
of (slightly?  how pessamistic are you?) more advances than regressions.

- erik

On Thu Jul 27 13:24:54 CDT 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ronald G Minnich wrote:
> >
> > see, the arpanet, ca. 1976, where we all trusted each other. Once the 
> > masses came in, it was all over.
> 1. CIX and others provided alternate backbones to NSF, enabling 
> commercial traffic
> 2. Delphi (which I founded) saw the resulting opportunity and started 
> bringing in the masses
> 3. Delphi was purchased by Rupert Murdoch, who thought the Net was a 
> broadcast medium and thus blew it big time
> 4. AOL seized on the resulting vacuum and brought in the masses of masses.
> 
> So money transformed the Net from an ivy league faculty club into Real 
> Life. Could you envision any other outcome?
> 
> Money is one of those things that removes civilization from 
> civilization. And money always finds a way in. And yes, I did my part.

Reply via email to