>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Non-member submission from [<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:25:08 -0500 (EST)
>
>>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 31 21:25:07 1999
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Received: from mail2.panix.com (mail2.panix.com [166.84.0.213])
> by ns1.vrx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6851DF213
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:25:06 -0500 (EST)
>Received: from panix7.panix.com (panix7.panix.com [166.84.0.232])
> by mail2.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
> id 46F8E155A3; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:23:38 -0500 (EST)
>Received: (from ronda@localhost) by panix7.panix.com (8.8.8/8.7.1/PanixN1.0) id
>VAA09950; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:23:38 -0500 (EST)
>Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 21:23:38 -0500 (EST)
>From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: The Internet and Netizens and the New Millennium: The Past As Prologue
>
>What will the new Millennium mean for the Internet and for the Netizens
>who have emerged with the development of the Internet?
>
>J.C.R. Licklider's research in the 1950s recognized the importance
>of the question of what should be the relationship between the human
>and the computer and set a foundation for time sharing and interactive
>computing. He proposed that the relationship should be one of
>human computer symbiosis, that is the human doing what the human
>could do best and the computer doing what it was most suited for
>in the partnership.
>
>Licklider then was invited to work at the Advanced Research Projects
>Agency (ARPA) in 1962. He set up the Information Processing
>Techniques Office (IPTO) which spearheaded many of the
>outstanding changes that we have witnessed in the development of
>computers and networking and then internetworking in the past 40 years.
>
>Not often in people's lives do they witness the significant events
>that have occurred in the past 40 years of our past century. This includes
>the development of time-sharing and interactive computing with Project MAC
>and of other centers of excellence projects in the 1960s. These made it
>possible to replace the form of batch processing that was the computing
>paradigm until then with interactive computing and time-sharing.
>
>The work on time-sharing also led people like Donald Davies in
>Great Britain and others thinking. Davies realized that multiplexing
>could be applied to the transport of computer data as well as to the
>organization of an operating system.
>
>Davies had the idea for packet switching along with others like
>Paul Baran. By the later part of the 1960's Larry Roberts had
>been brought to IPTO by Robert Taylor. Roberts spearheaded
>the developments at ARPA that would make it possible to create
>the ARPANET as an early and outstanding example of packet switching
>technology and that would make a new form of computer and communications
>possible.
>
>The marriage of computers and communication by the early 1970s had
>countries and researchers around the world excited about the potential
>of computer networking.
>
>The ICCC'72 conference in Washington DC not only was the event
>that demonstrated packet switching would work to those who
>attended from around the world. The conference was also an
>interdisciplinary event with papers from researchers around the world.
>A number of those present realized that the significant developments
>in computers and in communications on their own would bring great change
>to the world. But the marriage of these developments would prove to be
>an especially important development.
>
>Among those at the conference, some predicted that computer networking
>developments would challenge government officials and all other
>institutions of society to make the promise they held possible.
>And they questioned whether the public would indeed benefit from
>these important developments or would only those already with the power
>benefit?
>
>Countries around the world were planning computer networks. Would
>it be possible to have these different networks interconnect?
>
>After the 1972 conference, Bob Kahn, was among those researchers
>thinking about the problem of interconnecting computer networks or
>the Multiple Networking problem that it was then called. Working with
>Vint Cerf, they took on to propose a philosophy and a design for a
>way to solve the problem of linking up diverse packet switching
>networks, without interferring with the technology of those networks.
>The philosophy was open architecture.
>
>Working to create a protocol that would make an Internet
>possible, Kahn and Cerf drafted their paper describing a new
>protocol for Internetworking, for the creation of a protocol that
>would be called Transport Control Protocol, or TCP (and evenually
>TCP/IP). The ideas for the new protocol were presented at a meeting
>in Sussex England to a group of researchers working on networking
>problems in Fall of 1973. And their paper describing TCP was
>published in May 1974.
>
>Kahn went ahead and created an internetting project at IPTO,
>by exploring how to link up a ground packet radio network and
>a satellite packet switching network with the ARPANET so they
>could all share resources.
>
>By 1975 he had connected them in a way to know that they would
>work, and by 1977 IPTO conducted a demonstrations of the TCP
>implementations that had been developed and a demonstration
>of internetworking showed it was possible to send packets
>to Great Britain and Norway and back to the US using the ground
>packet radio network, the satellite packet switching network and
>the ARPANET.
>
>By January 1983 there was a cutover to TCP/IP on the ARPANET. Actually
>the cutover took a bit of time to carry out, but by October 1983
>it was possible to split the ARPANET, into the MILNET and the ARPANET
>networks and to have communication made possible across this
>early internet.
>
>Also by 1983 there had been a linking up of the ARPANET mailing
>lists with some Usenet newsgroups.
>
>In the mid 1980s there were Unix user groups around Europe
>using UUCP and Usenet to explore email and online discussions.
>
>And the Internet began to make communication possible among
>these diverse networks of users.
>
>By 1992 there were users around the world connecting to the
>Internet. And online research exploring the experiences of
>those users showed that a new social form was emerging online,
>the social form of the Netizen. That there were people who
>participated in the resource sharing that the Internet made
>possible, and they were finding that there was a vibrant and
>exciting new online community that was being developed. And
>they took on to make this new online means of communication
>available to others so they could benefit and contribute to it.
>
>Much has happened in the past 8 years, much that has spread
>this new medium of global communication around the world, and
>much that has shown that the new medium has some who don't
>understand its nature or the vision that has given it birth.
>There are some who are out to try to limit who benefits to
>those who feel that their money or power should give them
>special privileges to determine what the future of the Internet
>will be. But there are also those who are trying to carrying
>out the original vision of pioneers like JCR Licklider and Robert
>Taylor that access to the Internet should be a right for all
>not a privilege for the few.
>
>A contest is being waged. A contest that is tugging at the
>essence of the Internet. One manifestation of the contest has
>been the efforts by the U.S. government to try to turn over
>the publicly developed and important essential functions of
>the Internet like its protocol creation and development process,
>its domain name and numbering system and its root server system
>to a private corporation that has been created by the U.S.
>government. This would take away the public protection that
>is so important for these essential functions that can give
>controlling power over the Internet to those who are able to
>control this private corporation. And as one would expect there
>is a fierce battle on trying to seize such power by those who
>feel their gain is more important than the health and well
>being of the Internet and the global community it has created.
>
>There have been other contests in the developing life of the
>Internet. Some of these contests included the passage by
>the U.S. Congress of the Communications Decency Act (CDA)
>which would have limited the right of people to the global
>communication that the Internet makes possible under the
>guise that adults are to be limited to what might be appropriate
>to children. Online discussion and protest along with a lawsuit
>led to a court decision overturning the CDA and affirming the
>right of people online to participate in the global conversation
>that is so precious and that the Internet has brought into the
>world.
>
>There are many other examples of challenges to the Internet that
>have developed and many other examples of how those online who
>recognized the importance of the Internet and the communication
>it makes possible have been able to take on the challenges so
>that the Internet could continue to grow and flourish.
>
>What will be the future for the Internet and for the Netizen
>in this new millennium?
>
>The Internet and the Netizen are indeed some of what is
>important that has been developed over the past few decades
>that are prologue to the upcoming new millennium.
>
>What will the new millennium bring? How will the contest continue
>to unfold?
>
>A herald of the future is a conference I was invited to in
>Tampere, Finland in early December. The conference was on the
>topic of the role of the citizen in the coming new millennium.
>It was called citizen2000 and was sponsored by the European
>Union. (http://www.citizen2000.net) The seminar I was invited
>to participate in explored how the Internet can make possible
>new means of participation in the affairs of government for
>the citizen. The researchers who made presentations all were
>exploring what was actually possible with the new medium, and
>what were the benefits and the problems.
>
>If the Internet is to grow and flourish there may well be a
>necessity to explore how to increase the role of citizens in
>determining what will be the role that government will play
>in the future development of the Internet.
>
>It was quite special to see this research issue being recognized
>as important and explored at the citizen2000 conference in Finland.
>
>Below is the description of the seminar that was held in Tampere,
>Finland in early December.
>
>I wonder what others thoughts are as we enter this new millennium
>with respect to the important developments we are bringing with
>us from the past millennium and the challenges we will face in the
>next.
>
>Ronda
>
>Following is the description of the seminar held as part of the
>EU Citizens' Agenda NGO-forum 2000 in Finland, December 4th.
>
> E3. Civic Participation, Virtual Democracy and the Net
>
> What are the possibilities for more intensive democracy and
> participation while utilising internet and other new technologies? How
> can the internet facilitate local democracy? Finnish NGOs,
> Tampere-foorumi, Tampere Technology Centre
> Tampere Hall, VIP-room
> Languages: English
>
> A Digital Neighbourhood? The Vision of the Netizens? Public Sphere? If
> you are anxious to know more about these issues, take a closer view of
> the thematical seminar 'Civic Participation, Virtual Democracy and the
> Net'.
>
> In this seminar the matter in hand is the social impact of the so
> called information society. We will bring up for example the question
> of how one can encourage civic participation and create an active net
> community. We will also discuss the practices of virtual democracy and
> the problem of access.
>
> The seminar includes seven presentations and a panel discussion. In
> addition, there will be an interactive exhibition - a place where
> different kinds of net projects give food for thought.
>
> Speakers and their subjects
>
> Myrna J. Alejo:
> Information Technology and the Production of Democratic Ethos: the
> Philippine Case
> - How the uneven penetration of information technology affects the
> nature of "public sphere" in the Philippines; and how the philippine
> civil society is dealing with the problem of access.
>
> Ronda Hauben:
> Is the Internet a Laboratory for Democracy? The Vision of the Netizens
> vrs The E-Commerce Agenda
> - Why it is important for Netizens to participate in the contest being
> waged (as for instance: ICANN) over which strata of society will gain
> the benefit of the Internet and how the Internet provides the means
> for such participation.
>
> Steven Lenos:
> Networking for democracy: the digital future?
> - How organisations can use the Internet for (international)
> networking and how they are able to organise succesfull digital public
> debats.
>
> Jari Sepp
> Net participation - what can the City offer?
>
> - 10 years experience of work as a news repotrer in local newspapers
> and national tv-news
>
> - 12 years Head of Information of the City of Tampere, Finland
>
> He has acted as the chairman for two committees founded by the
> Association of Finnish Local Authorities, one creating the good
> practise for municipal information and the other one guidelines for
> municipal services presented over the Internet.
>
> In his presentation he will introduce some practical examples how the
> City of Tampere has developed civic participation via the Internet. We
> will hear how the Internet enables plan presentation, dialogue and
> lobbying, combined into the visual and functional opportunities
> provided by new media.
>
> Aija Staffans:
> Netted but not trapped. Local stakeholders on a digital neighbourhood
> forum constructing urban knowledge and planning
>
> - The main issue is whether a digital neighbourhood forum is able to
> bring together the municipality and local stakeholders (like
> inhabitants, citizen organizations, schools, kindergardens,
> shopkeepers etc.) in order to develop urban environment
>
> Lasse Peltonen & Seija Ridell:
> Citizen forums, virtual publicness and practices of local democracy:
> - The case of Tampere-foorumi (Lasse Peltonen)
> - Tampere-foorumi on the net (Seija Ridell)
> - The main issue is to describe the attempts, achievements and
> obstacles met by one local civic group in organizing opportunities for
> public interaction and dialogue - both in 'real life' and on the net -
> between city officials, politicians, economic actors and ordinary
> citizens.
>
> Civic Participation, Virtual Democracy and the Net
>
>
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm starting to notice that the only people who trust lawyers
are other lawyers. - John Berryhill PhD, JD.
