The Amateur
Computerist
May 1 2003 Netizens: Then & Now Volume 11 No. 2
Table of Contents
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 1
J. C. R. Licklider to Michael Hauben. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 2
Netizenship Today: An Interview.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 3
Jr. GII Web Chat 1995. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 12
What It Means to be a Netizen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 17
Poem about poetry Forums.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 19
The E-DRUM: An Ode. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 20
Letter from the Poet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 23
In Memoriam: Akos Herman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 23
Review of Netizens.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 27
Letter to the Editor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 31
Netizens Then and Now. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 32
15 Years of the Amateur Computerist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 40
Communication Not Annihilation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 45
Introduction
This year, 2003, is the 10
th
anniversary of Michael Hauben’s posting
of his research paper “The Net and the Netizen.” Also, on May 1, 2003
Michael would have been 30 years old.
With the continued growth and spread of the Internet and of the
concept of the Netizen, it seems appropriate to look back and to reflect
on the impact that not only the Internet has had, but also, and perhaps as
importantly, that the emergence and consciousness of the Netizen has
had on our society.
This issue of the Amateur Computerist is a beginning of that project.
Webpage: http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/
Page 1
In exploring online, it soon becomes evident that the concept of the
Netizen has inspired many to actively work to make the online world a
better place. There’s been at least one art exhibit, an exhibit in Rome,
inspired by Netizens, and many other developments.
The literature of the art exhibit explains how the word was chosen
to support contributions to the Net. Also an act was introduced into the
U.S. Congress, called the “Netizens Protection Act” to deal with online
spamming.
There are many other uses, but another that is notable is an article
about those in China or who can post on Chinese online sites, who are
taking up the challenge of netizenship.
Michael would welcome these efforts just as, in 1992-1993 he
welcomed those who wrote him describing their efforts to contribute to
the growth and spread of the Internet as a public communications me-
dium. In honor of Michael’s life and work toward the development of
the Internet, and of the better world that the Internet can make possible,
we have put together this issue of the Amateur Computerist. We know
that Michael would be honored that others continue his efforts.
The netizens and the continuing development and application of the
concept of the netizen that we document in these pages, is indeed
something to celebrate.
Thank you dear Michael and thanks to all those who have taken up
the torch to carry it on.
Netizens: J. C. R. Licklider
to Michael Hauben
by William Stewart
[Editor’s Note: The following entry, “Netizens,” can be found on the informative
website http://www.livinginternet.com put up by William Stewart.]
Netizens: In April, 1968, Licklider and Robert Taylor published a
ground-breaking paper The Computer as a Communication Device in
Page 2
Science and Technology, portraying the forthcoming universal network
as more than a service to provide transmission of data, but also as a tool
whose value came from the generation of new information through
interaction with its users. In other words, the old golden rule applied to
an as yet unbuilt network world, where each netizen contributes more to
the virtual community than they receive, producing something more
powerful and useful than anyone could create by themself.
Michael Hauben, a widely read Internet pioneer, encountered this
spirit still going strong in his studies of online Internet communities in
the 1990's, leading to his coinage of the term “net citizen” or “netizen.”
Newcomers to the Internet usually experience the same benefit of
participating in a larger virtual world, and adopt the spirit of the netizen
as it is handed down the generations. It cannot be a coincidence that so
many Internet technologies are built specifically to leverage the power
of community information sharing, such as the Usenet, IRC, MUDs, and
mailing lists. The concept of the netizen is also the foundation for the
motivation of netiquette.
[
Netizenship Today: An Interview
Questions
by Daniela A Baszkiewicz-Scott
Responses
by Ronda Hauben
Question #1: Five years ago, you and Michael published Netizens, a
study of the history and prospects of communication on the Internet,
specifically through the most common and popular medium of Usenet.
The book added a new coinage to the English language and implied a
particular vision of where the net could carry us. What was that vision
then, and has your sense of it changed at all over the past decade, and if
so, how?
Page 3
Answer #1: While Netizens was indeed published in a hard copy
version in 1997, it was first put on line almost 10 years ago, in 1994. In
1992/1993, Michael did his research and posted the summary in his
article “The Net and the Netizen.” So actually Michael’s work discover-
ing net.citizens and then formulating the concept of netizen, is 10 years
ago this year.
What Michael’s research taught him, was that there were people
online who functioned as citizens of the Internet and Usenet. These were
people who participated in making the Internet something valuable to
people around the world. Among those who recognized the importance
of the Internet as a new communication medium, there was the special
concern to make low cost or free access available to all people who
wanted to be online. These were some of the characteristics that Michael
recognized of users who were acting as “netizens,” or as citizens of a
broader entity than a national geographic entity. Michael’s vision of the
potential of the Internet, and the vision of a number of the users who
wrote him, was of an online medium that would make it possible for
people to be able to participate in the decisions that affected their lives.
Michael wrote about this in his article “What the Net means to me” (See
1.articles/acn11-1.a13.txt)
What has happened in these 10 years?
There are others who are “netizens” in the finest tradition. They are
continuing to uphold this vision and to help it to become a reality.
The Internet is going through difficult times in terms of its promise
as a participatory global communication system available to all who
want access. The conception of the netizen, however, is very much alive
and is helpful in supporting those who continue to work toward this
goal. Searching online in a search engine under netizens turns up almost
100,000 entries. Michael noted that the netizen was someone who acted
as a citizen of the Internet. He also observed that there was another
usage that developed after he popularized the term. This second usage
refers to any net user as a netizen. There are dictionaries that recognize
this distinction, for example, the Oxford English Dictionary. It defines
a netizen as a participant in the online community. Other sources like the
Glossary of Internet Terms describes a netizen as: “Derived from the
Page 4
term citizen, referring to a citizen of the Internet, or someone who uses
networked resources. The term connotes civic responsibility and
participation.” (http://www.matisse.net/files/glossary.html#N)
Still others like the Polish researcher Lesek Jesien examine the
essence of the citizen as the ability to participate in the processes of
governance. The netizen provides Jesien a model to be investigated. (See
for example “The 1996 IGC: European Citizenship Reconsidered.”
“Instituets fur den Donauraum und Mitteleuropa,” March 1997, p. 2.)
Michael spoke about the importance of everyone being able to be
online, as part of the vision of the netizen. Also, he noted the need for
people to have the time in their lives to be able to participate in the
affairs of the Internet’s development. How this can happen, only the
future will tell. A possible model exists in the U.S. This is the process
set up for citizens to have time in their lives to serve on juries. When
citizens are called for jury duty, they are paid by their employer or given
some reimbursement by government for the day. This is a model to
consider when looking at what will be needed for netizens to be able to
participate actively in the Internet’s development.
In these past 10 years, the concept of netizen has been embraced by
many people around the world. In our book Netizens: On the History
and Impact of Usenet and the Internet Michael wrote several chapters
looking at various developments. One chapter is chapter 13, about the
press, another is chapter 14 about the U.S. government policy advisory
online conference held in 1994. In his article on the development of the
press, Michael noted that the netizen as a citizen reporter will greatly
enrich the news that is available to the public. (See “The Effect of the
Net on the Professional News Media: The Usenet News Collective and
Man-Computer News Symbiosis”)
While Michael documents instances of this in his chapter on the
press, there continue to be many other instances. More recently, for
example, on February 8, 2003, the New York Times News of the Week
in Review section printed a transcript of an online discussion of people
monitoring the reentry of the Columbia shuttle back into the earth’s
atmosphere. They document their observations of its breakup as it
entered the earth’s atmosphere.
What progress has these 10 years brought for the Internet as a
Page 5
participatory communication medium? Many people around the world
try to utilize the Internet to influence their governments on a wide range
of issues from local housing concerns to broader efforts to prevent or
stop war. The concept and vision of the netizen is developing broadly
and widely, though it is not always visible. There are, however, rare
times, like the February 15, 2003 anti-war demonstrations around the
world, which were possible because they could be coordinated and
supported by citizens utilizing the Internet. Citizens could work together
to communicate with each other and their government to oppose a war
being waged against the people of Iraq.
The vision that Michael documented was of the Internet as a
platform for democracy, or as a laboratory for democracy. The Internet
provides the medium needed, and the netizens are the researchers who
explore how this medium can be helpful. I was invited to a seminar in
Finland in December 1999. This seminar was part of a European Union
sponsored conference exploring the ability of citizens to influence the
decisions made by their governments. There was general dismay at the
conference about the inability of most citizens to have an impact on
government decisions. The seminar I participated in explored whether
the Internet could make such participation possible. A journalism
researcher from Finland told of the frustrations of Finnish citizens in
trying to get their local government representatives to listen to their
views. She proposed that it was important for citizens to document their
efforts to influence their representatives before they could expect to
succeed. Her research was part of a process of exploring the barriers for
citizens to achieve this goal. To have such research ongoing and pre-
sented at a conference was an important advance. Also a government
official at the seminar responded that after representatives are elected
they feel it is appropriate to act according to their own judgement. They
are not required to listen to their constituents.
The EU Conference was held on December 2, 1999, just days after
the protests in Seattle (in November 1999) in opposition to the World
Trade Organization (WTO). Some of those attending the European
Union (EU) conference in Finland had come from Seattle. They were
excited by the breathe and diversity of those protesting in Seattle.
Michael’s research, done over 10 years ago this year, has set a basis
Page 6
for continuing research on the impact of the Internet, not only on its own
development, but also on the development of the larger society.
It will be good to see this research continued and enriched.
Question #2: Certainly, one of the things that has changed has been the
makeup of the populace of the Internet. Alongside the old elites and
normal, peaceful people, a vaster public of less clear ideals and
commitments, even including a significant number of hooligans and
sociopaths, has appeared. With such a public, can one still dream of a
magical civil society for which the net will be the “carrier” of democ-
racy?
Answer #2: This is an interesting question as it assumes that all those
who participated in the early development of the Internet were “elites.”
This is not accurate. From the early development of the Internet and
Usenet there were people who explored how to support collaborative
activities and communication versus those who wanted the Internet and
Usenet to serve their narrower purposes. Also, contrary to all the myths
of the Internet developing apart from government and government
regulation, the Internet was nourished by the early forms of government
regulation that functioned to protect it. The Internet was born as a
government project under the leadership of the Information Processing
Techniques Office (IPTO), an office within government. Through much
of its 30 year development, there was an Acceptable Use Policy (AUP)
that specified that the use of the system should be one with public
purposes and forbid self serving purposes. Similarly, Usenet had a
mechanism for system administrators to hold users responsible for
following certain standards of behavior. Those users who violated these
standards were limited or deprived of access to Usenet.
The current period is not the first time that there are users who
abuse the Internet and other users. Governments like that of the U.S.,
however, have ceased to provide citizens and netizens with protection
from those who are abusive.
There are counter efforts ongoing as well, however. How this will
develop, time will show. But there is much to learn from the early
development of the Internet and the role played by government and
Page 7
online administrators to encourage constructive activity by users.
Question #3: There would seem to be other potential challenges to
direct democracy and human rights today, but there is one of particular
relevance to the net and to Europe, which has been a subject of
particular interest to you in your recent study of the internet, namely,
that of language barriers. These barriers appear capable of dividing
united and still uniting Europe into a society of e-aristocrats and
e-outcasts, since, through no fault of their own, some peoples were long
cut off from the language which is now emerging as the universal
e-language: English. Can an individual learning English as a new
language, or for whom English is a “distant second” language have the
opportunity of truly free expression, at the same time as the European
Union becomes a single society with a common bureaucracy, official-
dom, and system of government which will need to be controlled by its
citizens?
Answer #3: This question has two parts.
The first refers to the development of English as a standard
language online. There are, indeed, many people around the world who
use the Internet, but who don’t speak or write English. English is clearly
not a common language at present, though it is used sometimes to try to
make communication possible among those with different languages.
A common language allows people from different countries to
communicate. However, this is a burden on those who don’t know this
language.
Rather than a common language, there are translation programs
online. One can put text into these programs and learn some of what is
being said in different languages. While these programs are still prim-
itive they are being used by people to communicate with others who
speak different languages. Also there are certain words that have
developed as part of the Internet’s development, like the word netizen,
which are being adopted as a common vocabulary in countries around
the world.
These are merely beginning steps toward trying to make communi-
cation possible among people who have different native languages. On
Page 8
Usenet and the Internet, there are posts, mailing lists, web sites, and
Usenet newsgroups in many languages. This makes it possible for
people to participate in the languages that are their own first languages,
the languages they are most comfortable in.
The Internet is not only helping to spread the means for people to
communicate with those who speak other languages, but it is also
beginning to create some common terms used online. Most importantly,
however, it is spreading the desire for and the possibility of communica-
tion among people who speak many different languages.
The problem of making communication possible among people who
speak different languages is a very real problem. It will take the efforts
of many people to solve it. The Internet and netizens are contributing to
the effort to explore and solve this challenge.
The second part of the question is about how citizens will be able
to control governing institutions like the European Union. This is a
broader question which I will respond to as part of the promise of
e-democracy which you ask about in question 5.
Question #4: Another significant brake on e-democracy would appear
to be the uneven system treatment of freedom of expression in different
countries. In the United States and, more recently, Great Britain, a set of
civil liberties are in force, in which a particular emphasis is placed on
freedom of speech. However, in many countries of Western Europe and
Central Europe (now seeking membership in a united Europe) a person
can go to jail for opinions about a politician expressed on the net, since
harming the “good name” of the politician is punished by the criminal
code. In Poland, for example, “slandering” a politician is addressed not
by the civil courts, but by the prosecutor paid by the taxpayers. In this
way, free exercise electronic media can be treated as an instrument of
crime. What are your thoughts about this problem?
Answer #4: Will the internet and netizens be able to help netizens in
Poland fight these restrictions? This is a question to be explored. This is
needed for the further development of the Internet in general, and in
Poland, in particular.
Both the origins of the Internet and its continued development
Page 9
require the ability to freely discuss diverse views via a grassroots
connection of people. Michael documented this in chapter 2, and 7 of
Netizens. The U.S. government was trying to outlaw the freedom to
express one’s views on the Internet when the U.S. Congress passed the
Communications Decency Act, (CDA) in 1995-1996. There was much
protest online and offline against the law. This pressure was helpful in
setting a basis for the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court when they
voted that the CDA was unconstitutional in the Summer of 1996.
Those online, whether in the countries of East and Central Europe,
or in the countries around the world, value the Internet and the ability to
explore diverse viewpoints online.
It is a serious problem that in Poland a person can be tried for their
criticism of a politician. I would hope a way could be found to have an
online campaign against such laws as they not only harm people in the
present, but they will make it more difficult in the future to develop both
the technology and the social environment for the technology and the
people to flourish.
Perhaps the ability to publicize such problems via the Internet will
make it possible to change such laws, like the experience of the online
community in overturning the CDA.
Question #5: Do you expect the United States, as a country which at
least has the right of the citizen to free expression included in its
constitution, to move more quickly toward e-democracy than other parts
of the world as a result of technological progress, or do you see barriers
blocking a movement toward e-democracy here as well? To put it
differently, what conditions must be realized for society to move toward
the model of e-democracy that has been sketched out at various
international gatherings recently devoted to this subject?
Answer #5: There are a variety of e-democracy models, from putting
government administrative functions and services on the Internet to
cheapen the cost of government, to encouraging citizens to discuss
problems from a broad diversity of viewpoints in order to find the means
to solve them. Examples of the latter are included in the chapters in
Netizens on the online processes to involve citizens in policy discus-
Page 10
sions. (See chapters 11 and 14)
The 1999 European Union conference in Finland raised the question
of how citizens could have more say in the decisions of their govern-
ments. The researchers and other participants in one seminar descried
how citizens in many countries around the world faced this problem.
The U.S. is no exception. Despite the constitutional right to protest
government activity in the U.S., the city and federal government refused
to allow a march in New York City on February 15, 2003 to protest war
against Iraq. Also the police prevented massive numbers of people trying
to attend the legally sanctioned rally from being able to get to the rally.
What conditions are needed to make e-democracy a reality? People
need low cost or free access to the Internet. They need enough leisure
time or paid work time to participate in forums on public questions. For
example, in the U.S. citizens are paid by their employers to participate
in jury activity. A similar process is needed for citizens to have the time
and income to be able to participate more broadly in public affairs.
Another condition is the need to have this participation affect the
decisions made by government officials. If there is no sign that citizens’
efforts have any effect, then it appears fruitless to make the effort.
In a paper “The 1996 IGC: European Citizenship Reconsidered”
published in March 1997, Lesiek Jesien explored the views of a number
of political theorists to determine what is essential for citizenship. His
conclusion is that the ability of citizens to participate is critical.
Comparing the development of netizenship on the Internet and citizen-
ship, Jesien writes (Jesien, 15): “Almost in front of us, and almost
unnoticed the new kind of citizenship is evolving.... But using the
Internet today is a sign of belonging to the elite, to those who exchange
ideas, who participate in something important, in a common cause.
There is no question of governance there, nor the question of representa-
tion, but there is a full, ultimate and direct participation.... At the time
the European Union struggles to shape the European citizenship with
much effort and little success, the other citizenship – Netizenship –
emerges. The IGC negotiators and European political leaders should
perhaps look at this phenomenon with sympathy and attention.”
The ability of netizens to participate in the activities of the Internet
is a fruitful model for the future of citizenship around the world. The
Page 11
“netizen” online is the networking citizen who accepts the obligation to
contribute to the Internet’s development and to the direction of its future
growth. The Internet functions as a laboratory of democracy. It has done
this best, however, when there have been prohibitions against the abuse
of online processes, like the Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) that helped
to support constructive activity online from 1985-1995. There is a
continuing need to learn how to support and protect the online user and
the netizen, to make it possible to realize the potential for e-democracy
that the Internet provides.
Junior GII Discusses Netizens
Web-Chat With Michael Hauben
[Editor’s Note: In 1995, teenagers from around the world were invited to participate in
a debate and discussion regarding the potential of the GII (Global Information
Infrastructure). Michael was asked to attend an online session. Below is the log from
that web-chat.]
January 25, 1996
Michael Hauben: Ohaiyo Gozaimasu. :-) Sorry for the delay.
Junko: Hi, Michael! Nice to see you again!
Darren: Hi Michael! I’m Darren from Hawaii.
Michael: Hi Junko, how are you? Hello everyone else. Nice to meet
you.
Michael: Hello Darren, I am writing you from New York City.
Richard: I’m here. Sorry I’m late.
Sheila: Hi, Michael. My name’s Sheila.
Michael: Hello Sheila and Rich! Nice you could be here today.
Michael: It is interesting to see people are connecting from a wide
variety of places. I am at home on a computer newly connected via SLIP
to my University.
Michael: Someone asked before I connected what a Netizen is. That
is a good question.
Darren: Okay, we are connected from an Elem. school LAN with
frame relay access.
Page 12
Michael: wow – I prefer IRC to this. Anyways, I was saying that I
was doing research into how people used the Net, Internet, Usenet, etc.
Richard: Also, a question from the communications group: What do
you think about “Internet addiction?”
Michael: And people felt they were part of a global cooperative
community. Net.citizen was used in Usenet speak and this really
represented what people were telling me – they were really net citizen
– which Netizen captures.
Sheila: So what did you find in your research, Michael?
Darren: A question from the Communications group – Do you think
that a universal language is necessary for such netizenship?
Michael: To be a ‘Netizen’ is different from being a ‘citizen.’ This
is because to be on the Net is to be part of a global community. To be a
citizen restricts someone to a more local or geographic orientation.
Michael: About the Q of the need for a “universal” language. I do
not think that a universal language is necessary.
Darren: So the members of the JR. Summit are netizens? :-)
Michael: This is because the new global community is best made of
the particular contributions that each different language and culture can
contribute to the whole of the net culture.
Richard: Then what do you think is the solution to the language
barrier?
Darren: What do you think about control/censorship of material on
the ‘Net’ and about the CompuServe deal in Germany?
Michael: An example is a friend of mine who recently was quoted
in a German newspaper because of a Usenet post she made.
Michael: Her post described how she started to try and learn
different languages – German, Italian, Japanese, because of the
connections to people with other languages on Usenet.
Junko: Did she learn all of those?
Michael: About the Q about if Jr. Summit Participants are Netizens?
Please tell me. Netizens are people who make a contribution to the Net
and the development of the Net.
Michael: Netizens give to the Net, and receive back through the
contributions of others.
Michael: Junko, she has begun to learn parts of the languages. Not
Page 13
a 100% crash course, but a beginning that she will continue.
Michael: About the language question again – language is a difficult
thing, but people on-line try to help each other.
Junko: So to speak, the Net motivated her to start learning different
languages, right?
Junko: If you start living in the Net, you notice that a different style
of life exists.
Michael: In different newsgroups you will see people posting in
languages other than English, and sometimes others translate or the
original poster posts a translation.
Darren: I think we are netizens.
Darren: On our lists we try to solve problems of language, control,
and access
Michael: I am interested in hearing other people’s thoughts about
how to deal with the language difficulties too.
Michael: The connection between Netizen and the language
question is that Netizen is global and thus there is not the tie to the local
language and there is consideration of others in other places.
Richard: Some participants have suggested machine translation. Do
you think that will be an option in the near future?
Junko: Are those translation done on voluntary basis?
Michael: How are you trying to solve these problems or what has
been talked about so far about Language, control and access?
Darren: My sister found some web sites on electronic translators.
Michael: Junko, yes these messages are translated on a voluntary
basis.
Darren: The group was divided – half for universal lang. – half for
trans.
Michael: Automation of translation is a good thing to explore. I do
not know how good they are now though. If however they are like
interactive spell-checkers...
Darren: We were also divided on the issues of control – governmen-
tal or commercial/free market.
Michael: and if the person using these automated translation is also
a student of the language, then it can be an interactive speller where the
user can see about the translation.
Page 14
Michael: The question of commercial vs government access is
important. It is a very live question this moment in the U.S.A. It is one
of the topics that I try to cover with a co-author in a book that is online
called the Netizens netbook. The URL is http://www.co-
lumbia.edu/~hauben/ netbook/.
Richard: The European participants seem to favor government
regulation.
Michael: The history of the Net is important to examine to
understand how “Netizenship” or a cooperative community is possible.
Michael: It is possible to make voluntary contributions to a larger
group, if the person involved does not expect something to be given to
him or her because that person paid for access.
Rich: How do you instill that sense of “selflessness” that’s required
to expand the net?
Michael: Once access becomes “a service” as provided by the
market, there is little incentive to create original material or make a
contribution. Rather the service model builds expectations of receiving
something from others. This is different then a Netizen.
Michael: The Net should be like a utility – akin to postal/tele-
phone/water not a commercial process.
Richard: So it sounds like you favor govt. regulation to a certain
extent.
Darren: Our Think Quest project requires that we create new infor-
mation, not just links
Michael: Rich – that is a good question. The “selflessness” grew out
of the fact that technology required cooperation and helping each other
to succeed – for people to develop and further computing technologies;
like UNIX, timesharing, etc.
Darren: I have seen people share URLs, information, advice on the
‘Net.’
Michael: The public access (in the USA) of the ARPAnet and
Internet came with a public obligation of research and sharing in science
and other aspects. There was the government partnership with academia.
Richard: Do you think the current trend of net commercialization
will decrease or get “worse?”
Richard: And do you see any benefits to the commercialization of
Page 15
the net?
Michael: It is not that I necessarily favor regulation. It is that it is
important to have equal access available and provided by government.
The “market” would not make the Internet available in areas where it
could not make a profit. Well the Net would lose if all potential
contributors were not able to participate. Regulation does not mean
censorship, even if it is sometimes described as such. Rather regulation
means putting the public interest over the commercial or private interest.
The Net is a shared commons, which means it is important to make it
available to the many, and not grabable by the few.
Richard: The Rand Organization just completed a study on universal
E-mail access. I ordered it through their web at www.rand.org. It’s $20.
There’s a brief overview available for free.
Michael: Sheila, and others – do you have any thoughts about
Netizenship or commercialization or government supported access?
Richard: ...and I just figured out the trick to using web chat is to
write your message in a text editor and paste it into the web browser
instead of trying to play “beat the clock.”
Michael: Commercialization – is the old way trying to take the new
way and use it for the old. CompuServe is an example – which is not the
Internet or Usenet. It is important to struggle to keep this public channel
open for the whole public to use. This would be through non-commer-
cial development.
Richard: I posed the commercialization question to the lists and no
one seemed to think it was a bad thing. The education group favors
companies sponsoring online educational projects in return for advertis-
ing space.
Darren: I think that we will be Netizens
Michael: There have been previous communications channels that
had potential to give a voice to the many – which were taken over by
commercial interests trying to make money – and to some extent certain
governments do or do not allow this. (Examples of TV, radio, etc.)
Darren: And I think the government should provide access.
Michael: Rich – that is what I am doing. :) (text editor)
Richard: Do you think it would be possible in any way for busi-
nesses or governments to actually “take over” the Net? (This is an open
Page 16
question to all you quiet folks too.)
Michael: Advertising will (and is) polluting the online world. Those
with money will quickly take over the spaces that those without would
not be able to. And those thinking of money are not thinking about a
global cooperative community – they are thinking about themselves.
Junko: I’ll be really upset if commercial (ization) take(s) over the Net! It
should not happen.
Michael: There is a battle over the soul of the Net. However, this medium
(as opposed to TV, etc.) allows people to organize on-line and to come to grips
that there are others who feel the same way. If you look to Usenet groups,
mailing lists, web pages, etc. – you can see people organizing and trying to
understand how to join together to struggle for what they feel is right.
Michael: The question is to figure out how to contribute in this battle. I am
sorry, but I need to sign off now. However, I hope I was able to contribute to
help people to join in these discussions and trying to figure out what role
governments, people and companies and other organizations should be playing.
Darren: Maybe our peace game can deal with control of the net instead.
Junko: Thanks a lot, Michael.
Richard: Michael, I really appreciate you showing up today. Thank you
for coming.
Junko: You contributed a lot for us today!
Michael: By the way – my E-mail address if anyone is interested in talking
more is hauben@columbia.edu.
Darren: Bye Michael! Thank you!
Michael: Thank you. It was interesting to hear some of what the Jr.
Summit participants are discussing.
Michael: Bye Bye. :-)
Darren: Bye everyone!
What It Means To Be A Netizen In 2002
by Steve Hoff
[Editor’s Note: It is an important question to figure out what has
happened with our online world – for those of us who were here at least
10 years ago. We thank Steve Hoff for the following submission on this
Page 17
question. Interestingly, TCP/IP development actually began about 30
years ago, in 1973. So both the Internet and the netizen are still quite
young. It has been a hard period of growing.]
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:48:49 -0500
To Whom It May Concern,
The early adapters of the technology we call the “net” were, more
often than not, the renegades. The geeks, freaks, prophets and pharisees.
Those unafraid of new untested waters, as long as it was in the privacy
of their own homes. The net was an adventure, all at once vast and scary,
yet safe and personal. We harnessed our saddles onto an electron’s back
and zoomed across the globe. Each click of the mouse, held possibilities
never before dreamed. Suddenly the world was at our doorsteps and we
at theirs. We typed and chatted, discussed and cussed. Sometimes we
agreed, more often not. We snickered and scoffed at the strangeness we
found so far away and reflected upon the strangeness, not so far away.
Crackpots, kooks, fanatics and freaks...every last one of them, the nine
o’clock news dutifully warned us, repeatedly. We listened, repeatedly,
like teenagers to their parents. Usenet was king, Microsoft a rebel and
IBM a has been. Spam was packaged meat and I preferred my cookies
with milk thank you. Our biggest discussions? Frames or no frames,
reply with the whole text or only quote the relevant, pictures or text and
the evils of bandwidth waste.
We accelerated our understanding of the world around us and
shortened the distances between us. To be a netizen meant to take
personal responsibility for your actions and guide the “newbies” when
they floundered, just like we had. It meant to share what you had found
and to doubt what was shared. Though we had heard of Michelangelo
and understood the concept of a firewall, we never really bothered to use
one. Everyone knew the only way to get a virus was by trading floppies.
“DOOM” came on seven of them you know. “Duke Nuk’em” on fifteen.
It took me three weeks to write my auto dialer/uploaded script. My BBS
allowed for a five to one upload ratio, but it worked ( I think ). Much
easier to upload when I slept than pay the twenty dollars per ten hours
of net time they charged. Thank God I had found a cheap service.
There aren’t any “newbies” left to guide. I sort of miss them. I try
Page 18
to avoid sites that are across the globe, or rather I try to remain hidden
from them. The crackpots, kooks, fanatics and freaks have left the net
for the most part. A friend in Idaho told me they all went to Washington.
Usenet is still king, but no one talks there anymore. IBM is a rebel and
Microsoft...well, they’re just evil. Frames or no frames, Flash or HTML,
reply to be removed? ( even though we know not to reply ). I still hate
Spam, all kinds and I don’t do cookies, any kind. Bandwidth?
In the ten years past the world has grown smaller still, yet strangely more
distant. The net is less personal, but more invasive. The wires I plug into my
hyper-tweaked machines twice as thick, the connection one-hundred times
faster, and the content...well, I seem to have lost it under a pop-up. Amazingly,
violent games are still causing us all to degrade into an army of slathering
zombies with assault rifles, though I fear our freedom to corrupt ourselves with
these games may not last much longer. It took me three weeks to write my
firewall script. Much easier to block all traffic than to let in worms and
crackers. My firewall is secure ( I think), and my system is free of viruses ( I
think ). I could be prosecuted if I unknowingly transmit a vicious worm. Thank
God I found Linux.
Through all of our understanding we have gained, we haven’t really
grown that much. I don’t cuss and discuss with exotic people, they are all too
busy reading books. The net isn’t anonymous anymore, but the nine o’clock
news doesn’t tell us. I don’t think we would listen to them anyway. Our next
machines will protect our “digital rights” (my friend in Idaho was right I think),
and bring us closer together. Cell blocks are 8 x 10 right?
We have come a great distance in those ten years, some would say not far
enough, other’s too far.
Why Old Mores Are Not Relevant to
Internet Poetry Forums
by Peter Richards
You think that I got here by backing down?
You think you’ll find your voice by saving face?
We have no voices and there is no place
Page 19
or volume, here the listeners can drown
one input by selecting other sounds.
So by whose standards do we kneel, who says?
A busted maestro in a leaded case;
a jester buckling beneath a laurel crown.
I hate diplomacy. It creeps along
the veins of peace engendering mistrust
and fear of words, a province of the old
world. With pioneering courage, may the bold
young bard’s blade not be blooded yet, nor thrust,
but held out, open, to be run upon.
The E-Drum
by Niama Leslie Williams
I really don’t want to write this ode. Cause the brotha came to town
and didn’t like my s***. Mentioned me in his report, the element of his
list serv I most look forward to, but misspelled my name and grouped
me in with a bunch of other spoken worders who he said were “[not] as
bad as many I have heard at open mikes, and at the same time there was
no one who really, really knocked me out.”
So by all rights I should be in Louisiana with my never been South
ass lookin’ fo’ him. To do some damage. And I admit; it took some
emotional doings for me to get back to readin him. Emotional doings.
But like that step fellowship I belong to, I never really left.
Cause see, he done done what no other force on this planet has been
able to do. Let me talk to you for a moment about the L. A. Times. My
parents only knew daily and Sunday. Wasn’t nothin else happenin in my
house. After my daddy left, the habit still continue. We all three readers,
my brothers and I, cause every time we looked at our parents there nose
was stuck in a newspaper, a book, or a magazine.
There was also the element of escape. I mean, incest, divorce,
Page 20
physical abuse; that a lot of s*** to deal with on any average day. I dealt
by doing what my parents had done; picking up a book. And so words
have meant salvation to me. When I started dealing them, gathering
them up, tossing them, shelling them out for sometimes money, it was
no little thing I was doing. This was tradition, heritage; hell, my mother
one of the few people got Bernie Casey’s book of poems in her library,
and all three of us read it.
Look at the People; I never forgot the title or the cover. I still prefer
the cover of a hardback to a computer printout; there’s just something
so tactile, so permanent, about a book. But this man, this man’ list serv
has gently seduced me into putting down the newspaper. At a pivotal
time. A time when we cannot count on traditional news outlets to give
us the real story.
I don’t find Yasser Arafat’s words on why he will not cease the
Palestinian struggle in the L. A. Times. I do not find Michael Moore’s
delightful and terribly sarcastic essay on whiteness there. I did not read
the Afghani woman’s essay, sharply on the heels of 9/11, in its pages. I
read all of the above on my screen. On e-drum. For free.
www.topica.com/lists/e-drum. I am put in the midst of a jivin’ discus-
sion between Kevin Powell and Charlie Braxton, me, the budding Black
Studies scholar, by Kalamu, the humble, quiet, stealthy perpetrator of
neo-griot. I understand griot, even neo-griot, as literary terms. What
Kalamu does with them via his traveling computer and portable theory
on new media mystifies me. I know that he speaks to the young, puts the
tools, the power, the idea of expression, the idea of access to the tools of
expression, the responsibility of recording expression, in their hands,
cooks it into their brains. I think he has cooked mine also. Because I was
a woman of the page.
Only now do I look back on my life and understand that if not for
the funny papers and the TV Guide, I would have no subscription to the
newspaper. Those are the only two things that keep my hand in. I have
gone from a heritage of daily and Sunday to Sunday only, and saving
about four sections of that Sunday only, none of them the front page.
I have seven five-shelf bookshelves in my house, each packed to the
gills with books. Books are the first thing anyone who enters my
sanctum sanctorum notices. I want to someday have tomes with my own
Page 21
name on the spine.
But I have relinquished print for something else. I spurn four, five,
six and eleven for this strange new creature I do not fully understand. It
brings me Mardi Gras and festival in Brazil from the lips of a barely
twenty-something. It brings me calls for submissions that Poets and
Writers would never think to run. It brings me the pulse beat of life from
places I cannot yet afford to visit, connects me to writers and outlets that
even if I had a check to write, I could not afford the multiple subscrip-
tions.
All of this for free. This e-drum, this place, is a powerful tool
because it has helped me turn my back on a media that has been
co-opted, that does not tell the Blackman’s truth, or the Latino’s or the
Asian’s. Or the Afghani’s for that matter. It gives me something the
corporate media, for that is what they have become, no longer seems to
understand: balance, balanced reporting. I see, when I check it once a
week, 100 to 150 messages at a time, my own perspective reflected back
through someone else’s pen.
This is no small thing, this turning away from Channel 7, the one
station we always looked forward to growing up as children because it
came in the clearest. This turning away from my hometown paper. No
more will I scan its pages with love, reminiscing about Hipshot
Percussion, Gal Friday, Bert’s Beanerie. I will hand down to my
children printouts, and the occasional clipping of Boondocks, the only
strip that now brings a smile when I flip to the funny pages.
We are in an interesting time, a time of a closing of the borders.
They have not erected steel and fencing, but they have corralled those
suspected of murder and they commit civil injustices against them. We
live in perceived freedom. One day, some day soon, they will come for
us. We need to sound the drum, the e-drum. It is the only thing that can
get into all of our houses, the only thing that can cross all of our screens,
one of the few things that is still free.
Close the comic book. Discontinue the Wall Street Journal. Turn to
your screen; fight to keep it free; beat the tightened skin. The e-drum is
all we have left.
Page 22
Letter from the Poet
Dear Editor,
What a pleasure to receive your e-mail welcoming my work and
including the wise and powerful words of Floyd Hoke-Miller! Floyd
sounds indeed like someone I would have loved to have met. Thank you
for responding so heartily and caringly. I will try to squeeze into an
already packed schedule examining some back issues of The Amateur
Computerist, but if the amount of time it took to respond to your e-mail
is any indication, it may be Spring before I actually get to do so!!! :) Be
well.
Sincerely,
Niama Williams
Books Have Their Own Fate
In Memoriam of Dr. Akos R. Herman
by John Horvath
In late February 2002, Dr. Akos R. Herman, formerly the director
of the National Technical Information Centre and Library in Budapest
(OMIKK), died from cancer. Like so many needless and premature
deaths in this tiny Central European country, his case had been diag-
nosed as less severe than it actually was.
Yet the importance of Dr. Herman’s untimely death was not as
another shameful statistic of a country that has medical care and life
expectancy comparable to the advanced countries of the Third World.
Rather, he was yet another example of a legion of unknown pioneers
who describe themselves as a citizen of the Internet, or to use the late
Michael Hauben’s term, a “netizen,” that is, a net citizen. Unlike most
hailed as pioneers of the “information society,” Akos Herman wasn’t a
celebrity figure like Jon Postel, Tim Berners-Lee, or Richard Stallman.
Nor was his contribution of a technical nature. Yet his work was equally
Page 23
as important.
The OMIKK was a library that served the entire Hungarian
community and was traditionally in the forefront of progress. A state
owned institution founded in 1883, it was open to people and organ-
izations, including small and medium sized enterprises, both as a special
interest institution and as a public library in the fields of science,
technology and economy. The OMIKK was one of the biggest of its kind
in Hungary, with a holding of one million and a half books, serials and
other documents.
During the Cold War years, the OMIKK was the first public – and
for a long time the only – institution of its kind in the whole of the
Eastern Bloc which had subscriptions to western science and technology
databases. It had the biggest collection of CD-ROM databases (more
than one hundred) and the most subscriptions to journals – including
electronic ones – in Hungary (more than six thousand).
Unfortunately, like all public institutions around the world –
especially since the fall of communism and the advent of “freedom and
democracy” – the library soon came face to face with a funding crisis.
As Dr. Herman himself noted, “one element of the library crisis in the
whole world is that in the best cases, budgets are flat while there is the
more or less exponentially growing number of publications, the inflation
in prices making an ever growing tension. So we had a money shortage
for acquisition.”
This crisis permeated all public institutions, affecting even the very
core of the emerging “information society” in Hungary. The Hungarian
Computer and Automation Research Institute (SZTAKI), which was in
control of the information backbone within the country, had to come up
with innovative ideas and practices just to survive. It was not an easy
task.
Despite this uphill battle, Dr. Herman did his best to keep the
OMIKK alive. In doing so, he forged a relationship that attempted to
integrate “eastern” and “western” thought on the role of computer
mediated communications. In May of 1999, after searching for informa-
tion on the renown Hungarian mathematician John G. Kemeny, he found
the book “Netizens and the Wonderful World of the Net” that had been
put on-line in 1994, as well as an article by Ronda Hauben that
Page 24
mentioned Kemeny but only briefly. He subsequently wrote to her about
how not enough attention was properly given to the work of Kemeny.
She then forwarded this e-mail to her husband, Jay Hauben, who had
written a biography of Kemeny when he had died in 1990. He promptly
answered Herman with a copy of the biography. This exchange led to a
lasting personal and professional relationship between the Haubens and
Herman that helped open the door on research into the development of
science and technology during the Cold War era.
Dr. Herman was a pivotal figure of sorts in this area. He studied
engineering (the metallurgy of non-ferrous metals) in Moscow during
the mid 1950s, when science and technology became a focal point in
policy on both sides of the Iron Curtain. When asked why he thought
there was such public support for science, he said that people so hated
war that they wanted to support whatever gave a chance of helping to
prevent one from happening.
Akos Herman also proved to be a wealth of information on
numerous Hungarian scientists. In particular he emphasised the work of
Kemeny, better known as the co-inventor of the computer language
BASIC and of DTSS, a person he felt deserved more attention.
When Ronda and Jay Hauben went to Budapest and met Akos
Herman in 1999, she gave him a hard copy edition of her book on
Netizens. For many, it’s still hard to understand how, even in this day
and age, books that deal with science and technology are somewhat of
a rarity. During the communist era it was a question of political
correctness; in the present era of neo-liberalism, it’s a question of price.
As Dr. Herman related, “although it [the Netizens book] will be a very
useful book for our readers, we will not buy it. I had an exemplar
dedicated personally to me. I was afraid that not any other Hungarian
library will have this book. I decided one year ago, grudgingly, to give
my copy to the library.”
Concerning his views on the development of the Internet, Herman
agrees with Hauben that the ARPAnet and the so called poor man’s
ARPAnet were very early phases of the “Internet revolution.” However,
he credits the work that went on at MIT and Dartmouth with the first
time-sharing systems as the true beginning of the Internet, not to
mention the work of Baran at the Rand corporation.
Page 25
As for his views on the concept of netizens, Herman pointed out that
there is a long list of names of people who contributed to this concept.
Among them are the ideas of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, the Jesuit
philosopher who published nearly half a century ago in “The Vision of
the Past” (Harper & Row, New York, 1966), where he mentions the
“noosphere,” i.e. the man-made sphere on the globe. Then there is the
Hungarian biologist Vilmos Csßnyi and his work “Evolution Systems
and Society: A General Theory of Life, Mind, and Culture” (General
Evolution Research Group, Duke University Press, Durham, NC, 1989),
which concludes with the autogenesis of a global system based on new
technology. And finally there is the late Michael Hauben who first
coined the word “netizen,” who made a significant contribution to
exploring the technical and social roots and aspects of the Internet. In
many ways, the year 2001 marked a troubling time for the concept of
netizens. Most notably, the September 11
th
terrorist attacks in the U.S.
led to a severe crackdown in human rights and gave the green light to
law enforcement authorities around the world to monitor and even
curtail computer mediated communications. This has been a severe blow
to the free flow of – and access to – information, which lies at the heart
of the netizen concept, one in which it’s believed that the top-down
model of information distribution would be transcended, thus making it
harder for governments to manipulate public opinion.
Yet even prior to this, two events happened in late June in separate
parts of the world which likewise had a devastating effect, each in their
own different way. In Budapest, the OMIKK succumbed to its fate. The
Secretary of State for Education decided to put an end to the over
hundred year history of the library. Against the will of many thousands
of users, on June 30
th
the holdings of the OMIKK were transferred to the
Budapest Technical University. In effect, this move has made it more
difficult for the general public to gain access to the wealth of infor-
mation that was at the OMIKK. Meanwhile, in New York City, Michael
Hauben died tragically.
“Habent sua fata libelli,” a Latin phrase quoted in an obituary of
Michael Hauben, had a double meaning for Herman. “The books have
their own fate” refers to how a work can live through the centuries and
still, in the end, find its reader. Yet in this instance, it not only refers to
Page 26
the work, but also to the author.
In the end, yet another meaning was added to this Latin axiom: that
of the reader. The book he dedicated to the library was read over by him
and initially left at the distant left corner on his writing table. He thought
that it would be a good beginning for a new period of his life. Indeed, he
shared with his friends a long list of projects he was hoping to do now
that he was retired. “Habent sua fata libelli.”
Review of
NETIZENS: On the History
and Impact Of Usenet and the Internet
by Boldur Barbat
[Editor’s Note: The following review of Netizens appeared in Studies in Informatics
and Control Journal (SIC) December 1998 Volume 7 Number 4 (Bucharest). It is at
their website at the URL:
http://www.ici.ro/ici/revista/sic98_4/index.html. We found
it recently and feel it recognizes the connection between Netizens and cybernetics.]
Michael Hauben and Ronda Hauben
IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, 1997, XVI p. + 346 p.
ISBN 0-8186-7706-6
The book aims at presenting the development and significance of
the participatory global computer network evolving into “an ambitious
look at the social aspects of computer networking. It examines the
present and the turbulent future, and especially it explores the technical
and social roots of the Net.” The readership aimed at, is comprised not
only of those who are already Netizens but – maybe notably – of those
who strive towards getting this status, within the perspective of passing
from the latter condition to the former. So, before moving forward, let
us see where such a gratifying title comes from – according to Michael
Hauben: “My research demonstrated that there were people active as
members of the network, which the words net citizen do not precisely
represent. The word citizen suggests a geographic or national definition
Page 27
of social membership. The word Netizen reflects the non-geographically
based social membership. So I contracted net.citizen to Netizen.”
Anyhow, the book makes it evident that the word – as well as its
denotation and ramifications – are here to stay.
The volume is divided into four Parts; each part comprises between
three and six Chapters ordinarily consisting of articles written over a
four-year period (1993-1996) and set up to be read individually.
The first Part, The Present: What Has Been Created and How, has
four Chapters providing an introduction to the net world: the effect it has
on peoples lives (now, after the moment when the critical mass of people
and interests has been reached), Usenet (its evolution and goal as “poor
mans ARPAnet”), the social forces behind its development, and the
description of the Usenet (including the conceivable antithetical features
of structure anarchy and the system of rules known as “Netiquette”),
emphasising the advantages of this new world as well as the possibility
of a “more democratic government.”
The second Part, The Past: Where Has It All Come From, is the
largest one, being composed of six chapters, and starts with the “vision
of interactive computing and the future” originated by Licklider and
proceeds on describing the foundations of the cybernetic revolution,
time sharing, man-computer symbiosis and their implications. Chapter
7 looks “behind the Net,” introducing “the untold story of the ARPAnet
and computer science” highlighting the new way of viewing the
computer: a communication device rather than (only) an arithmetic one,
whereas the next Chapter is a comprehensive narrative of the birth and
development of the ARPAnet. The last two Chapters bring into focus the
early history and impact of Unix, and the roots of the “co-operative
online culture,” respectively. In one of its Appendices are listed two
Newsgroups appearing in Usenet in 1982.
The third Part, And the Future?, comprises five Chapters. In
Chapter 11, the National Telecommunications Information Administra-
tion virtual conference on the future of the Net (held in November 1994)
is described as a very significant event, attempting to create a prototype
for a democratic decision-making process. The next Chapter, with the
inciting title “Imminent Death of the Net Predicted!” – a phrase often
used in the past, by Usenet pioneers, when problems seemed insur-
Page 28
mountable – explains the new problems ensued by the envisaged
changes in the nature, ownership, and oversight of the Net, defending
the principles that place its development into the hands of the public,
educational, and scientific sectors of society (i.e. considering the
privatisation harmful). Chapter 13 investigates the effect of the Net on
the professional news media, under the metaphor of “Will this kill
that?”; its conclusion is rather optimistic: the user masses becoming
“netizen reporters” will force the acknowledged news media – to avoid
being increasingly marginalized – to evolve a new role, challenging the
premise that authoritative professional reporters (almost always biased,
consciously or not) are the only possible ones. Chapter 14 scrutinises the
effect of the Net upon the future of politics, forecasting the “ascendancy
of the Commons” by reason of the new technologies presenting “the
chance to overcome the obstacles preventing the implementation of
direct democracy.” The last Chapter of this part departing from the
changes on a world scale, explores the New York City’s online
community, showing a snapshot of “nyc.general,” and concluding that,
in spite of being problems online, the advantages are “more important
and outweigh the disadvantages.”
The fourth Part, Contributions Toward Developing a Theoretical
Framework, consists of three Chapters. Two of them address character-
istic areas: “The Expanding Commonwealth of Learning” and “‘Arte’:
An Economic Perspective,” respectively. As regards the first issue,
“making a contribution is an integral part of Netizen behavior” and
“both the printing revolution and the Net revolution have been a catalyst
for increased intellectual activity.” With respect to the second question,
after accentuating the role of “Arte” in the production of social wealth,
the authors defend Humes observation that “arte” leads to intellectual
ferment, and, in turn, this ferment “is the needed support for the devel-
opment of technology.” The last Chapter merges the consequences of the
former ones into a whole, synthesising them in its title – perhaps the
bannerol of the entire book: “The Computer as a Democratizer,” one
main idea being that the “step toward universally available and
affordable access” and “uncensored accessible press” demonstrate that
“it is now possible to meet more of Mills requirements for democracy.”
At the end, before the substantial and numerous references, the
Page 29
Glossary of Acronyms is, particularly for readers outside the American
cultural milieu, an invaluable asset.
Maybe, this condensed passing through the content can give you an
idea about this book, but it could be inconclusive, because the mesmeriz-
ing force is originated by – or, better, in – the multitude of quotations
from known, and mostly unknown, “co-authors,” the conventional ones
remaining in the background, as unpretentious editors, devoting them-
selves to the chore of task-building. Consequently, “Netizens” becomes
rather an aggregate of articles, than an orchestrated ensemble with its
unbroken composition and, in turn, the articles become a kind of
syncretic and chaotical, but very enthusiastic and, first of all, very fertile
opinion pool. Though, the whole might be seen in the optimistic view of
the Net, as well as the cyberspace it embodies, as a “meritocratic”
environment; the book suggests us a micro-snapshot of such an
ambience. The feeling – intended or not – is that the book has been
written by Netizens for themselves, as an entreaty, a summons to all
readers – whatever and where ever they are – to join them in the extra-
ordinary world they live in. Thus, the book employs, at its much smaller
scale, the “large-scale customization” made workable by the Internet it
fights for. By the way, have you seen many books with Foreword,
Preface and Introduction? Yes, the book is full of redundancy and
heterogeneity – just like the Net, just like life itself (fortunately, some
of the redundancies are quite pleasant, covering most crucial historical
moments of the marvelous phenomenon they depict). Reading it, you
will find a very rich authentication, a host of peoples with a lot of ideas,
comments, proposals and – sometimes – displeasure, rising their voices;
you will discover rather the atmosphere of a “multimodal chat” than that
of a conference with invited papers. So, if you imagined that you could
learn from this book about network programming, forget it. Yes, the
Internet is in there, but as an actor – in all interpretations of this
polysemantic word – not as a computerised tomography. Thus, paradox-
ically, the book is net-centred because it is human-centred, or, pure and
simple, human.
If you read it again – it is in no way a chore – and all seems all
right, nothing is amazing or frightening, then you are prepared for full
Netizenship (of course, you need a computer, too!). Moreover, from the
Page 30
wording as well as from some rare photographs, you may scent the
flavour of old battles (with legendary heroes like Wiener, Shannon,
McCarthy, Licklider, Thompson, Ritchie ...), fought for forwarding not
only the Net, but the Computer Science itself. Such a flavor acts in the
age of Netizens as a catalyst for the Information Technology. Thus, the
book can be seen – and used – as a kind of second-degree catalyst: the
written catalyst for the living one....
Letters to the Editor
From: Tetsuro KATO <katot[email protected]>
Subject: Re: global netizen college and link to netizens book?
The name of my homepage “Global Netizen College” comes from netizen
of course. My Japanese page is a bit famous personal academic site. “Netizen
College” (over 400,000 hits). In Japan, we use the word “netizen = network
citizen” very popularly, thus I named my site “Netizen College.” I of course
know the history of the word and Prof. Kumon’s book.
If you can understand Japanese language, please search the word
“Netizen” in Google. You will find 5,410 sites which uses the word Netizen.
Of course I am proud of the fact that my site is the number one site of those
“netizen” sites in Japan. (You will of course find 82,600 “netizen” sites in
English Google.)
Yours,
Prof. Tetsuro KATO
Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, Japan
From: Jay Machado <jay[email protected]>
Subject: please subscribe me to the Amateur Computerist.
I was the editor of an e-zine back in the mid 90's called Bits and Bytes
Online Edition: The Electronic Newsletter for Information Hunter-
stories/2002/07/31/bitsAndBytes.html. I was interested (still am) in the
Page 31
convergence between technology and society. Got a little bit of
attention; I was in the first edition or 2 of the Internet Yellow Pages, a
piece mistakenly attributed to me was published in a book called
“Internet Dreams,” I got a couple of job offers, briefly worked with
Christopher “Rageboy” Locke on a website for Internet World, blah blah
blah. Time passed, and here we are. I will be reading your back issues
over the weekend. Looks interesting though. These are critical times for
preserving the freedoms we dream of enjoying on the net, when the net
grows up. It’s actually looking pretty bleak to me, but we will do what
we can to keep the net fast, cheap, and out of control.
Jay Machado
this particular weblog:
http://radio.weblogs.com/ 0104156
Netizens Then and Now
Introduction
This year marks the 10 year anniversary of the introduction online
of Michael Hauben’s article “The Net and the Netizen.” In honor of this
anniversary it seems appropriate to look at how this concept has
inspired, described or promoted netizenship around the world in the
intervening years.
Search engines turn up almost 100,000 instances of the use of
Netizens. Individual searches combining different countries and
“netizens” such as “Netizens India” or “Netizens Korea,” turn up a large
number of hits in each individual country. I want to consider but a few
of the examples I found.
Examples
1) A paper written by Jane Long and Matthew Allen titled “Hacking
the Undernet” (The Australian Journal of Communication, vol 28 (3)
2001, pp 37-54) describes the process of privatization of the Internet as
one of invading it. They examine the concept of an online community.
Page 32
They recognize that the networking architecture, which sets a foundation
for the global commons is often hidden from most researchers who focus
only on the online conversation. Long and Allen object to this limiting
and characterize it as a “narrowing” of the meaning and character of the
concept of community. They write:
The narrowing of meaning and association of the term ‘commu-
nity’ was also influenced by a concurrent thread in Internet
research concerning Usenet newsgroups. As with initial forays
into Irc research, earlier ground-breaking research (principally
by Hauben & Hauben, 1997) into Usenet had identified the
totality of newsgroup users as a form of community, ‘a world
town meeting’ or ‘the Wonderful World of Usenet News.’ The
Haubens also, however, emphasized the technical architectures
through which the overall Usenet system was maintained.
Long and Allen point to other notions of community that narrow the
concept to those on a single newsgroup, or those who use the Internet to
support relationships among people which already exist. In this context
they critique the notion of the Internet as a frontier with settlers. They
write:
Many problems have been identified with the individualist,
libertarian, and colonising ideologies inherent in the frontier
myth (Barbrook & Cameron, 1995; see also Werry, 1999). An
additional concern, not normally considered, is that describing
cyberspace as a frontier ‘presumes’ the existence of the space
into which community developers and settlers, such as Howard
Rheingold, John Perry Barlow, Esther Dyson, George Gilder,
and the multitude of anonymous others, were to move. How-
ever, these self-styled settlers were preceded by another
community, or set of interlinked communities, comprising the
engineers and scientists, hackers and coders, system adminis-
trators (‘sysadmins’) and operators who – effectively – created
the virtual terrain later labeled ‘the frontier’. Some who utilise
the frontier mythology regard these creators as the ‘natives’ to
be colonised or even driven off the frontier (Werry, 1999), but
within the metaphor, that still leaves open (or, rather, hidden)
the identity of those who created the cyber-frontier in the first
Page 33
place.
2) An article in a South Korean newspaper (Digital Chosunilbo –
English Edition) on March 3, 2003 documented how the Internet was
making it possible for people to act as netizens. The Korean president
made a decision to support the U.S. war effort in Iraq. The newspaper
article reports that this decision “has stirred up a flurry of disputes
among the segments of society.”
The article then describes the role of the Internet in this dispute:
Much of the dispute is playing out on the Internet, where
tempers flared after President Roh’s televised address on
Thursday. A netizen with the ID of ‘small practice’ wrote on
the Web site Jinbonuri that ‘President Roh violated the
constitution by deciding to dispatch our troops to Iraq.’ He
created a petition, to which 150 people quickly added their
names.
The article continued quoting from another web site:
The Cheong Wa Dae Web site was swarming with thousands
of posts and e-mails criticizing the president’s decision. One
netizen said that the president had betrayed his people.... But
other voices supported Roh. A netizen with the ID ‘people’
wrote that ‘The war is abhorrent, but as an ally of the U.S., we
must not forget that 30,000 American soldiers are in Korea to
secure our nation.’
The article in a very small way documented online discussion
among Internet users in South Korea to discuss whether a policy of their
government was in the interests of the South Korean people.
The article only gave a few of the posts. The posts themselves,
however, are an important process that shows that governments are not
the same as the people of a country. Though the Internet now makes it
possible for governments to hear the views of their citizens on important
policy questions, most governments do not recognize the importance of
these voices. In general, they don’t try to hear from the people of the
country before undertaking actions that they claim are in the best
interests of their citizens.
The Internet and netizens are changing this terrain, however. It is
now possible for governments to support the creation of online processes
Page 34
where they can hear from their citizens and from netizens around the
world about the national and international response to their plans. That
is a more dynamic process than depending on the voices of a few to
determine the decisions that will affect the many.
3) Another article explored the importance of the concept of netizen
for the people of China. The paper by Jack Linchuan Qiu, about the
Internet and its role in China, describes a similar democratic vision for
the role of the Netizen in Chinese society. In his article, “Virtual
Censorship in China: Keeping the Gate Between Cyberspaces”
(International Journal of Communication Law and Policy – issue 4,
Winter 1999/2000), Qiu writes:
The Internet, as the means of online political communication
(OPC), is not only a stimulant of cross-border interactions but
also a tranquilizer of academic debates.... Some hold that
advanced technology tends to democratization, while others
contend it leads to demoralization.... Today’s new medium is
the Internet. It sets the academic agenda with its interactivity,
global accessibility, infinite channel capacity and other
pro-democracy properties. It engulfs the critics of technology,
whose voice nearly disappears.... (p. 1)
Qiu recognizes that the Internet is a platform for many different
activities. He defines netizens, however, as those who utilize the Internet
for online political communication. He writes:
Politics and ideological content is usually outnumbered by
discussions about technology, economy, entertainment, sports
and other topics. In this sense, only a small portion of China’s
4 million Internet users can be called “netizens,” defined as
those who engage in OPC. (pp. 9-10)
Qiu observes that there are netizens from within and outside of
China who interact. He writes:
A special group of netizens is the external users, who enter
China’s virtual territory from the outside, playing a key role in
linking China’s cyberspace with the global computer network.
Most of them surf domestic websites and exchange information
with others as ordinary users. (p. 10)
Among these users he reports that “some directly oppose the rule of
Page 35
the Chinese authorities distributing e-mails with overt anti-ccp content.”
The Chinese government web sites, Qiu reports, are not influential,
One reason he proposes is that they “lack interactivity.” He writes:
The websites are designed to facilitate one-way indoctrination
instead of OPC interactions. Seldom do they reflect nonofficial
opinions except when they are hacked. (p. 10)
Discussing the advantages of technical background for Chinese
users who want to engage in online political communication, Qiu writes,
“Technical detours bypassing regulatory obstacles are also possible in
the case of the user who has more computer literacy.” (p. 18) And he
reports that most Chinese netizens use pseudonyms to protect them-
selves from penalties for expressing their views. (p. 16)
His article raises the question of whether the Chinese netizens will
prevail in their challenge to virtual censorship in China. “It remains
uncertain,” Qiu writes, “whether virtual censorship in China will become
more menacing or they will collapse someday leaving online political
communication free at last among the Chinese netizens.” (p. 20) The
URL for the journal’s website is http://www.ijclp.org/.
4) Looking for a definition of netizens, the online Miriam Webster
dictionary defines a netizen as “an active participant in the online
community of the Internet.”
5) The Tech Target, “What Is” website, goes further offering two
similar meanings for “netizen.”
1. A citizen who uses the Internet as a way of participating in
political society (for example, exchanging views, providing
information, and voting).
2. An Internet user who is trying to contribute to the Internet’s
use and growth. As a powerful communications medium, the
Internet seems to offer great possibilities for social change. It
also creates a new culture and its own special issues, such as
who shall have access to it. The implication is that the
Internet’s users, who use and know most about it, have a
responsibility to ensure that is used constructively while also
fostering free speech and open access.
(http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid 9_gci212636,00.html)
6) Chris Mueller, a graduate student, at the University of Berne, in
Page 36
a thesis on “Electronic Networks and Democracy” (draft October 2002)
describes how the online process of users contributing to the net is
necessary for the net to be a democratic commons. He concludes that
this process needs the hard work of people online. (http://www.soz.unibe
.ch/ii/virt/euricom.pdf)
Those who do some of this hard work, are the online users that
Michael called the netizens.
7) “Netizens Unite,” proclaims the title of the editorial in the Times
of India on Tuesday, March 4, 2003. The editorial appeared in the online
edition and also in the print edition on page 14. The editors of this major
newspaper in India write:
America’s threatened war against Iraq has divided the world.
First between the few friendly governments that support its
unilateral action and the many that don’t. And second between
officialdom on the one hand and the people on the other. This
later division is particularly significant because it has pitted
democratically elected governments that back Washington
against the overwhelming anti-war sentiment of their own
people. But none of this has made the slightest difference to
president Bush and his team of hawks.
The editorial documents that there was a basis for a peaceful
process to achieve the end that the earlier UN resolution had advocated
(whether or not that was a legitimate end, was not a question raised
however).
Then the editorial asks, “But what can all those around the world
who oppose this mindless militarism do other than feel powerless?”
This is a question essential to Michael’s vision for the concept of
the netizen. What are the means for common people to have power over
the issues that affect their lives, including issues like whether one’s
government makes war on another country?
The editorial then proposes a tentative way to look at this problem.
The editors write:
We believe that one easily accessible way for world citizens to
protest against this war is literally a mouse click away. As
inhabitants of an increasingly globalised and borderless world,
they should use the ultimate instrument of supra-nationalism –
Page 37
the Internet – to register their opposition and say no to the war:
Netizens of the world unite, you’ve nothing to lose but your
chains of chauvinism. (To voice your views log on to
The significance of the editorial is that it proposed that people
peacefully discuss their concerns and views. That such activity might
indeed be a weapon in the fight.
The editorial and then the online discussion by the Times of India
are not alone in seeing in the concept of Netizen as a way to be
responsible “inhabitants of an increasingly globalised and borderless
world” which the Internet has made possible.
8) It is not only researchers and writers online who have explored
and contributed to the development of the concept of Netizen. There is
also interest in the vision of the netizen in the online art community. For
example, in December of 2002 there appeared on the Net an announce-
ment of an art exhibit and competition in Rome, Italy. The exhibit was
curated by Valentina Tanni.
The curatrice writes (our translation):
Netizens is a neologism. It is born from the union of two
English words, net and citizens and is used commonly to define
the navigators of the web. The expression, destined to a great
future, was coined in the book by Michael and Ronda Hauben,
authors of an important book about the social and psychologi-
cal impact of the Net and of Net communication. (Actually it
is Michael who is responsible for identifying and developing
the concept of netizen -ed.)
Tanni continues:
It is not enough to be connected to the Internet to be a Netizen.
In order to enter and to become part of this new, diffused
society, it is necessary to pay attention to it, to understand it
and to try to improve it, just as one must do to be part of
communities offline. (Catalogue of the exhibit “Netizens:
cittadini della rete” Sala 1, Rome, Italy, December 2002, p.
14.)
9) Another writer commenting on the concept of Netizen, shortly
after the concept spread around the Internet, John Svedjedal, in his
Page 38
paper, writes:
the Net provides new opportunities for discussions, meetings,
and the exchange of ideas. As Michael Hauben...(has) recently
remarked, the Internet provides an ‘expansion of what it means
to be a social animal’ – the democratic, helpful human being
Michael Hauben has labeled the Netizen.... (“Busy Being Born
/Svedjedal/busy14.html)
Conclusion
These are but a few of the ways that the concept of netizen is being
understood and utilized online in the years since Michael first recog-
nized that there was something besides the technology of the Net that
was important. Among the Internet’s users something new was
developing, something new was being born. This new phenomena is
what Michael recognized and he called those who were part of this new
phenomena “netizens”. Whether the word had ever been used previ-
ously, is not significant. What is significant is that there was a transfor-
mation occurring. Among the users online, something new had been
discovered. This was that they were able to be part of a new society, and
to play an important role in the birth and development of this new
society. This isn’t something idealistic or off in the future. And it isn’t
something detached from the offline world and society. The netizen is
at the intersection between the old and the new, between the offline
society and the online community. The actions that people described in
1992-1993 when Michael posted his questions about the impact of the
Net on people, gave him an understanding of this new development.
This understanding was captured in a new concept, netizen, made up of
the concepts of citizen and net. And this concept, the new concept of the
netizen has gone on to set a foundation for a more active role for citizens
and people online, for a way that the Internet and its users can influence
the old world, the old institutions, so that the new world of a new
millennium can come into being. We are not there yet. Neither is the
concept of netizen a concept of “utopianism” as some have suggested.
Rather there is a living practice, an experience, and a consciousness
developing which is one of the promises for a better world in the future.
Page 39
Amateur Computerist
15 Year Index
[Editor’s note: We are happy to announce in honor of this as our 15 year
anniversary that all of the previous issues of the Amateur Computerist
are online in at least PDF format at:
http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/Back_Issues The following is the full index
of all of our issues.]
1) Volume 1 No 1 Feb. 1988
Introduction; Dawn of a New Era; Dedication; World of Telecommuni-
cations; Try This (IBM); Future Belongs to Programmers; The First
Programmer (PICTURE); Why Learn Programming; Cover of Personal
Computing (PICTURE); Commodore TIPS & TRICKS
2) Volume 1 No 2 Jun. 1988
The Big Machine; Pass the Profits, Please; Technology: Develop or
Stagnate?; CARTOON by “DOC” Wilson; Sample BASIC graphic
program; Try This (IBM); The World of Telecom... Corrections;
German Vocabulary Helper Program; Programming in BASIC or C?;
Configuring Your System; Letter to the Editor
3) Volume 1 No 3 Oct. 1988
Letter Published in Radio-Electronics; Responses from Around the
Country; Election & Computers (Editorial); Savior in Waiting; How to
Use the Merit Network?; Virtual Drives & Batch Files; Try This
(EQUATION OF A STRAIGHT LINE); As I Was Saying... (Why
Computerism?); Computers and Free Speech; Letter to the Editor; Plant
Life (PICTURE)
4) Volume 2 No 1 Jan. 1989
Return to Sanity With the Amateur & the Pro; Letters from Readers;
Problem Corner; Try This for IBM; SYSTEM DIAGRAM for
Quadraphonic Sound System); Response to October Editorial; CAR-
Page 40
TOONS (COMMODORE COUNTY); Welcome to Commodore County
USA; Computer Hacking, A Crime?; IBM Key Assignments Using the
“PROMPT”...; History of Computers Part I
5) Volume 2 No 2 Apr. 1989
Why Learn to Program? (DISCUSSION); Letters; Try This (MES-
SAGE); “SE Q” for IBM; As I Was Saying (JOBS: HOURS AND
SENSE...); Overtime and Under Pay; May Day; Sample Batch File;
History of Computers Part II
6) Volume 2 No 3 Summer 1989
Impact of Computers On Society: A Debate; Letters to the Editor; CoCo
Corner (Grail Quest-Pip); Commodore County USA (Cursor Color
Change); Out of the Heart of the Abacus...; History of the Computer Part
III
7) Volume 2 No 4 Fall 1989
Letter from Prosecutor; Opposing Viewpoint...; Letters to the Editor;
Wanted Alive (AD); CoCo Corner (Equation Graphing Prg.); True
Heroes; Trigonometry Lesson for IBM; History of the Computer Part IV
8) Volume 3 No 1 Winter 1989
Letter from Editor of Detroit News; Don’t Replicate UAW-Ford School;
When Will Their Walls Come Tumbling Down; Letters to Editor;
Commodore County USA (CARTOON); The Spirit of Babbage; CoCo
Corner (POKE & PEAK); CAD/CAM/CIM; History of Computers Part
V
9) Volume 3 No 2 Spring 1990
The Laborer, Yes; Floyd Hoke-Miller (1898-1990); The Picket; In
Honor of Labor’s Poet Laureate; Computer Education and Government
Regulation; Letter from Superintendent; Open Letter to Superintendent
Bemis; Letter to Governor; Commodore County U.S.A. (SHIMMER-
ING TEXT); C-64 Music Digitizer; IBM Label Program; CoCo Corner
(CALORIE COUNTER); Bulletin Board Numbers
Page 41
10) Volume 3 No 3 Fall 1990
What Criticisms Have You of the A.C.?; Tips and Tricks (IBM BOOT
PROBLEM); Letter to Editor; Editorial; A Common Man of Greatness;
CoCo Corner (CORRECTION); Excerpts from BBS (DISCUSSION-
TRADE UNIONS); Commodore C-64 Reset Switch; DIAGRAM #1
11) Volume 3 No 4 Winter 1990
Hats Off to Patriot; Amateurs are Needed More Than Ever; CoCo
Corner (MORE POKE & PEAK); Bringing Automation Home;
Computer BBS Discussion on the War; Computers for the People: Part
I
12) Volume 4 No 1 Fall 1991
Computers for the People - A History Part II; Letters to the Editor; Ten
Commandments of Good Networking; Try This Program (GRAPHIC
“HI”); USSR and the Computer; Command Line Calculator; The
Question of Censorship
13) Volume 4 No 2-3 Spring 1992
Computers Vs Plant Closures; Amateur Computerist Index(10 year);
Problem Corner; Union Forever; CARTOON (Shorter Hours); Letter To
The Editor; Letters to Amateur Computerist; Letter to Editor of Utne
Reader; Review from the µPeripheral; Tribute: Modern Computer
Pioneer; Interview with Staff Member; One Line Program; Computers
For The People; CARTOON (Commodore County); Pascal Program
14) Volume 4 No 4 Summer 1992
Impact of the Computer on Society: Two Views; Electronic Mail;
Letters to the Editor; Desktop Publishing; Computers for People:
History; TRY THIS: (Programs); From the Shop Floor; CARTOON (I
HAVE A Grievance); America and the Dollar; Problem Corner;
Interview with Staff Member
15) Supplement Fall 1992
INTRODUCTION; THE NET WORKS; ‘Arte’, Computers and Usenet
Page 42
News; Computer as a Democratizer; CityNet in New Zealand; Learning
About Usenet; Freenet BBS’s; Two Books to Help Users Liberation
Technology
16) Volume 5 No 1-2 Spring 1993
Interview with Henry Spencer; Tradition of May 1, 1848; Social Forces
Behind Usenet; The Net and the Labor Movement; Letters to Editor; The
New Dawn; Pittsburgh Press Strike; John G. Kemeny; Computers for the
People; Pascal Program; Try This Program in C; May Day in History;
Charter for Newsgroup
17) Volume 5 No 3/4 Fall 1993
From ARPAnet to Usenet News; Battle For Programming; COMMON
SENSE; Imminent Death of the Net; Letters To The Editor; News From
Europe; From The Shop Floor; Report: Summer 1993 USENIX;
Proposals on NSF Backbone; C Program; Computers for the People;
Soul of the Internet
18) Volume 6 No 1 Spring 1994
UNIX and Computer Science; An Interview with John Lions; An
Interview with Berkley Tague; On the 25
th
Anniversary of UNIX;
Usenet News: The Poor Man’s ARPAnet; What the Net Means to Me;
Plumbing The Depths Of UNIX; Using UNIX Tools; C Program; New
Net Book; The Linux Movement; The Ten Commandments for C; May
Day in the Morning; Free Software Foundation
19) Volume 6 No 2-3 Winter 1994
What is a Netizen?; Licklider’s Vision and the Future; Net Cultural
Assumptions; Etiquette and the Internet; Ethics and the Internet; The
Internet Society; The Internet: Maintaining Diversity; Do You Want to
Lose Your Voice?; The Net: A Scientific Perspective; Book Proposal;
Netizens: The Impact of the Net; Rights of Netizens
20) Volume 7 No 1 Spring 1996
Net Access: A Privilege or a Right?; Canadian Community Networking;
Netizens and Community Networks; Letter to the Editor; Access For All
Page 43
FAQ; The Future of Democracy; Old Freedoms and New Technologies;
Forming the Usenet Online Community; History of Cleveland Freenet;
Universal Access to E-Mail; Prototype for Policy Decisions; In Honor
of ‘Doc’ Wilson; (PICTURE OF DOC WILSON); ( 3 CARTOONS)
21) Volume 7 No 2 Winter 1997
Power Tools of Our Times; Effect of Net on Professional News Media;
Report from INET’96 Part I; CDA Decision (Excerpts); E-mail
Evangeladdict; Culture and Communication; Online Education; Report
from INET’96 Part II; Internet Impact on Daily Lives?; FCC Submission
on Universal Service; Letter to the Editor; Freenets and Politics of
Community; Broadsides for Our Day; Genora (Johnson) Dollinger
(1913-1995)
22) Volume 8 No 1 Spring 1998
Interview with Tom Truscott; Editorial; Factsheet Five: ACN; Coopera-
tive Nature of Usenet; Creating Broadsides; History of the Net is
Important; Netizens: Review of Reviews; Book Reviews: Netizens;
Community in k12.chat.teacher; Wiener and Licklider; Amateur
Computerist 10 Year Index: 1988-1998
23) Special Issue July 1998
Stakeholders in the DNS Controversy: Netizen List DNS Discussion;
Study of the ARPAnet TCP/IP Digest; An Introduction to TCP/IP
24) Volume 9 No 1 Winter 1998
Editorial: 25 Years of TCP/IP; Role of Govt in the Internet; Report from
INET98 and IFWP; The Internet: Public or Private?; Report from the
Front; The Internet a Public Treasure; Testimony Submitted to Con-
gress; Letter to Congressman Bliley; E-mail Message from Becky Burr;
Letter to Wm. Daley Sec. of Commerce; Letter: Tom Bliley to Ira
Magaziner; Letter to the NTIA; Herding Cats and Sacred Cows; DNS:
Short History and Short Future MsgGroup Mailing List
25) Volume 9 No 2 Special Issue 1999
ISOC Silencing the Press; Cone of Silence; U.S. Press Censorship;
Page 44
Letter from the DOC.; Letter from Ira Magaziner; Report from
SIGCAS/POLICY 98; GAO Review
26) Volume 10 No 1 Summer 2000
Welcoming the Millennium; Who Can Watch the Watchdog?; Internet
Pioneers Panel; Citizens’ Agenda 2000 Forum; Cleveland Freenet
Closed; From the Internet; Oral History of the Internet; 30 Years of
RFCs; Principles of the Internet; ARPAnet Mailing Lists
27) Volume 10 No 2 Spring 2001
EDITORIAL; Internet: A Laboratory for Democracy?; Ford Model E
Program; Battle over Computer Classes; State of the Net in Hungary; A
Loss for Netizens; Moment of Silence for Michael Muuss; Culture Clash
over Usenet Archive; Privatization of the Internet; MsgGroup
28) Volume 11 No 1 Special Issue 5/1/02
Introduction; The Emergence of the Netizen; Michael, Computers and
the Net; Work And Life of Michael Hauben; Some of Michael’s
Accomplishments; In Memoriam: a Netizen; Giving Back to the World;
Thoughts Regarding Michael’s Work; Mike: Sketches; “Netizens” in
Hebrew Dictionary; A Tribute; Writings by Michael Hauben; Preface:
What is a Netizen?; What the Net Means to Me; Declaration of the
Rights of Netizens; Democracy: SDS and the Net; The Untold History
of the ARPAnet; Berlin Report: The Vision Lives
Communication Not Annihilation,
No War on Iraq. Netizens Unite
[Editor's Note: The following is the text of a leaflet distributed in New York City on
February 15, 2003 at a rally in opposition to War against Iraq.]
Today’s marches around the world demonstrate the power of the
Netizens. There is a need for global communication to be utilized to
solve the enormous problems in our modern world. More citizens and
Page 45
netizens around the world can now participate in helping each other to
solve what otherwise would be impossible difficulties.
What is a Netizen?
The concept of Netizen grew out of research online in 1992-1993.
This was before the commercialization of the Internet. Contrary to
popular mythology the numbers of people connecting to the Internet was
growing by large numbers each year. There began to be Free-Nets
springing up to provide community people with access to the Internet.
A student doing online research, Michael, writes:
The story of Netizens is an important one. In conducting
research...online to determine people’s uses for the global
computer communications network, I became aware that there
was a new social institution, an electronic commons, develop-
ing. It was exciting to explore this new social institution.
Others online shared this excitement. I discovered from those
who wrote me that the people I was writing about were citizens
of the Net, or Netizens.
(from Preface to Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the
Internet http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/)
The Internet was making it possible for people who got access to
communicate with others around the world. And there were people
online who did what they could to connect others to the Internet and to
make the Internet something valuable for people around the world. The
student documented this development in his paper “The Net and
Netizens: The Impact the Net has on People’s Lives.”
The paper was posted online in 1993. The concept of Netizen spread
round the world and has been adopted by many who continue to
contribute to the development of the Internet as a global commons and
to spread access to the global communication the Internet makes
possible.
We need the vision of the Internet and the Netizen, that both its
early pioneers and the users that the student in 1992/3 found online, have
embodied. This is as a network of networks linking people around the
globe where online users act as netizens helping to solve the problems
of the Internet and of the society.
Page 46
People online and people who aren’t online, can help to make the
vision of the Internet pioneers and users a reality. We don’t want war in
Iraq. We don’t want war in North Korea or Iran. We don’t want war
against the Palestinians. We want to communicate with each other and
collaborate together to have the wealth of society go to its people so that
the better world that is now possible, becomes a reality. It’s a hard and
difficult struggle. But with lots of netizens around the world, we can
forge a better world.
Long live the Netizens, Long live the Iraqi People, Long live the
American People, Long live the peace loving people everywhere.
Let us honor the memory of those who have perished in the
struggle.
NETIZENS UNITE AND SPREAD THE INTERNET SO
EVERYONE HAS ACCESS
Let us continue to take up the challenge to make the Internet a
global commons that all can contribute to and build.
Dedicated to Michael (1973-2001). I have written this to honor his
memory and to try to continue his contributions to make the world a
better place.
Ronda
The opinions expressed in articles are those of their authors and not
necessarily the opinions of the Amateur Computerist newsletter. We
welcome submissions from a spectrum of viewpoints.
Page 47
Sticker distributed in 1995 at the Beppu
Netizens Conference in Oita, Japan
EDITORIAL STAFF
Ronda Hauben
William Rohler
Norman O. Thompson
Michael Hauben (1973-2001)
Jay Hauben
The Amateur Computerist invites submissions. Articles can be
submitted via e-mail:
[email protected] Permission is given to reprint articles from
this issue in a non profit publication provided credit is given, with name of
author and source of article cited.
ELECTRONIC EDITION
ACN Webpage:
http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/ All issues of the Amateur
Computerist are on-line. Back issues of the Amateur Computerist are available at:
http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/Back_Issues/
All issues can be accessed from the Index at:
http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/NewIndex.pdf
Page 48
