MARATHON DEMO RELEASED
Tuncer Deniz
download it and put it on the ftp sites?
Thanks,
Tuncer
Sean P Adams
> download it and put it on the ftp sites?
you have such power...such control.
Sean
Tuncer Deniz
Adams) wrote:
Yes, I am Lothar! Watch me as I bend this steel pipe! Look, I can run
faster than a train...I can post demos!
Whatever,
Tuncer
Steve Sullivan
>> I just posted the Marathon demo on AOL. Can someone on the net please
>> download it and put it on the ftp sites?
I wish I had thought of a better subject, but that will do. By "sucks" I
mean they are "bloodsuckers". All their AOL people take from usenet,
take from ftp sites, but what do they give back? Why should
administartors let aol people on their ftp sites, or pass their usenet
feeds to aol when aol does not do sh*t to give back? And WHY is aol the
first place that software is placed???? They leach resources from the
internet, do not give back, and then people still reward them. really
fricking pathetic.
When people bash aol and complain about its "newbies" who should be
kicked off the internet, I say YEAH RIGHT, they pay for their account and
have every right to be on the internet, even more right than people like
me who have our accounts subsidized by taxpayers. BUT when the aol (not
its members) acts the way it does, I have to wonder why people give to
aol when they are such big leaches.
Why should sites feed aol usenet? Why should sites allow aol on their
ftp sites?
Simon K Boocock
MARATHON D.. by Steve Sull...@mcl.ucsb.
> first place that software is placed???? They leach resources from the
> internet, do not give back, and then people still reward them. really
> fricking pathetic.
time for Turkey Day but:
Reality check -
The software vendors maintain a presence on aol.
The aol service is a commercial service.
The process works like this -
paying customers first, places where vendors *advertise* first.
AOL pays for its net access, so leeching from the net - no.
As for who gets what first - notice a few
hours past your message many ftp sites
on the net holding Marathon.
All due to volunteers. The net in action and all
that kind of stuff. Imagine without a subscription
or additional charges you get Marathon Demo, just a
little later.
A few hours difference in availability isn't killing me,
surely it isn't killing you.
MajorH1
Sullivan) writes:
<<All their AOL people take from usenet, take from ftp sites, but what do
they give back?>>
I am an AOL gateway user. I am also the designer of the Mac wargame
TacOps. I use the AOL gateway to answer game questions and to share
useful information about how to get more out of the TacOps game. With the
help of a more knowledgeable Internet user, I provide TacOps game updates
and patches to Internet ftp sites.
<<Why should sites feed aol usenet? Why should sites allow aol on their
ftp sites?>>
I suspect a good number of the files that are uploaded to ftp sites
originated from the massive public libraries found on AOL, CompuServe, and
the other national services. National service members with Internet
access pay to download files from the national services, and then they use
better Internet gates to pass them on to the ftp sites.
Geez ... cut back on the sugar and caffeine and try being a little more
tolerant.
Best regard, Major H.
Steve Sullivan
>Reality check -
>The software vendors maintain a presence on aol.
>The aol service is a commercial service.
>The process works like this -
>paying customers first, places where vendors *advertise* first.
>AOL pays for its net access, so leeching from the net - no.
Sorry, I dont need a reality check. That reality check is the reason AOL
sucks. And just because they pay for their service does not mean they
are not leeches. What you DONT UNDERSTAND is that your logic would
destroy the net. You say (in effect) "AOL pays for their service and is
a commercial provider, so why should they let non AOL people ftp from
their site, or feed other sites with usenet?"
When ALL "real" internet sites distribute info to each other, by letting
people on their ftp sites, by giving usenet feeds as well as taking them,
why should AOL be given feeds, be let on ftp sites, when they dont
reciprocate? You are so quick to say that AOL has a right to only serve
its members. But if you really believe this then you have conceded to
me. If aol only needs to serve its member why do ALL the other internet
sites have to serve AOL? Why do other internet sites have to give feeds
to AOL? AOL does not allow the internet to come onto their ftp, why
should the internet allow AOL onto their ftp sites?
AOL IS A LEECH. Just think how badly AOL would be if they were not
allowed on info-mac or its mirrors, or umich. If AOL could only use
AOL.
Your "AOL only needs to give to those who pay AOL" REALLY SUCKS!. This
is NOT how the internet works, and all I am suggesting is that other
sites make AOL realize the consequences of this by applying this to
them. AOL thinks they only need to provide for AOL, then all the sites
who are not paid by AOL should do likewise and not allow AOL on. AOL
does not pay stanford to use all the resources its members use, why
should stanford let them on?
Ken Lui
Steve Sullivan <usu...@mcl.ucsb.edu> wrote:
>When ALL "real" internet sites distribute info to each other, by letting
>people on their ftp sites, by giving usenet feeds as well as taking them,
>why should AOL be given feeds, be let on ftp sites, when they dont
>reciprocate?
There's no pre-requisite stating that a site or company that's on
the global Internet has to provide an anonymous FTP service.
Ken
--
Ken Lui, kl...@corp.hp.com 3000 Hanover Street MS 20CG
Palo Alto ITC Palo Alto, CA 94304-1112 USA
Datacomm Engineering 1.415.857.3230 FAX 1.415.857.5518
AFC Daniel
Sullivan) writes:
<<AOL IS A LEECH. Just think how badly AOL would be if they were not
allowed on info-mac or its mirrors, or umich. If AOL could only use
AOL.>>
About 1 million AOL subscribers would dissagree with your statements. So
would many more Compuserve and Prodigy subscribers.
By the way, AOL has just recently gotten FTP access. It didn't seem to
hurt them when they had no access at all.
Dan
Michael Wise
> AOL IS A LEECH. Just think how badly AOL would be if they were not
> allowed on info-mac or its mirrors, or umich. If AOL could only use
> AOL.
How bad would it be? AOL has much better/current Mac files than info-mac
does. AOL has gotten by just fine (file wise) without having preview ftp
access. In fact, as an AOL user, the only software I find on ftp sites
that I can't get off of AOL is up-to-date Internet software...which you
don't need with AOL anyway.
>AOL does not pay stanford to use all the resources its members
>use, why should stanford let them on?
I doubt your average AOL user could care less whether he/she has access to
Stanford or not. There is nothing (save Internet wares) on Stanford that
he/she can't find on AOL. And on AOL, it will be current and have a good
description of what it does.
Nathaniel Tagg
: I wish I had thought of a better subject, but that will do. By "sucks" I
: take from ftp sites, but what do they give back? Why should
: administartors let aol people on their ftp sites, or pass their usenet
: feeds to aol when aol does not do sh*t to give back? And WHY is aol the
: first place that software is placed???? They leach resources from the
: internet, do not give back, and then people still reward them. really
: fricking pathetic.
You answered your own concerns in almost the same breath. What
do AOL users take? They take stuff from the 'net. What do they give?
They give small buisnesses (i.e. Bungie, for instance) access to the 'net
so they can do things like put the Marathon demo in the public domain.
Of course it got on AOL first... but if AOL didn't have 'net
access, how long do you think it would take to perculate over? Forever.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nathaniel Tagg nt...@uoguelph.ca University of Guelph
"The chances of a neutrino actually hitting something as it
travels through all this howling emptiness are roughly comparable to that
of dropping a ball bearing at random from a cruising 747 and hitting,
say, an egg sandwich." -- Douglas Adams, _Mostly_Harmless_
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr God
: In article <3b15vp$8...@eis.calstate.edu>, sea...@eis.calstate.edu (Sean P
: Adams) wrote:
: > > I just posted the Marathon demo on AOL. Can someone on the net please
: > > download it and put it on the ftp sites?
: >
: > you have such power...such control.
Verily, he is...godlike!
: Yes, I am Lothar! Watch me as I bend this steel pipe! Look, I can run
: faster than a train...I can post demos!
Which brings me to ask...why is the hell, Tnucer, if you have the time
and $$$ to upload it to AOL didn't you take the time to UL to the Internet?
I don't get it. The boat left the dock and I wan't on board...explain it to
me.
: Whatever,
Yeah, whatever.
: Tuncer
Bruce
--
Bruce W. Anderson, sp...@bsu-cs.bsu.edu, pi...@free.org
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, |
| or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom |
| of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to |
| assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Steve Sullivan
>the global Internet has to provide an anonymous FTP service.
And when did I say their is? And since AOL does not give back to the
community why should the community give to AOL? Why should people
provide AOL with usenet feeds? Why should people allow AOL on ftp sites?
Several people are saying "we dont need the internet!!". But without the
internet giving you usenet feeds or allowing you on ftp sites, I think
you would have a different attitude.
Ken Lui
Steve Sullivan <usu...@mcl.ucsb.edu> wrote:
>>There's no pre-requisite stating that a site or company that's on
>>the global Internet has to provide an anonymous FTP service.
>And when did I say their is? And since AOL does not give back to the
>community why should the community give to AOL? Why should people
>provide AOL with usenet feeds? Why should people allow AOL on ftp sites?
Then what's the problem? When somebody provides others an
anonymous ftp account or usenet feed, they're doing others a
favor. When I do somebody a favor, I don't expect anything in
return. If you have a problem with AOL's policy, then you should
talk to its management. Why not send some e-mail to ro...@aol.com
or postm...@aol.com? You should be glad AOL doesn't have a
policy such as ZiffNet where software on its systems can't be
posted to other systems.
Marc Nimchuk
: Verily, he is...godlike!
: : Whatever,
: Yeah, whatever.
: : Tuncer
Perhaps because he doesnt have an internet account? I was under the
impression you couldnt ftp from AOL...
Besides, what the hell does it matter?
Tuncer Deniz
> Tuncer Deniz (tun...@mcs.com) wrote:
> : In article <3b15vp$8...@eis.calstate.edu>, sea...@eis.calstate.edu (Sean P
> : Adams) wrote:
>
> : > > I just posted the Marathon demo on AOL. Can someone on the net please
> : > > download it and put it on the ftp sites?
> : >
> : > you have such power...such control.
>
> Verily, he is...godlike!
>
> : Yes, I am Lothar! Watch me as I bend this steel pipe! Look, I can run
> : faster than a train...I can post demos!
>
> Which brings me to ask...why is the hell, Tnucer, if you have the time
> and $$$ to upload it to AOL didn't you take the time to UL to the Internet?
>
> I don't get it. The boat left the dock and I wan't on board...explain it to
> me.
Actually, I asked someone here on the net to do it because they would have
done it much quicker than I. I had to get in on eWorld and CIS :-)
Tuncer
d...@geovax.ed.ac.uk
> Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.mac.games: 24-Nov-94 AOL SUCKS!! (was
> MARATHON D.. by Steve Sull...@mcl.ucsb.
>> And WHY is aol the
>> first place that software is placed???? They leach resources from the
>> internet, do not give back, and then people still reward them. really
>> fricking pathetic.
>
>
> The software vendors maintain a presence on aol.
>
Er, EXCUSE ME? AOL sure as hell doesn't pay everyone on the net for the burden
its users place on everyone else through FTP, USENET and so on... it may pay
someone to provide it with a physical access point, but it relies upon the fact
that it can charge over the top to suckers for information (AND SERVICES) which
AOL actually gets for FREE (their access and connection costs excepted).
If the net is such a wonderful, sharing place, why can't net members get access
to the files on AOL through FTP?? (for example??) Does AOL pay umich for the
services it provides that AOL charges its members to access?
Not cynical, just observant...
Dave
Gayord
]]]Er, EXCUSE ME? AOL sure as hell doesn't pay everyone on the net for the
burden
its users place on everyone else through FTP, USENET and so on... it may
pay
someone to provide it with a physical access point, but it relies upon the
fact
that it can charge over the top to suckers for information (AND SERVICES)
which
AOL actually gets for FREE (their access and connection costs excepted).
If the net is such a wonderful, sharing place, why can't net members get
access
to the files on AOL through FTP?? (for example??) Does AOL pay umich for
the
services it provides that AOL charges its members to access?
Not cynical, just observant...
]]]Dave
Oh I see, and you are speciffically paying umich to use its services? How
about we all, everyone who pays taxes that is, is already paying for umich
as well as every single other edu user out there. if you want access to
AOL's superior files and vendor forums, its simple. Get an AOL account.
Otherwise quit your belly aching. No one owes you the Marathon demo the
moment is it uploaded.
Simon K Boocock
d...@geovax.ed.ac.uk
<sb...@andrew.cm
> u.edu> writes:
> > Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.mac.games: 24-Nov-94 AOL SUCKS!! (was
> > MARATHON D.. by Steve Sull...@mcl.ucsb.
> >> And WHY is aol the
> >> first place that software is placed???? They leach resources from the
> >> internet, do not give back, and then people still reward them. really
> >> fricking pathetic.
> >
> > Reality check -
> >
> > The software vendors maintain a presence on aol.
> >
> > AOL pays for its net access, so leeching from the net - no.
>
> Er, EXCUSE ME? AOL sure as hell doesn't pay everyone on the net for
the burden
> its users place on everyone else through FTP, USENET and so on
No more does AOL pay than does your institution. They certainly
do not get into the game of providing (limited) net access for free.
> ... it may pay
> someone to provide it with a physical access point, but it relies upon
the fact
> that it can charge over the top to suckers for information (AND
SERVICES) which
> AOL actually gets for FREE (their access and connection costs excepted).
Surcharges provide a means for AOL to recover on-going costs and
(god-forbid) make a profit. If there is any blood letting going on here
it is from the AOL members as they use these pay-to-use services.
Also, you agree that AOL does not get free access.
Only the AOL owners know for sure what the true cost for
such services are to AOL.
>
> If the net is such a wonderful, sharing place, why can't net members
get access
> to the files on AOL through FTP??
Because AOL is not an FTP internet site.
> (for example??) Does AOL pay umich for the
> services it provides that AOL charges its members to access?
for all the access it provides to its students/faculty?
>
> Not cynical, just observant...
> Dave
Here is an observation then, AOL didn't make the rules,
they are simply playing by them.
The points raised in this mini-debate clearly merit discussion,
more likely in the org.eff. heirarchy than here. The issues raised
are only to become more complex as the role of NSFNet changes in the US.
What do you propose? Should AOL pay a toll for each stop on the internet
its members use? What nightmarish future net would such a precendent set?
Simon K Boocock
MARATH.. by Steve Sull...@mcl.ucsb.
> >The software vendors maintain a presence on aol.
> >The aol service is a commercial service.
> >The process works like this -
> >paying customers first, places where vendors *advertise* first.
>
> >AOL pays for its net access, so leeching from the net - no.
>
> Sorry, I dont need a reality check.
> That reality check is the reason AOL
> sucks.
here defined as first look at new software?
> And just because they pay for their service does not mean they
> are not leeches. What you DONT UNDERSTAND is that your logic would
> destroy the net.
The future of the net as commercial sites increase in number is a
*valid* point for discussion, say in the org.eff groups. It is
sure to be a contentious area of continuing debate.
> You say (in effect) "AOL pays for their service and is
> a commercial provider, so why should they let non AOL people ftp from
> their site, or feed other sites with usenet?"
Indeed, why the hell should they let others download from AOL for free?
If they allow other non-paying customers to raid their libraries then
they swiftly go out of business. I am all in favor of low-cost/free
access by the public to the internet and its many free sites, AOL isn't
one of them.
Some people now choose AOL as a paying net access route for lack of a
better substitute.
AOL is not such an internet site, thus I have no problem with their
playing by different rules - consistent with their
mission as a profit making enterprise.
>
> When ALL "real" internet sites distribute info to each other,
There are some unreal internet sites? :-)
> by letting
> people on their ftp sites, by giving usenet feeds as well as taking them,
> why should AOL be given feeds, be let on ftp sites, when they dont
> reciprocate?
Few sites are fully open. The reasons for the lack of openness differ,
but are in my opinion related to the situation posed by AOL providing
gateways to the net for their members.
Consider the situation of a university site such as yours or mine.
Many things are shown in the directories for typical .edu/.gov sites.
Not all may be dowmloaded or accessed.
To name one example site licensed software is
off-limits to those making anonymous ftp use of the site.
True Marathon Demo is not site-licensed, being freely distributable.
Nonetheless there is a parallel. The early availability of Marathon Demo
and various gateway accesses are services AOL's customers expect when
they pay the monthly fee and on-line charges. Likewise as a denizen of
an .edu net site you expect fast access to your site licensed software,
rapid updating of newsnet feeds, and *many* other benefits.
It bears pointing out, even if well established, that all the .edu sites
also pay for these benefits.
> You are so quick to say that AOL has a right to only serve
> its members.
Sorry, but I never said any such thing in the message from
which you took my quote.
You bring up a good point however, one with which I concur - if
the wording is restated thusly:
AOL's primary mission is to serve its paying customers.
AOL has a requirement to meet that mission, else it looses
customers $'s and goes out of business.
Today to help meet that goal AOL provides gateways to the net.
As for the early availability of software at AOL, take it up
with Bungie. As I stated before the value of this benefit is finite
and small. Marathon is available at many ftp sites as of yesterday -
the same day many downloaded the same from AOL. This undescores the
strength of the net even in the face of commercial "competition" or
the encroachment of commercial service providers. It seriously
invalidates any basis for your crying foul at AOL.
> But if you really believe this then you have conceded to
> me.
Conceded what? See above.
> If aol only needs to serve its member why do ALL the other internet
> sites have to serve AOL?
They don't - see above. Whether they do or not is up to them.
(Be careful - consider what such elitism leads towards).
> Why do other internet sites have to give feeds
> to AOL?
They don't - see above.
> AOL does not allow the internet to come onto their ftp, why
> should the internet allow AOL onto their ftp sites?
Apples and oranges.
>
> AOL IS A LEECH.
In your opinion, to which you are entitled however wrong this
position seems to me or anyone else (and vice-versa).
> Just think how badly AOL would be if they were not
> allowed on info-mac or its mirrors, or umich. If AOL could only use
> AOL.
So badly that they remained one of the primary service providers
for years before any question of AOL & the net arose.
>
> Your "AOL only needs to give to those who pay AOL" REALLY SUCKS!.
First, this is not what I said.
Second, AOL's primary mission is surely to serve its paying
customers.
Third, AOL does give you all those "newbies" you can rag on, so I
guess they do serve a purpose :-)
> This
> is NOT how the internet works, and all I am suggesting is that other
> sites make AOL realize the consequences of this by applying this to
> them.
If AOL becomes a full part of the internet, instead of simply
providing newsfeeds, posting priviliges, and ftp access for their
paying customers then sure AOL would do well then - and only then -
to keep a net presence such as a WWW site.
Probably ending with a forms based invitation to subscribe.
As far as I am concerned AOL is not part of the internet
as you and I see it on a day to day basis, it provides
its subscribers with a view onto the net and mailing access.
The only other implication in the above is that a use-fee be
applied to AOL and others. Again a valid point of discussion
bur better placed elsewhere than c.s.m.games.
> AOL thinks they only need to provide for AOL
AOL is in business to satisfy their members.
> then all the sites
> who are not paid by AOL should do likewise and not allow AOL on.
> AOL
> does not pay stanford to use all the resources its members use, why
> should stanford let them on?
Dangerous logic. I read this to mean the following:
Stanford does not pay Imperial College directly for access to its site,
why should ic.ac.uk let stanford roam their electronic corridors.
I know you didn't mean such a thing, yet that is a logical extension
of the same position.
Furthermore, neither AOL, nor CMU et al have full access to Stanford's
complete resources, only those which Stanford chooses to allow - nor as
described above is it reasonable to expect such access.
I invite you to take this discussion from c.s.m.games
and into direct e-mail.
----------------
Or we can agree to disagree.
Hope you have found and obtained Marathon from one of
the volunteer sites by now.
Steve Sullivan
>>And when did I say their is? And since AOL does not give back to the
>>community why should the community give to AOL? Why should people
>>provide AOL with usenet feeds? Why should people allow AOL on ftp sites?
>Then what's the problem? When somebody provides others an
>anonymous ftp account or usenet feed, they're doing others a
>favor. When I do somebody a favor, I don't expect anything in
>return. If you have a problem with AOL's policy, then you should
>talk to its management. Why not send some e-mail to ro...@aol.com
>or postm...@aol.com? You should be glad AOL doesn't have a
>policy such as ZiffNet where software on its systems can't be
>posted to other systems.
Aol COULD NOT say that software cant be posted on other system. Ziffnet
ONLY can do this because the software is THEIRS. They PAY to have the
software created FOR THEIR USERS and thus own the copyright. IF AOL
tried to do that on the software it has , WHICH is copyrighted to others,
they would find themselves in court SO QUICKLY. PLUS they would have to
pay a heck of alot of money to secure copyrights. How much is bungie
going to demand that their demo can ONLY reach those on AOL?
When you say people are doing AOL "a favor" you are being much to
cavalier. It is EXPECTED, that in general people return the favor.
Why? Because the internet would collapse without this. You tell me to
write AOL, but you still did not answer my question,
>>And since AOL does not give back to the
>>community why should the community give to AOL? Why should people
>>provide AOL with usenet feeds? Why should people allow AOL on ftp sites?
Why should sites provide this for AOL, when they are committing abuses
that would severely damage the internet if universalized?
AOL DEPENDS on this, yet they turn around and act greedy. And for those
that want to DEFEND AOL, how can you not also defend those that give it
feeds to NOT give it feeds? If every site on the internet marked all
usenet posts as NOT going to AOL, and did not allow aol posts on their
system, how would you AOL'ers like that? Only having posts from
compu$erve, the other commercial non internet sites, etc? You would not
be very happy would you? Yes, AOL has no obligation to let non AOL
people use their ftp, but this also means that the internet has NO
obligation to let AOL use their services. So why should AOL be given
usenet feeds from internet sites, or allowed on ftp sites?
Steve Sullivan
>Oh I see, and you are speciffically paying umich to use its services? How
>about we all, everyone who pays taxes that is, is already paying for umich
>as well as every single other edu user out there. if you want access to
>AOL's superior files and vendor forums, its simple. Get an AOL account.
>Otherwise quit your belly aching. No one owes you the Marathon demo the
>moment is it uploaded.
No, better yet, instead of getting a AOL account how about the internet
just blacklists AOL? You are right, AOL DOESNOT owe the internet
marathon, or any of its files. BUT the internet does not owe AOL usenet
either. How would you like it if your usenet just was of posts from AOL
people? If you could only access AOL's web page (when it comes that
is)?
The simple fact is that the internet shares resources with itself, AS
WELL AS WITH AOL. AOL DOES NOT share back. So what reason does the
internet have to share with AOL? We would not have to listen to you
AOL'ers whine or brag anymore. And you AOL'ers WOULD NOT have access to
the internet. You AOL'ers keep saying "you guys dont pay for an aol
account thus aol does not have to let you use aol's ftp". Yes that is
true. But that also applies to the internet providing AOL with web, with
usenet, with ftp, with EMAIL, etc. The internet is what it is because of
the sharing that goes on. AOL has TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THIS, profited by
this, and more importantly does not share back.
JoshuaDR
into another AOL-bashing session. I am so tired of hearing complaints
about the burden that AOL places on the Net through its very presense.
When will some people get it through their heads that not all of the
newbies from AOL are newbies?
AOL certainly owes no debt to the Net, nor does the Net owe anything to
AOL. No one pays info-mac or umich for FTP. The whole point of the
Internet is that ITS FREE!
J / ROTHMAN
Ken Lui
Steve Sullivan <usu...@mcl.ucsb.edu> wrote:
> You tell me to
>write AOL, but you still did not answer my question,
>>>And since AOL does not give back to the
>>>community why should the community give to AOL? Why should people
>>>provide AOL with usenet feeds? Why should people allow AOL on ftp sites?
Well, I can't answer your question because it's pretty much the
same as why should people contribute money to politicans so they
can be elected? Why should people give to charity?
>Why should sites provide this for AOL, when they are committing abuses
>that would severely damage the internet if universalized?
In your opinion, you say AOL is abusing the Internet. And yet,
you agreed that there is no specific rule stating an anonymous
ftp is required for a company on the net. What's the abuse
here?
> And for those
>that want to DEFEND AOL, how can you not also defend those that give it
>feeds to NOT give it feeds?
I never said people who choose not to give AOL a feed is bad.
I'm just saying there shouldn't be anything wrong with those who
give AOL a feed even though AOL choose not to provide an
anonymous ftp service.
> Yes, AOL has no obligation to let non AOL
>people use their ftp, but this also means that the internet has NO
>obligation to let AOL use their services. So why should AOL be given
>usenet feeds from internet sites, or allowed on ftp sites?
If you feel strongly about this issue, I suggest you do something
about it rather than complain about it here. Nothing will be done
unless you take it upon yourself to change it.
Steve Sullivan
>more likely in the org.eff. heirarchy than here. The issues raised
>are only to become more complex as the role of NSFNet changes in the US.
>What do you propose? Should AOL pay a toll for each stop on the internet
>its members use? What nightmarish future net would such a precendent set?
Look, I am the one who started this thread, and the reason I started it
is because the net IS SO GREAT BECAUSE people share. The .com's DONT say
"we are a for profit company, why should we let others onto our ftp site
or www site?" They simply do! If the internet followed the lead of the
GREEDY AOL, the internet would be RUINED.
So the answer to your above question is simple. Aol SHOULD NOT pay a
toll. Those services (email, usenet, ftp) are provided because the
internet is ABOUT SHARING. They should simply play by the rules. netcom
allows anonymous ftp, as do all the other commercial, .net, .edu internet
sites. And if you ask why site A should be allowed to ftp to site B, my
answer is as follows:
The internet is what it is because of its connectedness, because the
sites let other sites on. If I want to get a file from netcom.com, I
can. Netcom doesnt say "we are a pay for access company, if you want a
file you have to pay".
Steve Sullivan
>into another AOL-bashing session. I am so tired of hearing complaints
>about the burden that AOL places on the Net through its very presense.
From my first post this HAS been a AOL-bashing thread. IT HAS NOT been a
aol-member bashing thread tho.
>AOL certainly owes no debt to the Net, nor does the Net owe anything to
>AOL. No one pays info-mac or umich for FTP. The whole point of the
>Internet is that ITS FREE!
I do not agree with this. The internet IS MOST DEFINITELY not free. All
sites are expensive. WHAT DOES make the internet great is that sites SHARE.
The .com's DONT say "you have to be a netcom member to access our ftp, or
www sites". It would be very unfortunate if all the internet sites took
the same stance as AOL does.
The commercial sites on the internet share, because if they didnt the net
would be seriously damaged if all the sites acted like AOL does.
AOl should simple share like all the other internet sites do, even the
commercial ones.
Simon K Boocock
Steve Sull...@mcl.ucsb.
> >more likely in the org.eff. heirarchy than here. The issues raised
> >are only to become more complex as the role of NSFNet changes in the US.
> >What do you propose? Should AOL pay a toll for each stop on the internet
> >its members use? What nightmarish future net would such a precendent set?
>
> Look, I am the one who started this thread, and the reason I started it
> is because the net IS SO GREAT BECAUSE people share.
The point I was making is that this discussion has evolved beyond
the charter of comp.sys.mac.GAMES.
Jim Mork
customers. All for the price of a connection to Internet. That's what I
call a really leveraged investment. But it does undermine the basis of
Internet which is people putting resources online without asking for
compensation. Imagine if every node on Internet took the AOL/CIS/Delphi
approach. "We get what you have free, but we only give to those who pay".
AOL wouldnt be bothering with Internet in that case because its resources
would be prohibitively expensive, and AOL customers wouldnt be interested.
Kevin Benko
: Actually AOL resells the resources of Internet, at a profit, to AOL
Good point, there. But if an individual agrees to do business with a said
company, that individual is, in effect, casting a "vote" for that
company, and saying that the manner in which that company does business.
It took me several weeks of intense BBS scrounging to find an Internet
provider that I considered to be honorable and have enough integrity for
me to do business with.
The bottom line. If an individual thinks that their provider is a schmuck,
why are they still, in effect, telling them that their business practices
are OK by their choice to conduct business with them. Get out and hit the
local BBS scene for a few weeks, you will probably find some good advice
on the most honorable Internet provider in your local area.
--
-------------------------------------------------
<*> Topology-Guy [The-God-of-Mathematics] <*>
Sleep is nature's way of telling you to go to bed
-------------------------------------------------
Richard Daniel
[...]
: The simple fact is that the internet shares resources with itself, AS
: WELL AS WITH AOL. AOL DOES NOT share back...
I'm not a big fan of AOL, but this is simply not true. America Online
runs a Veronica server open to everyone for free. I haven't noticed one
at ucsb.edu.
--
Rich Daniel | "It was not called the Net of a Million Lies
rwda...@erinet.com | for nothing." -- _A Fire Upon the Deep_
Ian Shook
> Good point, there. But if an individual agrees to do business with a said
> company, that individual is, in effect, casting a "vote" for that
> company, and saying that the manner in which that company does business.
Well, let it then be said that I do not do business with AOL. BUT, this is
not necessarily a vote against AOL, at best it is an abstension. SO, for
all those others that would consider doing business with AOL just for
internet access......Forget it! AOL sucks. It charges you up the ying-yang,
and you needn't settle for that type of hiway robbery. As well, they have
no program of recipricol connection, and therefore are not supportive of
the "commerce of ideas," rather, they just charge for data and time. This
is an elitist act which attempts to keep the price of information high
without evaluating the information's worth in itself. This is the profit
yielded by so much data hiway advertising. Ever notice how vague, and
content free these ads are? Ever go to fedworld just to discover the layers
and layers of menu-levels to get to a document that tells you what 800
number to call to pay for the hardcopy via the government publisher?
Its a scam. The information revolution belongs to the educated elites, but
the typically less educated consumer is funding it one way or another.
Boycott AOL.
--
panop...@oubliette.com Ian Shook, Panopticon Investigative Services
co...@law3.law.ucla.edu
>and you needn't settle for that type of hiway robbery. As well, they have
>no program of recipricol connection, and therefore are not supportive of
>the "commerce of ideas," rather, they just charge for data and time. This
>is an elitist act which attempts to keep the price of information high
>without evaluating the information's worth in itself.
I have been watching this for a long time and I think its funny that you all
think AOL depends on the net. The net is merely an additional service for tis
users. I agree, for usenet access it is VERY expensive, and I would never
consider using it for that. But it has many other features, and among
comparable online services, it is the least expensive of all.
As for not reciprocating, there are plenty of .edu's that offer little to
nothing to the net. So do we start barring those institutions access to
Summex? As for AOL, most of what is on the net is already in AOL's online
libraries, much of it put there first. AOL may seem expensive to people
getting their access free at an .edu, and it may be expensive compared to some
local net providers, but for the person who wants the latest Mac news and
software, and wants occaisional access to some internet features, it is great.
Among the onlone services (I have tried GEnie, eWorld, Compuserve, and Prodigy)
I feel there is no contest which is best for my needs. Note that I am posting
from an .edu, and I still find that my AOL account is valuable, and not all
that expensive at $9.95 per month for the 5 hours I get, which is usually
enough.
If you don't like AOL, fine, great. But why this talk of boycotting? Because
they don't have an FTP site with tons of software? Or do you want to be able
to access all of their services for free? What is it exactly that would make
you people happy? I would love to know. What degree of 'giving back to the
net' would satisfy all the people who are so upset at this capitalistic
monolith that is AOL?
Mike
SpecularI
Shook) writes:
"Its a scam. The information revolution belongs to the educated elites,
but
the typically less educated consumer is funding it one way or another."
I suppose we should withhold great works of fiction, poetry, film,
theatre, art, music, technology and philosophy from the Mobs of stupid
people. (As if there was any qualified human being on the palent who could
make such a judgement about fellow their citizens... Big Brother perhaps?)
If you think the information revolution belongs to the educated elite, my
friend, then you are not part of the "educated." Elite, maybe, but who
gives a shit about being "elite?" 3 Billion people on the planet probalby
don't.
You sound like some of my worst nightmares from prep school.
Andrei
Larry Wink
> Well, let it then be said that I do not do business with AOL.
Oh, but you do. See information below.
> BUT, this is
> not necessarily a vote against AOL, at best it is an abstension. SO, for
> all those others that would consider doing business with AOL just for
> internet access......Forget it! AOL sucks. It charges you up the ying-yang,
> and you needn't settle for that type of hiway robbery. As well, they have
> no program of recipricol connection, and therefore are not supportive of
> the "commerce of ideas," rather, they just charge for data and time. This
> is an elitist act which attempts to keep the price of information high
> without evaluating the information's worth in itself. This is the profit
> yielded by so much data hiway advertising. Ever notice how vague, and
> content free these ads are? Ever go to fedworld just to discover the layers
> and layers of menu-levels to get to a document that tells you what 800
> number to call to pay for the hardcopy via the government publisher?
>
> Its a scam. The information revolution belongs to the educated elites, but
> the typically less educated consumer is funding it one way or another.
>
> Boycott AOL.
From the latest TidBits:
: America Online buys ANS -- In a distinct case of putting $35
: million of its money where its mouth has been, America Online
: today announced plans to purchase ANS (Advanced Network &
: Services), the company that has managed and operated the NSFnet
: Backbone Service since 1990. The ANS backbone network is among the
: largest and fastest public data networks, carrying daily traffic
: in excess of three billion packets over more than 12,000 miles of
: leased 45 Mbps (T-3) fiber-optic circuits. The acquisition of ANS
: follows on the heels of two other Internet-related acquisitions by
: AOL, BookLink Technologies and NaviSoft.
:
: AOL also announced a closer alliance with Sprint, the network
: provider that currently carries more than 80 percent of AOL's
: traffic. I wonder if the closer alliance might be related to the
: fact that ANS and Sprint compete directly in the Internet provider
: business. The ANS acquisition also raises the possibility that AOL
: might consider changing its name from America Online to AOL, since
: the addition of the ANS network could significantly improve world-
: wide access to AOL. [ACE]
So, if you want to boycott AOL, give up all access to the Internet.
--
Larry Wink <wi...@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu> or <larr...@aol.com>
"Naked in the Periwinkle."
Scott Herz
usu...@mcl.ucsb.edu writes:
>The commercial sites on the internet share, because if they didnt the
net
>would be seriously damaged if all the sites acted like AOL does.
>AOl should simple share like all the other internet sites do, even the
>commercial ones.
The commercial sites certainly don't "share" everything! They put up
only the information they want possible consumers of their products to
have. I don't see AT&T or Sprint giving away free long distance over the
net.
Do you think that if distance learning took off that an .edu site would
give its curriculum (their main asset) away to anyone,?! For free?! No
way!
AOL is a business. And as a business it will protect it's assets, mainly
the files and messages contained within AOL. If you wana bitch about
something, bitch about their high rates and slow downloads.
nuff said.
Jonathon Gregory
AOL aint fun when you just want to log on to send one little
email message and you can't get on because their network
is saturated with other users (no not a busy signal on the
phone line - I'm talking you make the modem connection but
then after thirty seconds of connect time you're dumped off!)
I bet it's all those people trying to download Marathon ! :(
(macgregory)