Source
Automatically imported from: http://commons.somewhere.com:80/rre/1994/some.excellent.rants.abo.html
Content
This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.
some excellent rants about universal access and television
```
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 1994 00:03:42 -0500
From: Automatic digest processor
There are 3 messages totalling 139 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Universal Access: E-d-u-p-a-g-e 08/04/94 (fwd) (2) 2. Restricted internet access?????
---
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 1994 13:15:46 -0700
From: "Arthur R. McGee"
>UNIVERSAL ACCESS COMPARED TO WHAT? > While the debate continues over what universal access to the >information superhighway actually means, Mitch Kapor reminds us, >"Meanwhile, 98% of U.S. households have TVs (only 93% have telephones) and >all those people in the 98% paid for their TVs -- television is important >enough that people go out and actually spend money on it." (Technology >Review August/September '94 p.42)
This is an EXCELLENT point by Mitch. I hate to say it, but in many ways I have to side with the conservative viewpoint on this issue.
As a so-called "ethnic minority" I often find myself somewhat ashamed of the value SOME people who share my culture place on luxury items, while giving low priority to things that will enrich them intellectually. How many times(Black people raise your hands because you know what I am talking about) have you gone over to a friends' or relatives' house, walked through the front door and nearly been crushed by the 99" television set in the living room?! :-( Yet when you bring up the subject of computers, whether they have one, or whether we should be celebrating the genius of Marc Hannah (Chief Scientist, Silicon Graphics and a Black man) instead of Michael "Duh" Jordan, you get a blank stare. Mind you, I'm flexible, so the above was just an example, but it applies to many types of technological issues and discussions that have been brought up.
It's not like these people are middle class either. We're talking everyone from po'(that's a special kind of poor that Black people experience. ;-D) to working class and a few lower middle class thrown in. Now here I am, sitting here with my circa 1970 TV in the living room, a VCR so old the remote control has a cord(!), and a complete stereo system that cost about $59 bucks from Service Merchandise. Yet I have the means to buy that new big screen from "The King", I could go to Circuit City and blow a few thousand on a stereo system, I could get that new 8 head VCR if I wanted it. Why don't I you ask? PRIORITIES dammit. Every dollar spent on those things is one less dollar going toward my education, one less dollar going towards my being able to purchase things(like that new 100MHz, 1GB HD... Let me stop, I'm getting too excited) that will actually empower me as an individual, instead of rot my mind with culturally imperialistic, western biased, sexist, racist, misogynistic, homophobic, etc., etc., etc., mass market drivel(whew!).
The point I am trying to make is that before we get TOO carried away with all of this "info-poor" business, we also need to factor in the realization that the issue isn't always an economic one, but one based on priorities. This of course applies equally to all segments of the population, but particularly disturbs me when I see those who really can't afford to ignore this stuff doing so.
Free your minds people, and your asses will follow, right down to that computer store.
---
Art McGee [amcgee@netcom.com]
---
---
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 1994 21:38:02 -0400
From: "David H. Rothman"
Art's right to feel grouchy about 99-inch television sets. Basics before luxuries, please. Too many people--Afro-Americans and whites alike, in my opinion--are TVcentric. But this TVC problem is far, far more than just the shortcomings of individuals.
The White House so far is among the worst sinners. I find it most telling that Al Gore held his grand NII conference in Hollywood, and that the entertainment biz is overrepresented on the NII Advisory Council while librarians are under-represented. With its TVC approach, the White House seems more eager to cater to Fortune 500 types and Americans' short-term wishes than to serve the long-range interest of the country. Note the "seems." I'd love to be shown wrong about Clinton-Gore (Tom Kalil Jock Gill, or Mike Nelson, are you lurking? I voted for Clinton-Gore. I'd like not to have to sit out '96. Please don't disappoint me.)
The best long-range solution is to drive down the cost of text- and net-friendly computers to the point where they're just too cheap not to own. We could do this through a focused procurement program for schools and libraries to justify private industry's R&D. And the same machines could be used to add new capabilities to TV sets, including smart electronic forms for commercial and government-related transactions--a means to justify the text-friendly machines, at both the national and individual levels. There is indeed a way to reconcile literacy with the wishes of the home shopping folks for commerce-oriented gadgetry.
But is the White House doing anything? As far as I know, zilch. Despite all the nice talk about digital libraries and support of communets and the rest, folks, we're essentially talking about TVcentrists.
I'd hope that the White House would show a little leadership here and change its apparent direction. Otherwise Al Gore's little neighbor girl--the regular in his grand NII speeches--will be too busy gawking at the Roseanne to dial up the Library of Congress.
Meanwhile, perhaps some voters are finally wising up. I find it most heartening that a TVC atrocity like Channel One is losing out in the schools, thanks to a rather useful campaign at the grassroots level. Maybe the same energy can be harnessed someday to hold Gore to his promises to help his neighbor girl.
-David Rothman For the latest TeleRead (185K), put your system in rothman@clark.net capture and type from the UNIX prompt: 703-370-6540(o)(h) finger rothman@clark.net. Copies also via e-mail.
> As a so-called "ethnic minority" I often find myself somewhat ashamed of > the value SOME people who share my culture place on luxury items, while > giving low priority to things that will enrich them intellectually. How > many times(Black people raise your hands because you know what I am > talking about) have you gone over to a friends' or relatives' house, > walked through the front door and nearly been crushed by the 99" > television set in the living room?!
[GREAT STUFF DELETED] > ----------------------------- > Art McGee [amcgee@netcom.com] > ----------------------------- >
---
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 1994 22:45:30 -0400
From: Dave Bachmann
> But, doesn't this mean that the freenet patrons are restricted to > e-mail only ? No Telnet, no gopher, no WWW/Mosaic, no FTP?
As long as they are first logging in to the freenet, and then telneting or gophering from there to the rest of the world, there is no problem. You don't count as an IP reseller unless you are passing through IP packets.
dave
---
End of COMMUNET Digest - 4 Aug 1994 to 5 Aug 1994
--- ```
This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.