From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Tue Dec 3 02:02:50 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 27BC556FF3; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 02:02:50 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts7.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.40]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2F0C656FF2 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 02:02:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from sympatico.ca ([64.228.165.144]) by tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021203102212.KMGV3608.tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net@sympatico.ca> for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 05:22:12 -0500 Message-ID: <3DEC8516.2060700@sympatico.ca> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 05:19:02 -0500 From: Henry K van Eyken User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020607 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] [Fwd: Agora eBuzz December, 2002] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------010107090900000907000902" Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010107090900000907000902 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit FYI --------------010107090900000907000902 Content-Type: message/rfc822; name="Agora eBuzz December, 2002" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Agora eBuzz December, 2002" From - Tue Dec 3 05:15:32 2002 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Return-Path: Received: from host.automatedwebhosting.com ([209.239.41.12]) by tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021203043045.PSER4372.tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net@host.automatedwebhosting.com> for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 23:30:45 -0500 Received: (from kenbausc@localhost) by host.automatedwebhosting.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) id gB34UjW25564; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 23:30:45 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 23:30:45 -0500 Message-Id: <200212030430.gB34UjW25564@host.automatedwebhosting.com> X-Authentication-Warning: host.automatedwebhosting.com: kenbausc set sender to ken@globalagoras.org using -f Content-type: text/html To: vaneyken@sympatico.ca From: Global Agoras Subject: Agora eBuzz December, 2002

Volume 1 Number 1                                                                               December, 2002


Friends,

Agora eBuzz is sent to you in the belief that you will be interested in its contents and share our ideals.  If you wish to not receive it, you can remove yourself from our list:  Simply click www.globalagoras.org. In the dialogue box at the top of our home page, enter your e-mail address and click unsubscribe.

On the other hand, should you forward eBuzz to your friends, they can subscribe using the same process as that described above.  To view better printable versions of eBuzz and the Crete 2003 flyer, click here.

Ken Bausch

Executive Director

              


Advancement of Indigenous Opportunity

A movement for worldwide Indigenous solidarity officially took root during a Wisdom of the People Forum, September 15-18, 2002, in Washington DC.  Americans for Indian Opportunity www.aio.org and the Advancement of Maori Opportunity www.amo.co.nz convened leaders from a variety of backgrounds and geographical regions to begin forging links of global Indigenous cooperation. 

AIO and AMO share a commitment to grassroots empowerment and two strong programs for achieving it.  The first is their award-winning Ambassadors program that enables existing and emerging Indigenous leaders to be positive and proactive change agents. The rationale behind this program is expressed by  AIO founder, LaDonna Harris: “By empowering leadership with a firm cultural identity, we can withstand the forces of globalization and even more importantly, contribute our Indigeneity.” The second, the Indigenous Leadership Interactive System (ILISTM), enfolds computer interaction in a dialogue/design process that is congenial to traditional Indigenous decision-making.

The challenge facing this Forum was to lay the groundwork for an expanding web of transnational, grassroots Indigenous cooperation.  The leaders opened their deliberations sitting in the traditional Comanche circle sharing their “medicine”—their sources of inner strength and personal power—principally based on respect for the Earth, ancestors, family, and peaceful co-existence. 

Using ILIS, they then considered the obstacles that stand in the way of worldwide cooperation and generated 89 barriers.  In structured dialogue and in the spirit of participatory democracy, they identified not only the barriers that they deemed most important but also those whose overcoming would exert the most leverage in overcoming the other barriers.  They identified a lack of Indigenous shared vision as the deepest barrier to their worldwide cooperation. 

Other barriers with deep leverage (identified as needs to be addressed) were:

  • To increase respect for Indigenous peoples, cultures, and diversity;
  • To understand the impact of globalization;
  • To increase economic and political participation;
  • To increase asset and resource base;
  • For a coordinating agency in the global context; and
  • To overcome the reality that Indigenous nations are in different places and spaces.

The leaders proceeded to identify actions that would address these needs, to generate action scenarios in small groups, and to draft an action plan endorsed by everyone for moving ahead on transnational Indigenous cooperation.

This three-day Forum/Co-Laboratory was a collaborative effort of AIO, AMO, and the Institute for 21st Century Agoras (AGORAS).  The W.K. Kellogg Foundation funded it. For a complete report on this Forum, click: www.isss-conference.org;  click Resources and then A Wisdom of the People Forum.  Future Forums are being planned for El Salvador, Morocco, and Crete (during the ISSS conference).

Honors for LaDonna

LaDonna Harris, board member, founder and president of Americans for Indian Opportunity (AIO) for 33 years, stepped down as AIO Director in August triggering outbursts of appreciation.  At the grand powwow sponsored by the National Museum of the American Indian, on September 14, she was given a special honoring ceremony.

Four days later, after the Wisdom of the People Forum, at a Generations of Leadership Gala, she was joined by 300 of her closest friends and supporters,

government and Indian leaders from around the country, who shared stories of her tireless commitment, energy, and warmth.  During the gala, a slide presentation ran showing her life and her long involvement in Indian and human rights movements, including photos with every first family from the Kennedys to the Clintons.

A short bio of LaDonna can be found at

www.isss-conference.org/committee.htm.

Crete 2003

The Institute for 21st Century Agoras has close ties to the 47th annual conference of the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS; Crete 2003) and its theme: Conscious Evolution of Humanity: Using Systems Thinking to Construct Agoras of the Global Village.  Our President, Aleco Christakis, is also this year’s president of ISSS; our executive Director, Ken Bausch, is co-chair of the conference along with Aleco.

People like Ludwig von Bertalanffy, Kenneth Boulding, and Anatol Rappaport founded ISSS in 1954 as the Society for General Systems Research.  Its distinguished presidents are a Who’s Who of the outstanding systems scientists of the 20th century, including Margaret Mead, James Miller, Stafford Beer, Heinz von Foerster, Harold Odum, Bela Banathy, Ilya Prigogine, and Ervin Laszlo. 

The recently released Call for Papers see www.isss-conference.org reveals the very practical bent of Crete 2003.  Three Co-Laboratories are scheduled so far.  In addition to the Indigenous Forum, there are ones on “Dialogos en las Calles de Paises en Crises” and “Greek Culture in a Global World.”  One group has the theme “One Year after Johannesburg” assessing movement toward sustainable development and advancing grassroots ways to make an equitable, humane, and environmentally sound world society. Another group is considering “Participatory design and planning: potential and pitfalls for ethical governance.”  In addition, Markus Schwaninger and Allenna Leonard are leading Syntegrity sessions on “The Future of ISSS,” thus taking to heart Mead’s long-ago suggestion that systems scientists should “use their theory to predict the kind and size of the society they wanted.”

A flyer describing Crete 2003 is appended at the end of this message.  Full details on the conference are available at the above website. 

            

Co-Laboratories of Democracy

Co-laboratories streamline participatory democracy so that it functions effectively among diverse stakeholders in complex situations.  They (like ILIS) are adaptations of the Interactive Management (IM; also CogniScope) methodology, which has been refined and successfully applied for over 20 years in corporate, government, and international arenas.  They simplify IM for the use of non-profit organizations and community groups in sessions that:

  • Authenticate every stakeholder/ participant;
  • Elicit ideas and points of view from all stakeholders;
  • Move toward effective consensus;
  • Elicit and deal with the different priorities of stakeholder participants;
  • Equalize power relations among the stakeholders;
  • Go beyond identifying factors that are important, to specifying those that are most influential in achieving goals.

Co-laboratories (and IM) generate focus, consensus, and effective action.  In two days, they move groups to higher levels of functioning.  In addition to their tangible benefits for people and the organizations that serve them, co-laboratories provide full documentation and transparency.  We have on file hundreds of reports on successful IM interventions.  IM is the best design-making system that there is.  AGORAS makes it available to people who are trying to make a difference.

  A brief summary of this process, including a PowerPoint presentation can be found at www.globalagoras.com.  Extensive documentation is available at www.cwaltd.com.

Institute for 21st Century Agoras

The Institute for 21st Century Agoras  (AGORAS) is a volunteer-driven 501(c)(3) charitable organization that promotes vigorous democracy.  It revives the spirit of the ancient Greek agoras for the age of globalization.  With its Co-Laboratories of Democracy, it streamlines participatory democracy, making it efficient and transparent.  Its mission is to employ these co-laboratories in complex situations with diverse groups of willing stakeholders to jump start new or stalling democratic processes.  In this way, it aims to spread agoras around the world.

The immediate criteria of evaluation are the abilities of co-laboratories to draw together the relevant stakeholders of a situation, elicit a comprehensive list of responses to a well-devised triggering question, generate consensus on the deep parameters of the situation, and produce effective action plans.  The mid-term results are measured in the extent that participants and their constituencies follow through on the action scenarios generated in the co-laboratories.  The long-term results are measured in the vitality of the participating groups and their effectiveness in influencing problematic situations.

Co-laboratories require preparatory field work to interview stakeholder groups and compose a paper presenting their various views, to draft the proper triggering question, to obtain and set up the proper meeting room, computer projection equipment, etc.  They require a minimum three-person team for two-plus days.  They require a large expenditure of time and effort from AGORAS staff, facilitators, and local personnel.  AGORAS works on a tight budget, but still needs $15,000 to $30,000 for each co-laboratory, depending on the size and complexity of the situation, travel, lodging, etc.

Grassroots organizations seldom have the resources to cover that expense.  For that reason, we seek sponsorship from foundations, corporations, and individuals.

If your organization is having growing pains or is faced with many complex problems all at once, you might want to contact AGORAS.  If you want to sponsor a favorite organization for rejuvenation, we would like to hear from you.  You might want to contribute to our work.  (You can contribute online and your donations are tax-deductible.)  You just might want to find out more.  In any case, go to www.globalagoras.org.  and click the Get Involved  menu tab.  We would like to hear from you

 


47th Annual Conference of the

International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS)

Conscious Evolution of Humanity:

Using Systems Thinking

To Construct Agoras of the Global Village

On July 6 - 11, 2003, the world's systems scientists will converge on Heraklion, Crete, Greece to face the following questions:

Are We in Control? 

Is Globalization out of Control?

How can Humanity gain the Upper Hand?

In papers, discussions, workshops, and co-laboratories, we will devise ways to harness the multiple aspects of globalization and technological change in the interests of democratic and open societies. We will interact until we generate workable structures of democratic cooperation and coordinated plans for our conscious evolution. For details, see www.isss-conference.org and www.globalagoras.org.

This will be hard work, and that is the way it should be! To share this ambitious endeavor, join the party in Crete, July 2003.

Aleco Christakis, ISSS President



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click on the link below to be removed from the Global Agoras mailing list.

http://globalagoras.org/cgi-bin/subscribe.pl?vaneyken@sympatico.ca
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proudly powered by Subscribe Me Lite



--------------010107090900000907000902-- From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Tue Dec 3 22:58:18 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 7E5665700B; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:58:17 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from smtp02.wlv.untd.com (smtp02.wlv.untd.com [209.247.163.58]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C89B856FF2 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:58:15 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 13310 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 07:17:45 -0000 Received: from dsc01-oav-ca-1-42.rasserver.net (HELO netzero.net) (204.30.193.42) by smtp02.wlv.untd.com with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 07:17:45 -0000 Message-ID: <3DEDACA6.3010601@netzero.net> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 23:20:06 -0800 From: "John J. Deneen" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] [ba-talk-unrev] Powerful Concept Maps: HyperPhysics & HyperMath Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org HyperPhysics "HyperPhysics is an exploration environment for concepts in physics which employs concept maps and other linking strategies to facilitate smooth navigation. For the most part, it is laid out in small segments or "cards", true to its original development in HyperCard. The entire environment is interconnected with thousands of links, reminiscent of a neural network. The bottom bar of each card contains links to major concept maps for divisions of physics, plus a "go back" feature to allow you to retrace the path of an exploration. The side bar contains a link to the extensive Index, which itself is composed of active links. That sidebar also contains links to relevant concept maps. The rationale for such concept maps is to provide a visual survey of conceptually connected material, and it is hoped that they will provide some answers to the question "where do I go from here?". Whether you need further explanation of concepts which underly the current card content, or are seeking applications which go beyond it, the concept map may help you find the desired information." < http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html > HyperMath "HyperMath is a growing collection of examples of applied mathematics with links to their applications to problems in physics and astronomy. It is not systematic or complete in any sense, but is a collection of foundation mathematics principles and applications which were collected as the need was encountered in developing the HyperPhysics material." < http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html > Presentation: Doing It by the Numbers: Javascript Calculations in Web-Based Instructional Material Carl Rod Nave, AAPT Summer Meeting, Guelph, Ontario, Aug 2, 2000 "The building of the web-based physics exploration environment which I call HyperPhysics was undertaken originally to provide a continuing resource for the science teachers which I have taught at Georgia State University. It has had a much wider impact than that, with over two million hits for the year 2000 through July. From the beginning, part of the strategy of that exploration environment was to lead users finally to a quantitative application of the concepts; a place where they could plug in the numbers and explore the results." < http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html > --------------------------------------------- Introducing NetZero Long Distance 1st month Free! Sign up today at: www.netzerolongdistance.com From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Tue Dec 3 22:59:24 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 227745700C; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:59:24 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from smtp03.wlv.untd.com (smtp03.wlv.untd.com [209.247.163.66]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9142B5700B for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:59:22 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 27115 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 07:18:52 -0000 Received: from dsc01-oav-ca-1-42.rasserver.net (HELO netzero.net) (204.30.193.42) by smtp03.wlv.untd.com with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 07:18:52 -0000 Message-ID: <3DEDACE9.8020405@netzero.net> Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 23:21:13 -0800 From: "John J. Deneen" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] [ba-talk-unrev] Augmenting the Human Intellect with NetViz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org NetViz - (aka: Concept-Document-Extract-Network Visualization) < http://www.exocortex.org/netviz > NATO Presentation < http://www.exocortex.org/ben/netviz-mulvern.ppt > A candidate GUI for NODAL < http://www.ai.sri.com/~leei/OHS/NODAL-WhitePaper.html > for leading to an OHS framework < http://www.bootstrap.org/augment/ALLIANCE/980-1.html > ? ************ Demo Installation Instructions 1. Download the NetViz 7.31 installation program: NetViz 7.31 (Aug 16/99) (1.23 MB) - Windows 95/98/NT/2000 2. Run the installation program and let the program install itself into the directory C:\Program Files\NetViz.. 3. Run NetViz by starting the NetViz.exe application in the C:\Program Files\NetViz directory. For information on using NetViz please see the section Getting Started. < http://www.exocortex.org/netviz/Download/download.html > --------------------------------------------- Introducing NetZero Long Distance 1st month Free! Sign up today at: www.netzerolongdistance.com From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Fri Dec 6 08:51:08 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id C268856FF3; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:51:07 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (ms4.lga2.nytimes.com [199.239.138.148]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4733E56FF2 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:51:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from email5.lga2.nytimes.com (unknown [10.0.0.170]) by ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A3F2F5A62D for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:15:00 -0500 (EST) Received: by email5.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix, from userid 202) id 1A62158A4D; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:05:55 -0500 (EST) From: garyrichmond@rcn.com To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] NYTimes.com Article: Digital Robber Barons? Message-Id: <20021206170555.1A62158A4D@email5.lga2.nytimes.com> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:05:55 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com. from the article: Last March the F.C.C. used linguistic trickery ? defining cable Internet access as an "information service" rather than as telecommunications ? to exempt cable companies from the requirement to act as common carriers. The commission will probably make a similar ruling on DSL service, which runs over lines owned by your local phone company. The result will be a system in which most families and businesses will have no more choice about how to reach cyberspace than a typical 19th-century farmer had about which railroad would carry his grain. garyrichmond@rcn.com Digital Robber Barons? December 6, 2002 By PAUL KRUGMAN Bad metaphors make bad policy. Everyone talks about the "information highway." But in economic terms the telecommunications network resembles not a highway but the railroad industry of the robber-baron era - that is, before it faced effective competition from trucking. And railroads eventually faced tough regulation, for good reason: they had a lot of market power, and often abused it. Yet the people making choices today about the future of the Internet - above all Michael Powell, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission - seem unaware of this history. They are full of enthusiasm for the wonders of deregulation, dismissive of concerns about market power. And meanwhile tomorrow's robber barons are fortifying their castles. Until recently, the Internet seemed the very embodiment of the free-market ideal - a place where thousands of service providers competed, where anyone could visit any site. And the tech sector was a fertile breeding ground for libertarian ideology, with many techies asserting that they needed neither help nor regulation from Washington. But the wide-open, competitive world of the dial-up Internet depended on the very government regulation so many Internet enthusiasts decried. Local phone service is a natural monopoly, and in an unregulated world local phone monopolies would probably insist that you use their dial-up service. The reason you have a choice is that they are required to act as common carriers, allowing independent service providers to use their lines. A few years ago everyone expected the same story to unfold in broadband. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was supposed to create a highly competitive broadband industry. But it was a botched job; the promised competition never materialized. For example, I personally have no choice at all: if I want broadband, the Internet service provided by my local cable company is it. I'm like a 19th-century farmer who had to ship his grain on the Union Pacific, or not at all. If I lived closer to a telephone exchange, or had a clear view of the Southern sky, I might have some alternatives. But there are only a few places in the U.S. where there is effective broadband competition. And that's probably the way it will stay. The political will to fix the 1996 act, to create in broadband the kind of freewheeling environment that many Internet users still take for granted, has evaporated. Last March the F.C.C. used linguistic trickery - defining cable Internet access as an "information service" rather than as telecommunications - to exempt cable companies from the requirement to act as common carriers. The commission will probably make a similar ruling on DSL service, which runs over lines owned by your local phone company. The result will be a system in which most families and businesses will have no more choice about how to reach cyberspace than a typical 19th-century farmer had about which railroad would carry his grain. There were and are alternatives. We could have restored competition by breaking up the broadband industry, restricting local phone and cable companies to the business of selling space on their lines to independent Internet service providers. Or we could have accepted limited competition, and regulated Internet providers the way we used to regulate AT&T. But right now we seem to be heading for a system without either effective competition or regulation. Worse yet, the F.C.C. has been steadily lifting restrictions on cross-ownership of media and communications companies. The day when a single conglomerate could own your local newspaper, several of your local TV channels, your cable company and your phone company - and offer your only route to the Internet - may not be far off. The result of all this will probably be exorbitant access charges, but that's the least of it. Broadband providers that face neither effective competition nor regulation may well make it difficult for their customers to get access to sites outside their proprietary domain - ending the Internet as we know it. And there's a political dimension too. What happens when a few media conglomerates control not only what you can watch, but what you can download? There's still time to rethink; a fair number of Congressmen, from both parties, have misgivings about Mr. Powell's current direction. But time is running out. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/06/opinion/06KRUG.html?ex=1040194355&ei=1&en=2fe3d55a0ecdde98 HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Fri Dec 6 08:53:44 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 1C0C256FF4; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:53:44 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (ms4.lga2.nytimes.com [199.239.138.148]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9500F56FF3 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:53:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from email4.lga2.nytimes.com (email4 [10.5.101.169]) by ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE4AD5A49F for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:17:37 -0500 (EST) Received: by email4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix, from userid 202) id 5E0B2C432; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:06:13 -0500 (EST) From: garyrichmond@rcn.com To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] NYTimes.com Article: High-Speed Wireless Internet Network Is Planned Message-Id: <20021206170613.5E0B2C432@email4.lga2.nytimes.com> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:06:13 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com. from the article The service is intended to let subscribers pop open their laptops and have a seamless high-speed wireless extension of their personal or corporate Internet services ? initially in the 50 largest metropolitan areas ? without having to give credit card numbers or enter additional information, as is generally the case now. Connections would generally be at least the speed of a typical home broadband connection. garyrichmond@rcn.com High-Speed Wireless Internet Network Is Planned December 6, 2002 By JOHN MARKOFF SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 5 - The wireless technology known as WiFi, which allows users of personal and hand-held computers to connect to the Internet at high speed without cables, got a significant stamp of approval today when AT&T, I.B.M. and Intel announced a new company to create a nationwide network. The unruly technology, which has largely been a playground for hackers, hobbyists and high-technology start-ups, is already sprouting mushroomlike in coffee shops, bookstores, airports, hotels, homes, businesses and even a few parks. The new company, Cometa Networks, has set ambitious goals for itself: to deploy more than 20,000 wireless access points by the end of 2004, placing an cable-less high-speed Internet connection within either a five-minute walk in urban areas or a five-minute drive in suburban communities. Executives from the technology companies and the two investment firms, Apax Partners and 3i, that joined to create the network said they would begin offering their service through cellular and wired telephone companies, D.S.L. and cable Internet service providers and other Internet retailers some time in 2003. The service is intended to let subscribers pop open their laptops and have a seamless high-speed wireless extension of their personal or corporate Internet services - initially in the 50 largest metropolitan areas - without having to give credit card numbers or enter additional information, as is generally the case now. Connections would generally be at least the speed of a typical home broadband connection. Cometa executives said that they expected the national availability of the wireless network would combine with Intel's planned inclusion of wireless Internet capability in all its mobile microprocessors next year to spur a fundamental shift in the way Americans will use the Internet. "This is that big," said Dr. Lawrence B. Brilliant, chief executive of Cometa Networks. "It's that exciting; it's that much of a distortion in the computing field. It's a change in the way people use technology." Until now WiFi has been viewed by many technology analysts as an upstart from-the-bottom technology that has the potential of upsetting other capital-intensive technology deployments, like the expensive next-generation data-oriented cellular networks known as 2.5G and 3G that are being established by companies like AT&T Wireless, Cingular, Nextel, T-Mobile, Sprint and Verizon. But Cometa executives said that because they had chosen a wholesale business strategy, in which they will not sell Internet service directly to consumers or business, it is more likely that the two technologies would complement each other. In addition, users of the wireless access points would generally be stationary while connecting to the Internet. "WiFi has very high bandwidth and short range, while 2.5 and 3G cellular are lower bandwidth services designed to support data services on the fly," said Theodore Schell, chairman of Cometa Networks and a general partner of Apax Partners. "They will have different cost equations, and there is a place for both of these technologies." Industry analysts have said they believe that growing WiFi use could steal valuable subscribers from cellular companies that are hoping consumers will begin using their cellphones for data services like movie times, restaurant reviews and shopping deals wherever they are traveling. The Cometa executives said they were not certain how the new network would be used but were convinced that the nation's 100 million Internet users would begin to use their portable computers in new ways once connections are widely and easily available as they travel. The executives and industry analysts acknowledged that creating a new nationwide wireless network was something of an act of faith given the general economic and technological gloom in the telecommunications industry. It is widely believed that the industry had overbuilt and had overinvested in the Internet boom of the last decade. The new company would not disclose its planned prices or the equity stakes of the five partners. Wireless industry analysts, however, have said WiFi hot spots can cost as much as $4,000 apiece to install in public places. If the average cost is half that, the installation of 20,000 access points would cost $40 million. "One of the problems is that giant companies creating wireless ventures often have not had tremendous success," said Alan Reiter, publisher of Wireless Internet and Mobile Computing, an industry newsletter based in Chevy Chase, Md. He pointed to ambitious and expensive undertakings like a cellular data initiative known as C.P.D.P. in the 1980's and early 1990's and the wireless data service known as Metricom, which went bankrupt last year with $800 million of debts. Other analysts questioned whether Cometa Networks would be able to make headway in an already crowded WiFi marketplace that has had both early failures and a host of smaller, aggressive start-ups. "It's obvious that what is happening right now is a wireless land grab," said Andrew Seybold, editor of Outlook 4Mobility, a publishing and consulting firm based in Los Gatos, Calif. "The question is, How many places can they lock up and how quickly?" Cometa executives insisted, however, that they were in a different position from their predecessors. The companies have a technological advantage in that they will not have to create customer equipment, relying on Intel's equipping the nation's portable computers with wireless abilities. They said Cometa was also in a particularly strong position with respect to its competitors because it could use AT&T's existing data network, to connect the planned 20,000 wireless access points. Leaving the relationship with individual customers to Internet service providers "is smart from a business point of view," said Richard Miller, a wireless data industry consultant at Breo Ventures in Palo Alto, Calif. At the same time, he noted, the venture will not succeed unless big corporate customers demand the service from Internet service providers. "The demand will have to come from the enterprise to the carriers," he said. To gain the confidence of corporate customers the new network will have to meet stringent data security standards, and Dr. Brilliant said that Cometa planned to take advantage of industry standards like virtual private networks to add security to the WiFi standard. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/06/technology/06WIRE.html?ex=1040194373&ei=1&en=1dad65a4e8ab1c90 HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Sat Dec 7 11:29:13 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id E773A56FF8; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:29:12 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts16.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.4]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3F9B456FF7 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:29:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from sympatico.ca ([64.228.165.169]) by tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021207194844.RVKX15542.tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net@sympatico.ca> for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 14:48:44 -0500 Message-ID: <3DF24FE1.8080107@sympatico.ca> Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 14:45:37 -0500 From: Henry K van Eyken User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020607 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Poor textbook publishing practices Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org I was asked who published the textbook used in the UNIX course I just completed. I had described it as garbage or words to that effect. I am duplicating the reply here in the hope of receiving some relevant information participants in this forum may have to offer on the subject. Henry Copy: "Guide to UNIX Using Linux" was published by Thomson Course Technology. Although the 2nd edition of this book has three names of authors on the cover, I know of six having been involved at various times. One author told me that they did not know one another, i.o.w. they were not the actual authors. The kind of errors I picked up are not those authors would make, as I will demonstrate soon. Amazing thing is that the college I went to has adopted the book for the next semester even though better is around. I have showed them many outright technical errors and also that some of them were copied by the instructor in his notes! Right now, I am looking at another text, "Bulletproof Unix" by Timothy Gottleber and published by Prentice Hall (Pearson Education). I am in Chapter 2 and found one minor error sofar (Linux is said to be a version of Unix). I did find a lot of stylistic errors, though, which shows that the publisher did not bother about properly editing the text. This, of course, propagates the bad use of language through the educational system and ought be flagged. I want to do a story on this (what is the point in augmenting poorly educated minds?) and, perhaps, something for ACM's Ubiquity and a journal of college teaching. Would love to give a verbal presentation at an educational conference (where publisher spread their wares around in the halls!). High time an issue is made of this sort of abuse where students pay for books that have been recommended by instructors. Henry From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Wed Dec 11 08:35:05 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 61CFD56FFC; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:35:04 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from mail.101freeway.net (mail.101freeway.net [12.44.112.15]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1BFEE56FFB for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:35:01 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 27645 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 16:52:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO minerva) (192.168.45.236) by mail.101freeway.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 16:52:11 -0000 From: "Garold (Gary) L. Johnson" To: "Ba-Unrev-Talk" Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Third Stage of KM Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:55:21 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Possibly of interest: The third stage that has emerged is taxonomy/ content. "The three stages of KM "Stage I: "by the Internet out of intellectual capital" information technology; intellectual capital; the Internet (including intranets, extranets, etc.); key phrases: "best practices" replaced by the more politic "lessons learned" " "Stage 2: human and cultural dimensions, the human relations stage; communities of practice; organizational culture; the learning organization (Senge); tacit knowledge (Nonaka) incorporated into KM; key phrase: "communities of practice";" "Stage 3: content and retrievability structuring content and assigning descriptors (index terms); key phrases: "content management" and "taxonomies";" article by in KMWorld, March 2002, Vol 11, Issue 3 The third stage of KM emerges Dr. Michael Koenig of Long Island University http://www.kmworld.com/publications/magazine/index.cfm?action=readarticle&Ar ticle_ID=1223&Publication_ID=67 Thanks, Garold (Gary) L. Johnson From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Wed Dec 11 08:35:05 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 865CF56FF9; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:35:04 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from mail.101freeway.net (mail.101freeway.net [12.44.112.15]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 05A0C56FF9 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:35:01 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 27640 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 16:52:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO minerva) (192.168.45.236) by mail.101freeway.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 16:52:10 -0000 From: "Garold (Gary) L. Johnson" To: "Ba-Unrev-Talk" Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Building Community Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:55:21 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Possibly interesting site: http://www.fetzer.org/resources/centeredontheedge/welcome.htm The Group as Art Form of the Future As part of an institutional assessment process between 1996 and 1997, Fetzer asked author Jacob Needleman to offer his reflections about the future role of the Institute. In his letter to Fetzer, Jacob offers a provocative image: "I [believe] that the group is the art form of the future.... Every great culture has created forms of sacred art that were needed in order to transmit and...discover by experience the truths which were necessary to absorb into one's life.... In our present culture, as I see it, the main need is for a form that can enable human beings to share their perception and attention and, through that sharing, to become a conduit for the appearance of spiritual intelligence." —Jacob Needleman Jacob then underscores the urgency of this image, observing that "we obviously cannot confront this tangled world alone.... It takes no great insight to realize that we have no choice but to think together, ponder together, in groups and communities. The question is how to do this. How to come together and think and hear each other in order to touch, or be touched by, the intelligence we need." Thanks, Garold (Gary) L. Johnson From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Wed Dec 11 08:35:07 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 640F356FF9; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:35:07 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from mail.101freeway.net (mail.101freeway.net [12.44.112.15]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0FD8156FFA for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:35:01 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 27643 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 16:52:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO minerva) (192.168.45.236) by mail.101freeway.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 16:52:10 -0000 From: "Garold (Gary) L. Johnson" To: "Ba-Unrev-Talk" Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Choosing KM Tools Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:55:21 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Possibly of interest: Codification,personalization,integration A strategy for selecting and applying KM tools: By Charlie Bixler http://www.kmworld.com/publications/magazine/index.cfm?action=readarticle&Ar ticle_ID=1224&Publication_ID=67 Thanks, Garold (Gary) L. Johnson From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Sun Dec 15 16:45:32 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 638AE56FF8; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:45:32 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7909D56FF7 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:45:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from 207-237-116-202.c3-0.23d-ubr1.nyr-23d.ny.cable.rcn.com ([207.237.116.202] helo=rcn.com) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Njgx-0002ts-00; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 20:05:07 -0500 Message-ID: <3DFD26BD.9050104@rcn.com> Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 20:05:01 -0500 From: Gary Richmond User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jerry@philosophers.co.uk Cc: peirce-l , arisbe , INTERNATIONAL DISCUSSION GROUP , c g , ba Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Re: TPM Online Information: Posting No. 49 References: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080108090303040608060909" Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org --------------080108090303040608060909 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dr Jeremy Stangroom wrote: >It's Sunday afternoon, and I've been thinking about Christmas. What I want >to know is why it isn't possible to mention Christmas without someone opining >that it has become 'much too commercial'? What on earth are they talking >about? It's always been commercial. After all, didn't some wise men bring the >baby Jesus presents as it lay in its crib. Gold and Frank's incense, if I >remember correctly. Anyway, the whole point of Christmas is to run up a huge >credit card bill. Unless, of course, you've maxed it out buying an oil tanker. > > I think the point of the critics of the commercialism of Christmas is that to the extent that the original message is obscured--that message being, that the world is redeemed exactly through love--commercialism remains an impediment to the growth of the Law of Love in the world, to the health and healing of the world through generous, and even selfless, acts of loving each other as we would be loved. The symbol of the rich gifts given by the wisemen to the christchild does not in any way support commercialism; perhaps a more faithful interpretation is that is is possible for even the wealthiest and most powerful to come to see, that we ought give of what is ours in the world to that which is worthy, to that which is really and truly of value. From exercising this (which is, nothing more than the fundamental expression of our deepest humanity) follows the power of "the Gospel of Love" (as opposed to what the scientist and philosopher Charles S. Peirce called "the Gospel of Greed"), and even the intellectual summum bonum, the reasonable in itself (Peirce) Best regards and Merry Christmas, Ga;ry Richmond City University of New York PS JS: That's it for now. Got to go and heckle some people who insist on calling Christmas a winter solstice celebration... GR: Now this I can go along with! > >It's Sunday afternoon, and I've been thinking about Christmas. What I want >to know is why it isn't possible to mention Christmas without someone opining >that it has become 'much too commercial'? What on earth are they talking >about? It's always been commercial. After all, didn't some wise men bring the >baby Jesus presents as it lay in its crib. Gold and Frank's incense, if I >remember correctly. Anyway, the whole point of Christmas is to run up a huge >credit card bill. Unless, of course, you've maxed it out buying an oil tanker. > > > --------------080108090303040608060909 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dr Jeremy Stangroom wrote:
It's Sunday afternoon, and I've been thinking about Christmas. What I want 
to know is why it isn't possible to mention Christmas without someone opining 
that it has become 'much too commercial'? What on earth are they talking 
about? It's always been commercial. After all, didn't some wise men bring the 
baby Jesus presents as it lay in its crib. Gold and Frank's incense, if I 
remember correctly. Anyway, the whole point of Christmas is to run up a huge 
credit card bill. Unless, of course, you've maxed it out buying an oil tanker.
  
I think the point of the critics of the commercialism of Christmas is that to the extent that the original message is
obscured--that message being, that the world is redeemed exactly through  love--commercialism remains an
impediment to the growth of the Law of Love in the world, to the health and healing of the world through generous,
and even selfless, acts of loving each other as we would be loved.

The symbol of the rich gifts given by the wisemen to the christchild does not in any way support commercialism;
perhaps a more faithful interpretation is that is is possible for even the wealthiest and most powerful to come to see,
that we ought give of what is ours in the world to that which is worthy, to that which is really and truly of value.

>From exercising this (which is, nothing more than the fundamental expression of our deepest humanity)  follows the power
of "the Gospel of Love" (as opposed to what the scientist and philosopher Charles S. Peirce called "the Gospel of Greed"), and
even the intellectual summum bonum, the reasonable in itself (Peirce)

Best regards and Merry Christmas,

Ga;ry Richmond
City University of New York

PS
 
JS: That's it for now. Got to go and heckle some people who insist on calling 
Christmas a winter solstice celebration...

GR: Now this I can go along with!


It's Sunday afternoon, and I've been thinking about Christmas. What I want 
to know is why it isn't possible to mention Christmas without someone opining 
that it has become 'much too commercial'? What on earth are they talking 
about? It's always been commercial. After all, didn't some wise men bring the 
baby Jesus presents as it lay in its crib. Gold and Frank's incense, if I 
remember correctly. Anyway, the whole point of Christmas is to run up a huge 
credit card bill. Unless, of course, you've maxed it out buying an oil tanker.

  


--------------080108090303040608060909-- From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Tue Dec 17 05:50:54 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 3133B56FF7; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:50:54 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (ms4.lga2.nytimes.com [199.239.138.148]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 89A7256FF2 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:50:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from email4.lga2.nytimes.com (email4 [10.5.101.169]) by ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C9FD5A640 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:14:54 -0500 (EST) Received: by email4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix, from userid 202) id 833BCC43B; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:03:27 -0500 (EST) From: garyrichmond@rcn.com To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] NYTimes.com Article: New Premise in Science: Get the Word Out Quickly, Online Message-Id: <20021217140327.833BCC43B@email4.lga2.nytimes.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 09:03:27 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com. the conclusion of the article:' When scientists relied on print-and-paper journals to distribute their work, the Library's supporters argue, it made sense to charge for access, since each copy represented an additional expense. But they say that at a time when the Internet has reduced distribution costs to almost zero, a system that grants journals exclusive rights over distribution is no longer necessary. By publishing on the Internet and forgoing any profits, the new venture says it is now possible to maintain a high-quality journal without charging subscription fees. garyrichmond@rcn.com New Premise in Science: Get the Word Out Quickly, Online December 17, 2002 By AMY HARMON A group of prominent scientists is mounting an electronic challenge to the leading scientific journals, accusing them of holding back the progress of science by restricting online access to their articles so they can reap higher profits. Supported by a $9 million grant from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the scientists say that this week they will announce the creation of two peer-reviewed online journals on biology and medicine, with the goal of cornering the best scientific papers and immediately depositing them in the public domain. By providing a highly visible alternative to what they view as an outmoded system of distributing information, the founders hope science itself will be transformed. The two journals are the first of what they envision as a vast electronic library in which no one has to pay dues or seek permission to read, copy or use the collective product of the world's academic research. "The written record is the lifeblood of science," said Dr. Harold E. Varmus, a Nobel laureate in medicine who is serving as the chairman of the new nonprofit publisher. "Our ability to build on the old to discover the new is all based on the way we disseminate our results." By contrast, established journals like Science and Nature charge steep annual subscription fees and bar access to their online editions to nonsubscribers, although Science recently began providing free electronic access to articles a year after publication. The new publishing venture, Public Library of Science, is an outgrowth of several years of friction between scientists and the journals over who should control access to scientific literature in the electronic age. For most scientists, who typically assign their copyright to the journals for no compensation, the main goal is to distribute their work as widely as possible. Academic publishers argue that if they made the articles more widely available they would lose the subscription revenue they need to ensure the quality of the editorial process. Far from holding back science, they say, the journals have played a crucial role in its advancement as a trusted repository of significant discovery. "We have very high standards, and it is somewhat costly," said Dr. Donald Kennedy, the editor of Science. "We're dealing in a market whether we like it or not." Science estimates that 800,000 people read the magazine electronically now, compared with 140,000 readers of the print version. Given the number of downloads at universities like Harvard and Stanford, which buy site licenses for about $5,000 a year, the magazine says people are reading articles for only a few cents each. In many cases even such small per-article charges to access a digital database can make for substantial income. The Dutch-British conglomerate Reed Elsevier Group, the world's largest academic publisher, posted a 30 percent profit last year on its science publishing activities. Science took in $34 million last year on advertising alone. But supporters of the Public Library of Science say the point is not how much money the journals make, but their monopoly control over literature that should belong to the public. "We would be perfectly happy for them to have huge profit margins providing that in exchange for all this money we're giving them we got to own the literature and the literature did not belong to them," said Dr. Michael B. Eisen, a biologist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the University of California, and a founder of the Public Library of Science. When scientists relied on print-and-paper journals to distribute their work, the Library's supporters argue, it made sense to charge for access, since each copy represented an additional expense. But they say that at a time when the Internet has reduced distribution costs to almost zero, a system that grants journals exclusive rights over distribution is no longer necessary. By publishing on the Internet and forgoing any profits, the new venture says it is now possible to maintain a high-quality journal without charging subscription fees. Instead, the new journals hope institutions that finance research will come to regard publishing as part of the cost. The journals will initially ask most authors to pay about $1,500 per article, for exposure to a wider potential audience and a much faster turnaround time. The library's founders agree that its success will depend largely on whether leading scholars are willing to forsake the certain status of publishing in the established journals to support the principle of science as a public resource. In a profession where publishing in a top journal is often crucial to success and grant money, that may be a difficult task. "I'd be happy to forswear publishing in any of those journals, but I'm not in a position where I need a job," said Dr. Marc Kirschner, chairman of the cell biology department at Harvard Medical School and a member of the electronic library's editorial board. "The difficulty will be getting over this hump from the point where people say, `Why should I risk it?' to where they don't see it as a risk." In that regard, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute - the nonprofit institute whose $11 billion endowment makes it a leading supporter of medical research - has emerged as a powerful ally. Dr. Thomas R. Cech, the institute's president, has publicly endorsed the library's goals and promised to cover its investigators' extra costs of publishing in the new journals. As for other researchers, "people will want to be associated with this because it is such a good deed," said another member of the library's editorial board, Dr. Nicholas R. Cozzarelli, editor of The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Unfettered access to the literature, library supporters say, would eliminate unnecessary duplication and allow doctors in poor countries, scientists at budget-conscious institutions, high school students, cancer patients and anyone else who could not afford subscriptions to benefit from existing research and add to it. Moreover, they say, the taxpayers, who spend nearly $40 billion a year on biomedical research, should not have to pay again - or wait some unspecified period - to be able to search for and see the results themselves. But Derk Haank, chairman of Elsevier Science, whose 1,500 journals include Cell, says such criticism is misguided. Elsevier, he says, is offering broader access to its electronic databases to the institutions that want it for far less than the cost of subscribing to dozens of paper journals. "It sounds very sympathetic to say this should be available to the public," he said. "But this kind of material is only used by experts." Still, in addition to making data available to more people sooner, the electronic library's founders argue that the research itself becomes more valuable when it is not walled off by copyrights and Balkanized in separate electronic databases. They envision the sprouting of a kind of cyber neural network, where all of scientific knowledge can be searched, sorted and grafted with a fluidity that will speed discovery. Under the library's editorial policy, any data can be integrated into new work as long as the original author is credited appropriately. The model is inspired by GenBank, the central repository of DNA sequences whose open access policy has driven much of the progress in genomics and biotechnology of the last decade. The library's roots can be traced to Dr. Patrick O. Brown's frustration at the barriers to literature he needed for research at his genetics laboratory at the Stanford University School of Medicine in 1998. "The information I wanted was information scientists had published with the goal of making it available to all their colleagues," he said. "And I couldn't get it readily because of the way the system was organized." Dr. Varmus, then director of the National Institutes for Health, talked with Dr. Brown in January 1999 and decided to pay for a Web site that would provide free access to peer-reviewed scientific literature. PubMedCentral (www.pubmedcentral.gov) was opened the next year. By a year later, however, only a handful of journals had decided to participate in the government archive. In an effort to whip up enthusiasm, Drs. Varmus, Brown and Eisen began circulating an open letter to the journals, asking them to place their articles in a free online database. The petition quickly garnered 30,000 signers around the world, including several Nobel laureates, who promised to publish their work only in journals that complied with their demand. But almost none did. That is when Dr. Varmus and his colleagues became convinced that they needed to raise money to start their own publication. After being rejected by several traditional science research foundations, the scientists found a sympathetic ear at the Silicon Valley foundation whose benefactor, Dr. Gordon E. Moore, was the co-founder of Intel Corporation. "Scientists are a conservative bunch," said Dr. Edward Penhoet, the foundation's senior director for science. "In the short term they'll still be publishing in Cell and other places. But in the long term, I think this has the potential to dramatically facilitate science." http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/17/science/17JOUR.html?ex=1041133807&ei=1&en=aed3ceb9fa3b1650 HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Tue Dec 17 06:06:33 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id B8D6956FF7; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 06:06:32 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7471256FF2 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 06:06:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from apt05-nex-01.thinkalong.com (12-234-214-35.client.attbi.com[12.234.214.35]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <2002121714260905300rvkjbe>; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:26:09 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.0.20021217062408.027b3520@thinkalong.com> X-Sender: jackpark@thinkalong.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 06:26:03 -0800 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org From: Jack Park Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Fwd: News from Public Library of Science Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Here is the PLoS press release on which the NYT article Gary Richmond forwarded to this list. >We are writing to you and 31,000 other colleagues who signed the >Public Library of Science open letter, to share some exciting news: >The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation has awarded a $9 million grant >to the Public Library of Science to enable us to launch new journals >that will allow scientists to make their works freely and universally >available from the moment of publication through international, >online "public libraries of science", without sacrificing the >recognition and audience that a reputable journal can provide. > >PLoS will begin by publishing two journals - PLoS Biology and PLoS >Medicine - that will retain all of the important features of >scientific journals, including rigorous peer-review and high >editorial standards, but will use a new business model in which the >costs of these services are recovered by modest fees on each >published paper. This new model will allow PLoS to make all published >works immediately available online, with no charges for access or >restrictions on subsequent redistribution or use. > >The Howard Hughes Medical Institute in the US has strongly endorsed >this concept by by offering to cover the costs of open access >publication by means of a budget supplement to each of its >investigators. Several universities have recognized the tremendous >value of open access publishing to the scientific and academic >communities (as well as long term financial savings of this model) >and have taken similar steps by providing funds from library budgets >to support open access publishing. We are confident that other >funding agencies and research institutions will similarly endorse the >idea of using grant money and institutional funds to cover modest >authors' fees. > >We have also taken steps to ensure that authors who do not have >access to grant funds or institutional support that allow them to pay >publication fees will still be able to publish their work in our >journals. > >We have begun putting together a superlative professional editorial >staff, and assembling a diverse, international editorial advisory >board of outstanding scientists who share our goals. We are aiming to >begin receiving submissions by summer 2003, and to begin publishing >in the second half of 2003. > >You can find more information about this new initiative at: >http://www.publiclibraryofscience.org (please bookmark it!). > >Thanks for your continued support. > >Harold E. Varmus >Patrick O. Brown >Michael B. Eisen > >for Public Library of Science --------------------------------------------------------------------------- XML Topic Maps: Creating and Using Topic Maps for the Web. Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-74960-2. http://www.nexist.org/wiki/User0Blog From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Wed Dec 18 14:17:08 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 5873956FF7; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:17:08 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B2EB156FF2 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 14:17:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from 207-237-116-202.c3-0.23d-ubr1.nyr-23d.ny.cable.rcn.com ([207.237.116.202] helo=rcn.com) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18Omo2-0001u0-00; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:36:46 -0500 Message-ID: <3E00F86F.6030402@rcn.com> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:36:31 -0500 From: Gary Richmond User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] [Fwd: [peirce-l] Re: NYTimes.com Article: New Premise in Science: Get the Word Out Quickly, Online] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Victoria N. Alexander also provided the url for this Los Alamos Archive which I am forwarding from the Peirce list. Gary VA: There also the Los Alamos Archive, which has made research immediately available for a number of years now: http://arxiv.org/ > > New Premise in Science: Get the Word Out Quickly, Online > > December 17, 2002 > By AMY HARMON > > > > From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Thu Dec 19 04:38:44 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 3472856FF7; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 04:38:44 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts8.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.52]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6659156FF2 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 04:38:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from sympatico.ca ([64.228.165.168]) by tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021219125825.WLJW27461.tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net@sympatico.ca> for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:58:25 -0500 Message-ID: <3E01C0FD.F66FC532@sympatico.ca> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:52:13 -0500 From: Henry K van Eyken X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] [Fwd: [peirce-l] Re: NYTimes.com Article: New Premise in Science:Get the Word Out Quickly, Online] References: <3E00F86F.6030402@rcn.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Gary. I somehow missed the NYT attachment to your post ("Get the word out quickly"). Henry Gary Richmond wrote: > Victoria N. Alexander also provided the url for this Los Alamos > Archive which I am forwarding from the Peirce list. Gary > > VA: There also the Los Alamos Archive, which has made research immediately > available for a number of years now: > http://arxiv.org/ > > > > > New Premise in Science: Get the Word Out Quickly, Online > > > > December 17, 2002 > > By AMY HARMON > > > > > > > > From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Thu Dec 19 07:30:26 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 6B02F56FF7; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:30:25 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (ms4.lga2.nytimes.com [199.239.138.148]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A0F9356FF2 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:30:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from email4.lga2.nytimes.com (email4 [10.5.101.169]) by ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3AA65A658 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:54:28 -0500 (EST) Received: by email4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix, from userid 202) id B774EC434; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:43:01 -0500 (EST) From: garyrichmond@rcn.com To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] NYTimes.com Article: New Premise in Science: Get the Word Out Quickly, Online Message-Id: <20021219154301.B774EC434@email4.lga2.nytimes.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:43:01 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com. Henry, Here's the NYTimes article you requested. Gary garyrichmond@rcn.com New Premise in Science: Get the Word Out Quickly, Online December 17, 2002 By AMY HARMON A group of prominent scientists is mounting an electronic challenge to the leading scientific journals, accusing them of holding back the progress of science by restricting online access to their articles so they can reap higher profits. Supported by a $9 million grant from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the scientists say that this week they will announce the creation of two peer-reviewed online journals on biology and medicine, with the goal of cornering the best scientific papers and immediately depositing them in the public domain. By providing a highly visible alternative to what they view as an outmoded system of distributing information, the founders hope science itself will be transformed. The two journals are the first of what they envision as a vast electronic library in which no one has to pay dues or seek permission to read, copy or use the collective product of the world's academic research. "The written record is the lifeblood of science," said Dr. Harold E. Varmus, a Nobel laureate in medicine and president of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center who is serving as the chairman of the new nonprofit publisher. "Our ability to build on the old to discover the new is all based on the way we disseminate our results." By contrast, established journals like Science and Nature charge steep annual subscription fees and bar access to their online editions to nonsubscribers, although Science recently began providing free electronic access to articles a year after publication. The new publishing venture, Public Library of Science, is an outgrowth of several years of friction between scientists and the journals over who should control access to scientific literature in the electronic age. For most scientists, who typically assign their copyright to the journals for no compensation, the main goal is to distribute their work as widely as possible. Academic publishers argue that if they made the articles more widely available they would lose the subscription revenue they need to ensure the quality of the editorial process. Far from holding back science, they say, the journals have played a crucial role in its advancement as a trusted repository of significant discovery. "We have very high standards, and it is somewhat costly," said Dr. Donald Kennedy, the editor of Science. "We're dealing in a market whether we like it or not." Science estimates that 800,000 people read the magazine electronically now, compared with 140,000 readers of the print version. Given the number of downloads at universities like Harvard and Stanford, which buy site licenses for about $5,000 a year, the magazine says people are reading articles for only a few cents each. In many cases even such small per-article charges to access a digital database can make for substantial income. The Dutch-British conglomerate Reed Elsevier Group, the world's largest academic publisher, posted a 30 percent profit last year on its science publishing activities. Science took in $34 million last year on advertising alone. But supporters of the Public Library of Science say the point is not how much money the journals make, but their monopoly control over literature that should belong to the public. "We would be perfectly happy for them to have huge profit margins providing that in exchange for all this money we're giving them we got to own the literature and the literature did not belong to them," said Dr. Michael B. Eisen, a biologist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the University of California, and a founder of the Public Library of Science. When scientists relied on print-and-paper journals to distribute their work, the Library's supporters argue, it made sense to charge for access, since each copy represented an additional expense. But they say that at a time when the Internet has reduced distribution costs to almost zero, a system that grants journals exclusive rights over distribution is no longer necessary. By publishing on the Internet and forgoing any profits, the new venture says it is now possible to maintain a high-quality journal without charging subscription fees. Instead, the new journals hope institutions that finance research will come to regard publishing as part of the cost. The journals will initially ask most authors to pay about $1,500 per article, for exposure to a wider potential audience and a much faster turnaround time. The library's founders agree that its success will depend largely on whether leading scholars are willing to forsake the certain status of publishing in the established journals to support the principle of science as a public resource. In a profession where publishing in a top journal is often crucial to success and grant money, that may be a difficult task. "I'd be happy to forswear publishing in any of those journals, but I'm not in a position where I need a job," said Dr. Marc Kirschner, chairman of the cell biology department at Harvard Medical School and a member of the electronic library's editorial board. "The difficulty will be getting over this hump from the point where people say, `Why should I risk it?' to where they don't see it as a risk." In that regard, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute - the nonprofit institute whose $11 billion endowment makes it a leading supporter of medical research - has emerged as a powerful ally. Dr. Thomas R. Cech, the institute's president, has publicly endorsed the library's goals and promised to cover its investigators' extra costs of publishing in the new journals. As for other researchers, "people will want to be associated with this because it is such a good deed," said another member of the library's editorial board, Dr. Nicholas R. Cozzarelli, editor of The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Unfettered access to the literature, library supporters say, would eliminate unnecessary duplication and allow doctors in poor countries, scientists at budget-conscious institutions, high school students, cancer patients and anyone else who could not afford subscriptions to benefit from existing research and add to it. Moreover, they say, the taxpayers, who spend nearly $40 billion a year on biomedical research, should not have to pay again - or wait some unspecified period - to be able to search for and see the results themselves. But Derk Haank, chairman of Elsevier Science, whose 1,500 journals include Cell, says such criticism is misguided. Elsevier, he says, is offering broader access to its electronic databases to the institutions that want it for far less than the cost of subscribing to dozens of paper journals. "It sounds very sympathetic to say this should be available to the public," he said. "But this kind of material is only used by experts." Still, in addition to making data available to more people sooner, the electronic library's founders argue that the research itself becomes more valuable when it is not walled off by copyrights and Balkanized in separate electronic databases. They envision the sprouting of a kind of cyber neural network, where all of scientific knowledge can be searched, sorted and grafted with a fluidity that will speed discovery. Under the library's editorial policy, any data can be integrated into new work as long as the original author is credited appropriately. The model is inspired by GenBank, the central repository of DNA sequences whose open access policy has driven much of the progress in genomics and biotechnology of the last decade. The library's roots can be traced to Dr. Patrick O. Brown's frustration at the barriers to literature he needed for research at his genetics laboratory at the Stanford University School of Medicine in 1998. "The information I wanted was information scientists had published with the goal of making it available to all their colleagues," he said. "And I couldn't get it readily because of the way the system was organized." Dr. Varmus, then director of the National Institutes for Health, talked with Dr. Brown in January 1999 and decided to pay for a Web site that would provide free access to peer-reviewed scientific literature. PubMedCentral (www.pubmedcentral.gov) was opened the next year. By a year later, however, only a handful of journals had decided to participate in the government archive. In an effort to whip up enthusiasm, Drs. Varmus, Brown and Eisen began circulating an open letter to the journals, asking them to place their articles in a free online database. The petition quickly garnered 30,000 signers around the world, including several Nobel laureates, who promised to publish their work only in journals that complied with their demand. But almost none did. That is when Dr. Varmus and his colleagues became convinced that they needed to raise money to start their own publication. After being rejected by several traditional science research foundations, the scientists found a sympathetic ear at the Silicon Valley foundation whose benefactor, Dr. Gordon E. Moore, was the co-founder of Intel Corporation. "Scientists are a conservative bunch," said Dr. Edward Penhoet, the foundation's senior director for science. "In the short term they'll still be publishing in Cell and other places. But in the long term, I think this has the potential to dramatically facilitate science." http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/17/science/17JOUR.html?ex=1041312581&ei=1&en=149e16b37acd3687 HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Thu Dec 19 22:07:17 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 792D356FF7; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:07:16 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1039756FF3 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:07:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from apt05-nex-01.thinkalong.com (12-234-214-35.client.attbi.com[12.234.214.35]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <20021220062654002000e49de>; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:26:54 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.0.20021219221835.027697c0@thinkalong.com> X-Sender: jackpark@thinkalong.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:26:39 -0800 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org From: Jack Park Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] TeacherServlet, first blood Cc: ted Kahn , eclegg@iftf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Well, the damned thing saw first light just now. Lots of bugs, but, what the heck. I'm in the process now of substituting the header jpg on delwiche.html for the nexist logo. You can see it at http://www.nexist.org/TeacherFirstBlood.gif Now, I need the primary categories that will become a URL from Eileen's front page, and I'll gen up some pages and database entries to get things started. The URLs to link to this will look like: http://www.nexist.org/hf/XXX where XXX is the name of a category you want to jump to and will be a pagename in my database. I'm going to shut down now. I'll check my mail in the morning for the categories (and descriptions) so I can hack up this demo. Cheers Jack --------------------------------------------------------------------------- XML Topic Maps: Creating and Using Topic Maps for the Web. Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-74960-2. http://www.nexist.org/wiki/User0Blog From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Thu Dec 19 22:12:53 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id CBC0E56FFD; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:12:52 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4251A56FF7 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:12:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from apt05-nex-01.thinkalong.com (12-234-214-35.client.attbi.com[12.234.214.35]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <20021220063231002000d3g3e>; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:32:32 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.0.20021219222843.0275df78@thinkalong.com> X-Sender: jackpark@thinkalong.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:32:11 -0800 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org From: Jack Park Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] TeacherServlet, first blood In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.0.20021219221835.027697c0@thinkalong.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Wouldn't you know, this late in the evening, I managed to get email screwed up. So, what the heck, an explanation is in order. I'm using NexistWiki version 1.5 as a substate for a teacher's platform, one that will allow teachers to organize lesson plans and so forth. The message was aimed at several people including Ted Kahn who is running the project. I like to think that the underlying platform is robust enough to stretch in different directions. Eileen Clegg is the graphic artist who did a really slick image with ImageMaps installed by Bill Dahl. Those maps will link to my system which gives teachers a database-driven Website. So much for screwed up email addresses. Have a great holiday, everyone. Cheers Jack At 10:26 PM 12/19/2002 -0800, you wrote: >Well, the damned thing saw first light just now. Lots of bugs, but, what >the heck. >I'm in the process now of substituting the header jpg on delwiche.html for >the nexist logo. > >You can see it at http://www.nexist.org/TeacherFirstBlood.gif > >Now, I need the primary categories that will become a URL from Eileen's >front page, and I'll gen up some pages and database entries to get things >started. >The URLs to link to this will look like: http://www.nexist.org/hf/XXX >where XXX is the name of a category you want to jump to and will be a >pagename in my database. > >I'm going to shut down now. I'll check my mail in the morning for the >categories (and descriptions) so I can hack up this demo. > >Cheers >Jack > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >XML Topic Maps: Creating and Using Topic Maps for the Web. >Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-74960-2. > >http://www.nexist.org/wiki/User0Blog --------------------------------------------------------------------------- XML Topic Maps: Creating and Using Topic Maps for the Web. Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-74960-2. http://www.nexist.org/wiki/User0Blog From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Fri Dec 20 22:23:14 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id BE59056FF5; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 22:23:13 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from pheriche.sun.com (pheriche.sun.com [192.18.98.34]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4730356FF4 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 22:23:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from ha1sca-mail1.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.145.155.51]) by pheriche.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA14740 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:42:53 -0700 (MST) Received: from sun.com (d-usca14-129-126 [129.145.129.126]) by ha1sca-mail1.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.11.6+Sun/8.10.2/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id gBL6gqM29420 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 22:42:52 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3E040D6C.395D9F87@sun.com> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 22:42:52 -0800 From: Eric Armstrong X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Google Ranking #1 !!! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org How about that! I'm a google first! pamela a wrote: > Hello Eric, > > type "partially hydrogenated" into Google and your web > site is the first one that pops up! ... From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Sat Dec 21 08:34:50 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 2C5D156FF5; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:34:50 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net [207.69.200.246]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7EB7456FF4 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:34:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from user-11200gf.dsl.mindspring.com ([66.32.2.15] helo=gmob) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PmtR-0005Jz-00 for ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:54:29 -0500 From: "Graham Stalker-Wilde" To: Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] the paperless office Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:54:07 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: <3E040D6C.395D9F87@sun.com> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Interesting article in the current issue of "The Economist" called "In Praise of Clutter". Essentially it's on the idea of clutter as an external memory device - using paper as a means of mapping pre-, or partially, categorized information. Makes a number of good points. One is the density of paper as an information storage medium compared to screens. Another is how much more convenient - and informative - it is to rearrange pieces of paper on a desk than windows on a screen. The most interesting area to me is perhaps the application of technology to filing/retrieval Worth a look. Graham Stalker-Wilde www.stalker-wilde.com From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Sat Dec 21 08:37:38 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 9FC9857001; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:37:37 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3CE9B56FF5 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:37:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from apt05-nex-01.thinkalong.com (12-234-214-35.client.attbi.com[12.234.214.35]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <20021221165717001003nh2oe>; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 16:57:17 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.0.20021221085623.02716798@thinkalong.com> X-Sender: jackpark@thinkalong.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:57:00 -0800 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org From: Jack Park Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] the paperless office In-Reply-To: References: <3E040D6C.395D9F87@sun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org At 11:54 AM 12/21/2002 -0500, you wrote: >Essentially it's on the idea of clutter as an external memory device - using >paper as a means of mapping pre-, or partially, categorized information. If my office is any indication, I'm a life-long subscriber to this paradigm! Cheers Jack --------------------------------------------------------------------------- XML Topic Maps: Creating and Using Topic Maps for the Web. Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-74960-2. http://www.nexist.org/wiki/User0Blog From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Sat Dec 21 09:03:24 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id DAFE856FF5; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:03:20 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from tomts26-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts26-srv.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.189]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2B00056FF4 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:03:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from sympatico.ca ([64.228.165.124]) by tomts26-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021221172304.GNOB25524.tomts26-srv.bellnexxia.net@sympatico.ca> for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:23:04 -0500 Message-ID: <3E04A20C.E9017334@sympatico.ca> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:17:00 -0500 From: Henry K van Eyken X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Google Ranking #1 !!! References: <3E040D6C.395D9F87@sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Congrats! And that is for only partially dehydrogenated! H. Eric Armstrong wrote: > How about that! I'm a google first! > > pamela a wrote: > > > Hello Eric, > > > > type "partially hydrogenated" into Google and your web > > site is the first one that pops up! ... From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Sat Dec 21 09:14:31 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id E323256FF5; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:14:30 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8859E56FF4 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:14:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from pacbell.net (12-240-200-207.client.attbi.com[12.240.200.207]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <20021221173411001003l3nje>; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 17:34:11 +0000 Message-ID: <3E04A616.3020102@pacbell.net> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:34:14 -0800 From: Gerald Pierce User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] the paperless office References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org WHAT A RELIEF! My work area looks like a gravitational accretion zone. The trick is to balance the level of chaos (can it have levels?) with the need of reasonable retrieval times. You know, when what is needed has become snowed under. What is really fun is the occasional clean-up. It is quite like an archeological dig. It is always interesting to see what captured my momentary interest and was then left to become intellectual compost. I wonder if this is an unacknowledged counter force to the success of knowledge management (e.g. CoDIAK?) The more that I think on this, the more I have to say. I guess that I owe it the author to go read the article before saying any more. Gerald Pierce Q. E. D. Services Graham Stalker-Wilde wrote: > Interesting article in the current issue of "The Economist" called "In > Praise of Clutter". > > Essentially it's on the idea of clutter as an external memory device - using > paper as a means of mapping pre-, or partially, categorized information. > > Makes a number of good points. One is the density of paper as an information > storage medium compared to screens. Another is how much more convenient - > and informative - it is to rearrange pieces of paper on a desk than windows > on a screen. The most interesting area to me is perhaps the application of > technology to filing/retrieval > > Worth a look. > > Graham Stalker-Wilde > www.stalker-wilde.com > > > From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Sat Dec 21 14:24:59 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 9CED556FF9; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 14:24:58 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net [207.69.200.246]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1583656FF4 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 14:24:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from user-11200gf.dsl.mindspring.com ([66.32.2.15] helo=gmob) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18PsMH-0000eF-00 for ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 17:44:37 -0500 From: "Graham Stalker-Wilde" To: Subject: RE: [ba-unrev-talk] the paperless office Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 17:44:15 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: <3E04A616.3020102@pacbell.net> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org On the lighter side, I think this is one of these areas where George Carlin's driving paradigm applies (anyone driving slower than you is an a@#hole, anyone driving faster is a maniac) - so I, and I alone, have exactly the right balance of creative confusion. On the more serious side, I invariably program with a large paper blotter beside me - because for many things it's simply much more useful than a teraflop workstation with a 800 trillion by 600 trillion flat screen monitor. Partly it's the ability to externalize unarticulated cognitive structures (er, did I really say that? sorry) - "this goes here, near that" Computers tend to force one into formalizing relationships too early. For my 2 cents worth, I think it ought to go something like this: Technology almost never becomes obsolete (arms races might be an exception here) - there are more steam engines working now than in the 19th century - radio did not replace live performance, nor TV film, etc etc. What happens is that new technology enables better use of old - steam engines generating electricity which is easier to transmit, load balance, etc. What I really want from computers is the ability to find stuff without ever filing it. This is pretty close to available. A nice little google indexer running on my PDA ought to do it. I never want to file things because I never know what they will ultimately have been about. Think about email - I used to store by sender, or by subject, or date, or split into "project A" "topic X". Now I usually just file everything in a big folder called "mail" - and let the machine knock itself out locating that letter I got sometime last year about that poor Nigerian widow. It usually finds it faster than I do when I look by category. -g > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org > [mailto:owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org]On Behalf Of Gerald Pierce > Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 12:34 PM > To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org > Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] the paperless office > > > WHAT A RELIEF! My work area looks like a gravitational accretion > zone. The > trick is to balance the level of chaos (can it have levels?) with > the need of > reasonable retrieval times. You know, when what is needed has > become snowed under. > > What is really fun is the occasional clean-up. It is quite like > an archeological > dig. It is always interesting to see what captured my momentary > interest and > was then left to become intellectual compost. > > I wonder if this is an unacknowledged counter force to the > success of knowledge > management (e.g. CoDIAK?) > > The more that I think on this, the more I have to say. I guess > that I owe it > the author to go read the article before saying any more. > > Gerald Pierce > Q. E. D. Services > > Graham Stalker-Wilde wrote: > > Interesting article in the current issue of "The Economist" called "In > > Praise of Clutter". > > > > Essentially it's on the idea of clutter as an external memory > device - using > > paper as a means of mapping pre-, or partially, categorized information. > > > > Makes a number of good points. One is the density of paper as > an information > > storage medium compared to screens. Another is how much more > convenient - > > and informative - it is to rearrange pieces of paper on a desk > than windows > > on a screen. The most interesting area to me is perhaps the > application of > > technology to filing/retrieval > > > > Worth a look. > > > > Graham Stalker-Wilde > > www.stalker-wilde.com > > > > > > > > From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Sun Dec 22 16:45:56 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 8248056FF8; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 16:45:55 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from bill.trinity.unimelb.edu.au (bill.trinity.unimelb.edu.au [203.28.240.2]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AE14656FF4 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 16:45:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by bill.trinity.unimelb.edu.au (Postfix, from userid 119) id A9C40241F; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:05:40 +1100 (EST) Received: from localhost (tela.trinity.unimelb.edu.au [203.28.240.180]) by bill.trinity.unimelb.edu.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3F92421 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:05:39 +1100 (EST) Received: from pc42-141.trinity.unimelb.edu.au (domo7.trinity.unimelb.edu.au [203.28.240.72]) by bill.trinity.unimelb.edu.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888B3241F for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:05:37 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021223115831.0220ecc8@myriad.its.unimelb.edu.au> X-Sender: tgelder@bill.trinity.unimelb.edu.au X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:05:31 +1100 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org From: Tim van Gelder Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] query - "argument mapping" antecedents Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-99.7 required=7.0 tests=AWL,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_IN_WHITELIST version=2.43 X-Spam-Level: Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Hello, In the 1962 report Augmenting Human Intellect, Douglas Engelbart described a system for displaying and manipulating argument structures - what we might now call computer-supported argument mapping. My query is: in sketching such a system, was Engelbart familiar with and drawing upon antecedents in argument mapping, such as the work of Wigmore and Toulmin (or any others)? Or did he quite independently develop the concept of "box and line" graphical displays of argument structure? I'm currently drafting a paper "Enhancing and Augmenting Human Reasoning" based on my presentation at a recent conference Cognition, Evolution and Rationality: Cognitive Science for the 21st Century. The above question arises in that context. Any advice much appreciated, Tim van Gelder http://www.austhink.org From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Tue Dec 24 15:34:49 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 692775703E; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:34:48 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (nwkea-mail-1.sun.com [192.18.42.13]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EE44757035 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:34:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from ha1sca-mail1.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.145.155.51]) by nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA05855 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:54:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from sun.com (d-usca14-129-126 [129.145.129.126]) by ha1sca-mail1.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.11.6+Sun/8.10.2/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id gBONsRM14129 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:54:27 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3E08F3B3.3DC21543@sun.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:54:27 -0800 From: Eric Armstrong X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] the paperless office References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Over the years, I've noticed several advantages to paper: 1. Lots of info on the page, and I can take it with me to read just about anywhere. 2. I can jot down notes, comments, corrections, and counter-arguments in the margins. 3. Different sizes, shapes, positions, and locations of papers stay in my mind -- so when I want something, I have a pretty good idea where to look, if I handled it in the last month or so. (Beyond that, stuff is effectively buried.) 4. The stuff on the top of the heap triggers my "to do" reflex. The stuff that got buried conveniently slides of my mental stack. 5. About once a year, when I'm procastinating before starting a major new project, I "clear the decks" by tossing all the old paper. Feels good. In contrast, I once spent a year tracking my "todo" lists with my outliner program. Had lists for home, work, and for when I'm out and about, so I was very productive. When I walked into the hardware store, I'd have the list of the things I needed for any and all projects I was working on (typically several). That was great for a while, but after a few months I noticed that every week or so I would add 10 items, but only 6 or 7 would get done. So every week I would accumulate 2 to 4 things that didn't get done. In the past, with my lists on scraps of paper, they would get lost, or misplaced, so I'd write new ones. When I found the old ones, they would be dog-eared and useless, so I'd throw them out. In that process, anything important enough to *stay* in my mental queue got transferred from the old scrap of paper to the new scrap. I was quite comfortable, having anywhere from 2 to 10 things on a scrap of paper at any one time -- seldom more or less. But after a year with an electronic system, I had 100 items that the stupid program would not let me forget! Each one sat there, mocking me, every time I opened up my list. When it grew to 4 pages long, I threw it away and went back to the scraps of paper. I never looked back. I've been happy with scraps of paper for todo lists ever since, and I have stacks of printouts to read in my office. (When it gets a foot deep, it's time to purge. But until then, it's comfortable.) What I need to remember is right there at the top, and what's less important is farther down. And when I want to clear the decks, I can. On the other hand, I also keep mail in different project categories -- especially mail that contains *information* I need to carry out an action item. When I get back to that project, the information I need will be right there. A structured todo list is also enormously helpful when working on a project -- to keep track of the things I need to do in some other module, when I get to it. So I use both systems. Disk storage is great for long term access and for remote access. On screen viewing is great for browsing to see if that's the document I want. But when it comes time to work on the project and use the information, I invariably print it first... Graham Stalker-Wilde wrote: > Interesting article in the current issue of "The Economist" called "In > Praise of Clutter". > > Essentially it's on the idea of clutter as an external memory device - using > paper as a means of mapping pre-, or partially, categorized information. > > Makes a number of good points. One is the density of paper as an information > storage medium compared to screens. Another is how much more convenient - > and informative - it is to rearrange pieces of paper on a desk than windows > on a screen. The most interesting area to me is perhaps the application of > technology to filing/retrieval > > Worth a look. > > Graham Stalker-Wilde > www.stalker-wilde.com From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Tue Dec 24 16:12:31 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id F25BE5704F; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:12:30 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from mail.101freeway.net (mail.101freeway.net [12.44.112.15]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7FDBF5704E for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:12:28 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 67846 invoked from network); 25 Dec 2002 00:29:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO minerva) (192.168.45.236) by mail.101freeway.com with SMTP; 25 Dec 2002 00:29:31 -0000 From: "Garold (Gary) L. Johnson" To: Subject: RE: [ba-unrev-talk] the paperless office Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:32:12 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <3E08F3B3.3DC21543@sun.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org I too have had the problem of the continually growing ToDo list. Partly because I tended to combine "buy bread: with "ensure world peace" levels of tasks. In "Getting Things Done" www.davidco.com, David Allen proposes getting *all* of your ToDo items into a trusted system - one where you can be assured that you *will* review the item, that it won't fall through the cracks, so that the system will provide memory so you don't have to. A "project" is deemed to be anything that requires more than one step. At a minimum, the "next action" that can be done is visible in the system. The active items are reviewed at least weekly. Items can be discarded as "never going to do it" or moved to a "someday / sometime / maybe" category which is visible in the review but not on a daily basis. If a task isn't being addressed, it may need to be broken down. The objective is to have a task that can be done as a next action to move the project forward. The addition of "contexts" where and what resources make it possible to carry out an action, support knowing what to get at the hardware store while you are running errands but *not* while you are at your desk unless you look at a different context explicitly. Allen's take on prioritization is that it goes out the window at the first interruption. He contends that if you have available a list of possible next actions that you can work on in the current context (possibly with time estimates), that intuition and judgment are all that is needed to decide what to do next. I have yet to try the system, but he makes some excellent points, I am in the process of reading the book. The Ecco Yahoo group has both an Excel template and an Ecco template that address the technique. I am not terribly thrilled with any one of them. It is certainly a different and interesting approach. Thanks, Garold (Gary) L. Johnson -----Original Message----- From: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org [mailto:owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org]On Behalf Of Eric Armstrong Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 3:54 PM To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] the paperless office Over the years, I've noticed several advantages to paper: 1. Lots of info on the page, and I can take it with me to read just about anywhere. 2. I can jot down notes, comments, corrections, and counter-arguments in the margins. 3. Different sizes, shapes, positions, and locations of papers stay in my mind -- so when I want something, I have a pretty good idea where to look, if I handled it in the last month or so. (Beyond that, stuff is effectively buried.) 4. The stuff on the top of the heap triggers my "to do" reflex. The stuff that got buried conveniently slides of my mental stack. 5. About once a year, when I'm procastinating before starting a major new project, I "clear the decks" by tossing all the old paper. Feels good. In contrast, I once spent a year tracking my "todo" lists with my outliner program. Had lists for home, work, and for when I'm out and about, so I was very productive. When I walked into the hardware store, I'd have the list of the things I needed for any and all projects I was working on (typically several). That was great for a while, but after a few months I noticed that every week or so I would add 10 items, but only 6 or 7 would get done. So every week I would accumulate 2 to 4 things that didn't get done. In the past, with my lists on scraps of paper, they would get lost, or misplaced, so I'd write new ones. When I found the old ones, they would be dog-eared and useless, so I'd throw them out. In that process, anything important enough to *stay* in my mental queue got transferred from the old scrap of paper to the new scrap. I was quite comfortable, having anywhere from 2 to 10 things on a scrap of paper at any one time -- seldom more or less. But after a year with an electronic system, I had 100 items that the stupid program would not let me forget! Each one sat there, mocking me, every time I opened up my list. When it grew to 4 pages long, I threw it away and went back to the scraps of paper. I never looked back. I've been happy with scraps of paper for todo lists ever since, and I have stacks of printouts to read in my office. (When it gets a foot deep, it's time to purge. But until then, it's comfortable.) What I need to remember is right there at the top, and what's less important is farther down. And when I want to clear the decks, I can. On the other hand, I also keep mail in different project categories -- especially mail that contains *information* I need to carry out an action item. When I get back to that project, the information I need will be right there. A structured todo list is also enormously helpful when working on a project -- to keep track of the things I need to do in some other module, when I get to it. So I use both systems. Disk storage is great for long term access and for remote access. On screen viewing is great for browsing to see if that's the document I want. But when it comes time to work on the project and use the information, I invariably print it first... Graham Stalker-Wilde wrote: > Interesting article in the current issue of "The Economist" called "In > Praise of Clutter". > > Essentially it's on the idea of clutter as an external memory device - using > paper as a means of mapping pre-, or partially, categorized information. > > Makes a number of good points. One is the density of paper as an information > storage medium compared to screens. Another is how much more convenient - > and informative - it is to rearrange pieces of paper on a desk than windows > on a screen. The most interesting area to me is perhaps the application of > technology to filing/retrieval > > Worth a look. > > Graham Stalker-Wilde > www.stalker-wilde.com From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Tue Dec 24 16:53:12 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 824CA57069; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:53:11 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from kathmandu.sun.com (kathmandu.sun.com [192.18.98.36]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F31BE57061 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:53:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ha1sca-mail1.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.145.155.51]) by kathmandu.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA06355 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:12:46 -0700 (MST) Received: from sun.com (d-usca14-129-126 [129.145.129.126]) by ha1sca-mail1.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.11.6+Sun/8.10.2/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id gBP1CkM19562 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:12:46 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3E09060E.2BAB96B7@sun.com> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 17:12:46 -0800 From: Eric Armstrong X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] the paperless office References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org "Garold (Gary) L. Johnson" wrote: > In "Getting Things Done" www.davidco.com, David Allen ... Hmm. 4-1/2 stars from 61 reviews at Amazon. Hell of a record. I ordered it. From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Wed Dec 25 19:35:41 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id C5BA0570A0; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 19:35:40 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 62DB65709B for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 19:35:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from pacbell.net (12-240-200-207.client.attbi.com[12.240.200.207]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51) with SMTP id <20021226035523051006i6kie>; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 03:55:23 +0000 Message-ID: <3E0A7DB3.2070107@pacbell.net> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 19:55:31 -0800 From: Gerald Pierce User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] the paperless office References: <3E09060E.2BAB96B7@sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org You know, I think you're right! I ordered it too ($14.00 new at www.powells.com) Ger Pierce Eric Armstrong wrote: > "Garold (Gary) L. Johnson" wrote: > > >>In "Getting Things Done" www.davidco.com, David Allen ... > > > Hmm. 4-1/2 stars from 61 reviews at Amazon. > Hell of a record. > I ordered it. > > > > From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Thu Dec 26 08:27:05 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 2940B570B8; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 08:27:05 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 93F6A570B2 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 08:27:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from apt05-nex-01.thinkalong.com (12-234-214-35.client.attbi.com[12.234.214.35]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <20021226164644002000d84ae>; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 16:46:44 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.0.20021226084529.027a6238@thinkalong.com> X-Sender: jackpark@thinkalong.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 08:46:30 -0800 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org From: Jack Park Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] New book on knowledge innovation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Transcluded from a k-web email received today: From: "Debra Amidon" To: Subject: RE: AOK Knowledge Architecture 2.12 Date: Mon, Dec 23, 2002, 10:21 AM Jerry: It might be of interest to your architecture group that the new book includes entire chapters on: - Knowledge Performance Economics - Knowledge Structures - Knowledge Workers - Knowledge Processes - Knowledge Processing Technology Of course, they can see the sample first chapter on line - http://www.entovation.com/forthcoming.htm; and soon you will have your review as well. Holiday blessings... Debra (Editor's Note: Please buy Deborah's new book, "THE INNOVATION SUPERHIGHWAY," through the AOK Bookstore: http://www.kwork.org/Store/new.html) *************** Debra M. Amidon Founder and CEO ENTOVATION International Ltd. 2 Reading Avenue, Suite 300 Wilmington, MA 01887 USA T: 978/988-7995 F: 978/863-0124 E-mail: debra@entovation.com URL: http://www.entovation.com "Innovating our future...together." --------------------------------------------------------------------------- XML Topic Maps: Creating and Using Topic Maps for the Web. Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-74960-2. http://www.nexist.org/wiki/User0Blog From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Fri Dec 27 03:33:51 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 3AEF1570F3; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 03:33:51 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from mail.chariot.net.au (mail.chariot.net.au [203.87.95.38]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 27D31570ED for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 03:33:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from chariot.net.au (ppp-159.cust203-87-112.ghr.chariot.net.au [203.87.112.159]) by mail.chariot.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D906180708 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 22:23:36 +1030 (CST) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 22:23:51 +1030 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Interesting projects From: stephen white To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Have a look at: http://snipsnap.org/ another interesting project: http://tiki.org/ I'm currently looking for a CMS to handle lecturer/student communication. The winner of my search will be run on a testbed of 2000 students to find out how well it works in practice. I'm looking forwards to this part of my new job since this area is a particular interest of mine. I can get involved in the development of these tools as part of my daily job! -- spwhite@chariot.net.au From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Fri Dec 27 04:24:19 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 01485570F6; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 04:24:18 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from mail.chariot.net.au (mail.chariot.net.au [203.87.95.38]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F28C7570F3 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 04:24:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from chariot.net.au (ppp-248.cust203-87-122.ghr.chariot.net.au [203.87.122.248]) by mail.chariot.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F9F517FF7A for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 23:14:07 +1030 (CST) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 22:47:45 +1030 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Correction From: stephen white To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <34B25224-1995-11D7-A842-000393B7D972@chariot.net.au> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Sorry for any wasted time... tiki.org should have been: http://sourceforge.net/projects/tikiwiki/ -- spwhite@chariot.net.au From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Fri Dec 27 09:54:30 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 9E83057109; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 09:54:29 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from mail.101freeway.net (mail.101freeway.net [12.44.112.15]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 19233570ED for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 09:54:28 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 61695 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2002 18:11:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO minerva) (192.168.45.236) by mail.101freeway.com with SMTP; 27 Dec 2002 18:11:30 -0000 From: "Garold (Gary) L. Johnson" To: Subject: RE: [ba-unrev-talk] Interesting projects Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:14:27 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org The RSD (Really Simple Discoverability) idea at http://archipelago.phrasewise.com/stories/storyReader$1330 sounds interesting as a way to simplify setup of Wikis and Blogs. It may have wider application. Thanks, Garold (Gary) L. Johnson -----Original Message----- From: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org [mailto:owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org]On Behalf Of stephen white Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 3:54 AM To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Interesting projects Have a look at: http://snipsnap.org/ another interesting project: http://tiki.org/ I'm currently looking for a CMS to handle lecturer/student communication. The winner of my search will be run on a testbed of 2000 students to find out how well it works in practice. I'm looking forwards to this part of my new job since this area is a particular interest of mine. I can get involved in the development of these tools as part of my daily job! -- spwhite@chariot.net.au From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Mon Dec 30 08:25:34 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 1915856FF9; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:25:34 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (ms4.lga2.nytimes.com [199.239.138.148]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9C23E56FF4 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:25:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from email4.lga2.nytimes.com (email4 [10.5.101.169]) by ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95F0B5A52C for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:49:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by email4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix, from userid 202) id 9A0C2C432; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:38:18 -0500 (EST) From: garyrichmond@rcn.com To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] NYTimes.com Article: Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do Message-Id: <20021230163818.9A0C2C432@email4.lga2.nytimes.com> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:38:18 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com. The opening of the article: SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next spring: The capital I that usually begins the word "Internet." Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies how people use online technology and how that affects their lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize Internet — and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift in the way that we think about the online world. garyrichmond@rcn.com Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do December 29, 2002 By JOHN SCHWARTZ SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next spring: The capital I that usually begins the word "Internet." Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies how people use online technology and how that affects their lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize Internet - and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift in the way that we think about the online world. "I think what it means is it's part of the everyday universe," he said. Capitalization irked him because, he said, it seemed to imply that reaching into the vast, interconnected ether was a brand-name experience. "The capitalization of things seems to place an inordinate, almost private emphasis on something," he said, turning it into a Kleenex or a Frigidaire. "The Internet, at least philosophically, should not be owned by anyone," he said, calling it "part of the neural universe of life." But, he said, dropping the big I would sent a deeper message to the world: The revolution is over, and the Net won. It's part of everyone's life, and as common as air and water (neither of which starts with a capital). Some elements of the online world have already made the transition. Internet often appears with a lowercase I on the Internet itself - but then, spelling online is dreadful, u kno. Although most everybody still capitalizes World Wide Web, words like "website," and the online journals known as weblogs (or, simply, blogs) are increasingly lowercase. Of course, the Internet's capital I is virtually engraved in stone, since Microsoft Word automatically capitalizes the lowercase "i" unless a user overrides its settings. For Mr. Turow, the first step in his campaign was persuading his book editor to enlist. She compromised, dropping to lowercase in newly written parts and retaining the capital in older articles reproduced in the book. Then he nudged Steven Jones, a communications professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago and president of the Association of Internet Researchers. Mr. Jones was cool to the idea, until he looked at copies of Scientific American from the late 19th century, and noticed that words for new technologies, like Phonograph, were often uppercased. Today, Mr. Jones is a crusader himself. "I think the moment is right," he said, to treat the Internet "the way we refer to television, radio and the telephone." He shared his view with a few hundred close friends last month at a meeting of the National Communication Association, an educators' group. "I just noticed everybody's attention kind of snapped forward," he said. "I'm used to having people say nice things," he said. "We're scholars, not wrestlers. But this time I was struck by the number of people who were saying the equivalent of, `Right on!' " DICTIONARY editors, though, have dismissed Mr. Turow politely but firmly. Dictionaries do not generally see themselves as making the rules, said Jesse Sheidlower, who runs the American offices of the Oxford English Dictionary. "What dictionaries do is reflect what's out there," he said. He and his fellow dictionary editors would think seriously about such changes after newspapers make them, he added. That could take a while. Allan M. Siegal, a co-author of The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage and an assistant managing editor at the newspaper, said that "there is some virtue in the theory" that Internet is becoming a generic term, "and it would not be surprising to see the lowercase usage eclipse the uppercase within a few years." He said, however, that the newspaper was unlikely to make any change that was not supported by authoritative dictionaries. Time to ask Robert Kahn, who is as responsible as anyone for the creation of the Internet, having helped plan the original network that preceded it and having created, with Vinton Cerf, the language of computer networks, known as TCP/IP, that allowed the vast knitting-together of systems that gave birth to the modern medium. He cares deeply about the name, having led a fight for years to ensure that its use is not restricted or abused by the corporation that received the trademark in 1989. A settlement was reached two years ago with the company now known as Concord EFS. The company agreed that it would not dun people who used the word, which meant that "Internet" now belongs to everybody, Mr. Kahn said. "We defended the right of people to use the word `Internet' for what we think of as the Internet," he said. THAT was the important fight, according to Mr. Kahn. "Whether you use a cap I or little I" hardly matters, he said. Which leads us back to a profound question for Mr. Turow: Don't you have anything better to do? "That's a really interesting question," he said. "I was an English major. I'm very sensitive to the nuances of words, and I'm very concerned about the nuances, the feel that words have within the society." Fair enough; Perhaps the next big thing, after all, will be small. At least initially. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/29/weekinreview/29SCHW.html?ex=1042266298&ei=1&en=a1d8d3cfcbb6f3ad HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Mon Dec 30 08:28:34 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 7794C56FFB; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:28:33 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (ms4.lga2.nytimes.com [199.239.138.148]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1CD8156FF9 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:28:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from email4.lga2.nytimes.com (email4 [10.5.101.169]) by ms4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2C2C5A548 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:52:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by email4.lga2.nytimes.com (Postfix, from userid 202) id D4B09C432; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:41:18 -0500 (EST) From: garyrichmond@rcn.com To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] NYTimes.com Article: Glass Panes and Software: Windows Name Is Challenged Message-Id: <20021230164118.D4B09C432@email4.lga2.nytimes.com> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:41:18 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com. from the article: Lindows.com's stated intention is to market desktop operating software based on Linux, an operating system, distributed free, whose basic code is written and debugged by a volunteer community of programmers. To date, Linux has done well as an operating system for the server computers that run corporate networks and the Internet. But it has made scant progress in loosening Microsoft's grip on the market for PC operating systems, where Microsoft enjoys a monopoly. garyrichmond@rcn.com Glass Panes and Software: Windows Name Is Challenged December 30, 2002 By STEVE LOHR An upstart company, Lindows.com, is trying to persuade the Federal District Court in Seattle to invalidate Microsoft's trademark on Windows. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/30/technology/30LOGO.html?ex=1042266478&ei=1&en=c73b1e22d67c2049 HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Mon Dec 30 12:02:01 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id 8A09A56FF9; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:02:00 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.185]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 66EA556FF4 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:01:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from sympatico.ca ([64.228.165.166]) by tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021230202141.KOHU12793.tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net@sympatico.ca> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:21:41 -0500 Message-ID: <3E10A7DD.1F855780@sympatico.ca> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:09:01 -0500 From: Henry K van Eyken X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] NYTimes.com Article: Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do References: <20021230163818.9A0C2C432@email4.lga2.nytimes.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------6D8B719E6536ABE918AE4B6C" Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org --------------6D8B719E6536ABE918AE4B6C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Yes, Gary. You know, I never liked it very much when the Telephone rings while I am listening to a fine concert on the Radio. Or when suddenly the Electricity goes off while I am watching my tv.. And so, when may we expect to comfortably browse the worldwide web? (ww or www?) Henry BTW. I do appreciate your references to the New York Times. garyrichmond@rcn.com wrote: > This article from NYTimes.com > has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com. > > The opening of the article: > > SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next spring: The capital I that usually begins the word "Internet." > > Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies how people use online technology and how that affects their lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize Internet — and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift in the way that we think about the online world. > > garyrichmond@rcn.com > > Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do > > December 29, 2002 > By JOHN SCHWARTZ > > > > SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about > families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next > spring: The capital I that usually begins the word > "Internet." > > Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for > Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies > how people use online technology and how that affects their > lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize > Internet - and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift > in the way that we think about the online world. > > "I think what it means is it's part of the everyday > universe," he said. > > Capitalization irked him because, he said, it seemed to > imply that reaching into the vast, interconnected ether was > a brand-name experience. > > "The capitalization of things seems to place an inordinate, > almost private emphasis on something," he said, turning it > into a Kleenex or a Frigidaire. "The Internet, at least > philosophically, should not be owned by anyone," he said, > calling it "part of the neural universe of life." > > But, he said, dropping the big I would sent a deeper > message to the world: The revolution is over, and the Net > won. It's part of everyone's life, and as common as air and > water (neither of which starts with a capital). > > Some elements of the online world have already made the > transition. Internet often appears with a lowercase I on > the Internet itself - but then, spelling online is > dreadful, u kno. > > Although most everybody still capitalizes World Wide Web, > words like "website," and the online journals known as > weblogs (or, simply, blogs) are increasingly lowercase. Of > course, the Internet's capital I is virtually engraved in > stone, since Microsoft Word automatically capitalizes the > lowercase "i" unless a user overrides its settings. > > For Mr. Turow, the first step in his campaign was > persuading his book editor to enlist. She compromised, > dropping to lowercase in newly written parts and retaining > the capital in older articles reproduced in the book. > > Then he nudged Steven Jones, a communications professor at > the University of Illinois at Chicago and president of the > Association of Internet Researchers. Mr. Jones was cool to > the idea, until he looked at copies of Scientific American > from the late 19th century, and noticed that words for new > technologies, like Phonograph, were often uppercased. > > Today, Mr. Jones is a crusader himself. > > "I think the > moment is right," he said, to treat the Internet "the way > we refer to television, radio and the telephone." > > He shared his view with a few hundred close friends last > month at a meeting of the National Communication > Association, an educators' group. "I just noticed > everybody's attention kind of snapped forward," he said. > > "I'm used to having people say nice things," he said. > "We're scholars, not wrestlers. But this time I was struck > by the number of people who were saying the equivalent of, > `Right on!' " > > DICTIONARY editors, though, have dismissed Mr. Turow > politely but firmly. > > Dictionaries do not generally see themselves as making the > rules, said Jesse Sheidlower, who runs the American offices > of the Oxford English Dictionary. > > "What dictionaries do is reflect what's out there," he > said. He and his fellow dictionary editors would think > seriously about such changes after newspapers make them, he > added. > > That could take a while. Allan M. Siegal, a co-author of > The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage and an > assistant managing editor at the newspaper, said that > "there is some virtue in the theory" that Internet is > becoming a generic term, "and it would not be surprising to > see the lowercase usage eclipse the uppercase within a few > years." > > He said, however, that the newspaper was unlikely to make > any change that was not supported by authoritative > dictionaries. > > Time to ask Robert Kahn, who is as responsible as anyone > for the creation of the Internet, having helped plan the > original network that preceded it and having created, with > Vinton Cerf, the language of computer networks, known as > TCP/IP, that allowed the vast knitting-together of systems > that gave birth to the modern medium. > > He cares deeply about the name, having led a fight for > years to ensure that its use is not restricted or abused by > the corporation that received the trademark in 1989. > > A settlement was reached two years ago with the company now > known as Concord EFS. The company agreed that it would not > dun people who used the word, which meant that "Internet" > now belongs to everybody, Mr. Kahn said. > > "We defended the right of people to use the word `Internet' > for what we think of as the Internet," he said. > > THAT was the important fight, according to Mr. Kahn. > "Whether you use a cap I or little I" hardly matters, he > said. > > Which leads us back to a profound question for Mr. Turow: > Don't you have anything better to do? > > "That's a really interesting question," he said. "I was an > English major. I'm very sensitive to the nuances of words, > and I'm very concerned about the nuances, the feel that > words have within the society." > > Fair enough; Perhaps the next big thing, after all, will be > small. At least initially. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/29/weekinreview/29SCHW.html?ex=1042266298&ei=1&en=a1d8d3cfcbb6f3ad > > HOW TO ADVERTISE > --------------------------------- > For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters > or other creative advertising opportunities with The > New York Times on the Web, please contact > onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media > kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo > > For general information about NYTimes.com, write to > help@nytimes.com. > > Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company --------------6D8B719E6536ABE918AE4B6C Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Yes, Gary. You know, I never liked it very much when the Telephone rings while I am listening to a fine concert on the Radio. Or when suddenly the Electricity goes off while I am watching my tv..

And so, when may we expect to comfortably browse the worldwide web? (ww or www?)

Henry

BTW. I do appreciate your references to the New York Times.

garyrichmond@rcn.com wrote:

This article from NYTimes.com
has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com.

The opening of the article:

 SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next spring: The capital I that usually begins the word "Internet."

Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies how people use online technology and how that affects their lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize Internet — and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift in the way that we think about the online world.

garyrichmond@rcn.com

Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do

December 29, 2002
By JOHN SCHWARTZ
 
 

SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about
families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next
spring: The capital I that usually begins the word
"Internet."

Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for
Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies
how people use online technology and how that affects their
lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize
Internet - and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift
in the way that we think about the online world.

"I think what it means is it's part of the everyday
universe," he said.

Capitalization irked him because, he said, it seemed to
imply that reaching into the vast, interconnected ether was
a brand-name experience.

"The capitalization of things seems to place an inordinate,
almost private emphasis on something," he said, turning it
into a Kleenex or a Frigidaire. "The Internet, at least
philosophically, should not be owned by anyone," he said,
calling it "part of the neural universe of life."

But, he said, dropping the big I would sent a deeper
message to the world: The revolution is over, and the Net
won. It's part of everyone's life, and as common as air and
water (neither of which starts with a capital).

Some elements of the online world have already made the
transition. Internet often appears with a lowercase I on
the Internet itself - but then, spelling online is
dreadful, u kno.

Although most everybody still capitalizes World Wide Web,
words like "website," and the online journals known as
weblogs (or, simply, blogs) are increasingly lowercase. Of
course, the Internet's capital I is virtually engraved in
stone, since Microsoft Word automatically capitalizes the
lowercase "i" unless a user overrides its settings.

For Mr. Turow, the first step in his campaign was
persuading his book editor to enlist. She compromised,
dropping to lowercase in newly written parts and retaining
the capital in older articles reproduced in the book.

Then he nudged Steven Jones, a communications professor at
the University of Illinois at Chicago and president of the
Association of Internet Researchers. Mr. Jones was cool to
the idea, until he looked at copies of Scientific American
from the late 19th century, and noticed that words for new
technologies, like Phonograph, were often uppercased.

Today, Mr. Jones is a crusader himself.

"I think the
moment is right," he said, to treat the Internet "the way
we refer to television, radio and the telephone."

He shared his view with a few hundred close friends last
month at a meeting of the National Communication
Association, an educators' group. "I just noticed
everybody's attention kind of snapped forward," he said.

"I'm used to having people say nice things," he said.
"We're scholars, not wrestlers. But this time I was struck
by the number of people who were saying the equivalent of,
`Right on!' "

DICTIONARY editors, though, have dismissed Mr. Turow
politely but firmly.

Dictionaries do not generally see themselves as making the
rules, said Jesse Sheidlower, who runs the American offices
of the Oxford English Dictionary.

"What dictionaries do is reflect what's out there," he
said. He and his fellow dictionary editors would think
seriously about such changes after newspapers make them, he
added.

That could take a while. Allan M. Siegal, a co-author of
The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage and an
assistant managing editor at the newspaper, said that
"there is some virtue in the theory" that Internet is
becoming a generic term, "and it would not be surprising to
see the lowercase usage eclipse the uppercase within a few
years."

He said, however, that the newspaper was unlikely to make
any change that was not supported by authoritative
dictionaries.

Time to ask Robert Kahn, who is as responsible as anyone
for the creation of the Internet, having helped plan the
original network that preceded it and having created, with
Vinton Cerf, the language of computer networks, known as
TCP/IP, that allowed the vast knitting-together of systems
that gave birth to the modern medium.

He cares deeply about the name, having led a fight for
years to ensure that its use is not restricted or abused by
the corporation that received the trademark in 1989.

A settlement was reached two years ago with the company now
known as Concord EFS. The company agreed that it would not
dun people who used the word, which meant that "Internet"
now belongs to everybody, Mr. Kahn said.

"We defended the right of people to use the word `Internet'
for what we think of as the Internet," he said.

THAT was the important fight, according to Mr. Kahn.
"Whether you use a cap I or little I" hardly matters, he
said.

Which leads us back to a profound question for Mr. Turow:
Don't you have anything better to do?

"That's a really interesting question," he said. "I was an
English major. I'm very sensitive to the nuances of words,
and I'm very concerned about the nuances, the feel that
words have within the society."

Fair enough; Perhaps the next big thing, after all, will be
small. At least initially.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/29/weekinreview/29SCHW.html?ex=1042266298&ei=1&en=a1d8d3cfcbb6f3ad

HOW TO ADVERTISE
---------------------------------
For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters
or other creative advertising opportunities with The
New York Times on the Web, please contact
onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media
kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo

For general information about NYTimes.com, write to
help@nytimes.com.

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company

--------------6D8B719E6536ABE918AE4B6C-- From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Mon Dec 30 12:02:13 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id B170E56FFA; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:02:12 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from tomts17-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts17.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.71]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1BD8C56FF9 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:02:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from sympatico.ca ([64.228.165.166]) by tomts17-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021230202200.CWBA21380.tomts17-srv.bellnexxia.net@sympatico.ca> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:22:00 -0500 Message-ID: <3E10A7EF.1BB1208A@sympatico.ca> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:09:19 -0500 From: Henry K van Eyken X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] NYTimes.com Article: Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do References: <20021230163818.9A0C2C432@email4.lga2.nytimes.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------3DE92D1599869C2C4B87C03F" Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org --------------3DE92D1599869C2C4B87C03F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Yes, Gary. You know, I never liked it very much when the Telephone rings while I am listening to a fine concert on the Radio. Or when suddenly the Electricity goes off while I am watching tv.. And so, when may we expect to comfortably browse the worldwide web? (ww or www?) Henry BTW. I do appreciate your references to the New York Times. garyrichmond@rcn.com wrote: > This article from NYTimes.com > has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com. > > The opening of the article: > > SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next spring: The capital I that usually begins the word "Internet." > > Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies how people use online technology and how that affects their lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize Internet — and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift in the way that we think about the online world. > > garyrichmond@rcn.com > > Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do > > December 29, 2002 > By JOHN SCHWARTZ > > > > SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about > families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next > spring: The capital I that usually begins the word > "Internet." > > Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for > Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies > how people use online technology and how that affects their > lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize > Internet - and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift > in the way that we think about the online world. > > "I think what it means is it's part of the everyday > universe," he said. > > Capitalization irked him because, he said, it seemed to > imply that reaching into the vast, interconnected ether was > a brand-name experience. > > "The capitalization of things seems to place an inordinate, > almost private emphasis on something," he said, turning it > into a Kleenex or a Frigidaire. "The Internet, at least > philosophically, should not be owned by anyone," he said, > calling it "part of the neural universe of life." > > But, he said, dropping the big I would sent a deeper > message to the world: The revolution is over, and the Net > won. It's part of everyone's life, and as common as air and > water (neither of which starts with a capital). > > Some elements of the online world have already made the > transition. Internet often appears with a lowercase I on > the Internet itself - but then, spelling online is > dreadful, u kno. > > Although most everybody still capitalizes World Wide Web, > words like "website," and the online journals known as > weblogs (or, simply, blogs) are increasingly lowercase. Of > course, the Internet's capital I is virtually engraved in > stone, since Microsoft Word automatically capitalizes the > lowercase "i" unless a user overrides its settings. > > For Mr. Turow, the first step in his campaign was > persuading his book editor to enlist. She compromised, > dropping to lowercase in newly written parts and retaining > the capital in older articles reproduced in the book. > > Then he nudged Steven Jones, a communications professor at > the University of Illinois at Chicago and president of the > Association of Internet Researchers. Mr. Jones was cool to > the idea, until he looked at copies of Scientific American > from the late 19th century, and noticed that words for new > technologies, like Phonograph, were often uppercased. > > Today, Mr. Jones is a crusader himself. > > "I think the > moment is right," he said, to treat the Internet "the way > we refer to television, radio and the telephone." > > He shared his view with a few hundred close friends last > month at a meeting of the National Communication > Association, an educators' group. "I just noticed > everybody's attention kind of snapped forward," he said. > > "I'm used to having people say nice things," he said. > "We're scholars, not wrestlers. But this time I was struck > by the number of people who were saying the equivalent of, > `Right on!' " > > DICTIONARY editors, though, have dismissed Mr. Turow > politely but firmly. > > Dictionaries do not generally see themselves as making the > rules, said Jesse Sheidlower, who runs the American offices > of the Oxford English Dictionary. > > "What dictionaries do is reflect what's out there," he > said. He and his fellow dictionary editors would think > seriously about such changes after newspapers make them, he > added. > > That could take a while. Allan M. Siegal, a co-author of > The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage and an > assistant managing editor at the newspaper, said that > "there is some virtue in the theory" that Internet is > becoming a generic term, "and it would not be surprising to > see the lowercase usage eclipse the uppercase within a few > years." > > He said, however, that the newspaper was unlikely to make > any change that was not supported by authoritative > dictionaries. > > Time to ask Robert Kahn, who is as responsible as anyone > for the creation of the Internet, having helped plan the > original network that preceded it and having created, with > Vinton Cerf, the language of computer networks, known as > TCP/IP, that allowed the vast knitting-together of systems > that gave birth to the modern medium. > > He cares deeply about the name, having led a fight for > years to ensure that its use is not restricted or abused by > the corporation that received the trademark in 1989. > > A settlement was reached two years ago with the company now > known as Concord EFS. The company agreed that it would not > dun people who used the word, which meant that "Internet" > now belongs to everybody, Mr. Kahn said. > > "We defended the right of people to use the word `Internet' > for what we think of as the Internet," he said. > > THAT was the important fight, according to Mr. Kahn. > "Whether you use a cap I or little I" hardly matters, he > said. > > Which leads us back to a profound question for Mr. Turow: > Don't you have anything better to do? > > "That's a really interesting question," he said. "I was an > English major. I'm very sensitive to the nuances of words, > and I'm very concerned about the nuances, the feel that > words have within the society." > > Fair enough; Perhaps the next big thing, after all, will be > small. At least initially. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/29/weekinreview/29SCHW.html?ex=1042266298&ei=1&en=a1d8d3cfcbb6f3ad > > HOW TO ADVERTISE > --------------------------------- > For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters > or other creative advertising opportunities with The > New York Times on the Web, please contact > onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media > kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo > > For general information about NYTimes.com, write to > help@nytimes.com. > > Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company --------------3DE92D1599869C2C4B87C03F Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Yes, Gary. You know, I never liked it very much when the Telephone rings while I am listening to a fine concert on the Radio. Or when suddenly the Electricity goes off while I am watching tv..

And so, when may we expect to comfortably browse the worldwide web? (ww or www?)

Henry

BTW. I do appreciate your references to the New York Times.

garyrichmond@rcn.com wrote:

This article from NYTimes.com
has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com.

The opening of the article:

 SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next spring: The capital I that usually begins the word "Internet."

Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies how people use online technology and how that affects their lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize Internet — and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift in the way that we think about the online world.

garyrichmond@rcn.com

Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do

December 29, 2002
By JOHN SCHWARTZ
 
 

SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about
families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next
spring: The capital I that usually begins the word
"Internet."

Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for
Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies
how people use online technology and how that affects their
lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize
Internet - and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift
in the way that we think about the online world.

"I think what it means is it's part of the everyday
universe," he said.

Capitalization irked him because, he said, it seemed to
imply that reaching into the vast, interconnected ether was
a brand-name experience.

"The capitalization of things seems to place an inordinate,
almost private emphasis on something," he said, turning it
into a Kleenex or a Frigidaire. "The Internet, at least
philosophically, should not be owned by anyone," he said,
calling it "part of the neural universe of life."

But, he said, dropping the big I would sent a deeper
message to the world: The revolution is over, and the Net
won. It's part of everyone's life, and as common as air and
water (neither of which starts with a capital).

Some elements of the online world have already made the
transition. Internet often appears with a lowercase I on
the Internet itself - but then, spelling online is
dreadful, u kno.

Although most everybody still capitalizes World Wide Web,
words like "website," and the online journals known as
weblogs (or, simply, blogs) are increasingly lowercase. Of
course, the Internet's capital I is virtually engraved in
stone, since Microsoft Word automatically capitalizes the
lowercase "i" unless a user overrides its settings.

For Mr. Turow, the first step in his campaign was
persuading his book editor to enlist. She compromised,
dropping to lowercase in newly written parts and retaining
the capital in older articles reproduced in the book.

Then he nudged Steven Jones, a communications professor at
the University of Illinois at Chicago and president of the
Association of Internet Researchers. Mr. Jones was cool to
the idea, until he looked at copies of Scientific American
from the late 19th century, and noticed that words for new
technologies, like Phonograph, were often uppercased.

Today, Mr. Jones is a crusader himself.

"I think the
moment is right," he said, to treat the Internet "the way
we refer to television, radio and the telephone."

He shared his view with a few hundred close friends last
month at a meeting of the National Communication
Association, an educators' group. "I just noticed
everybody's attention kind of snapped forward," he said.

"I'm used to having people say nice things," he said.
"We're scholars, not wrestlers. But this time I was struck
by the number of people who were saying the equivalent of,
`Right on!' "

DICTIONARY editors, though, have dismissed Mr. Turow
politely but firmly.

Dictionaries do not generally see themselves as making the
rules, said Jesse Sheidlower, who runs the American offices
of the Oxford English Dictionary.

"What dictionaries do is reflect what's out there," he
said. He and his fellow dictionary editors would think
seriously about such changes after newspapers make them, he
added.

That could take a while. Allan M. Siegal, a co-author of
The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage and an
assistant managing editor at the newspaper, said that
"there is some virtue in the theory" that Internet is
becoming a generic term, "and it would not be surprising to
see the lowercase usage eclipse the uppercase within a few
years."

He said, however, that the newspaper was unlikely to make
any change that was not supported by authoritative
dictionaries.

Time to ask Robert Kahn, who is as responsible as anyone
for the creation of the Internet, having helped plan the
original network that preceded it and having created, with
Vinton Cerf, the language of computer networks, known as
TCP/IP, that allowed the vast knitting-together of systems
that gave birth to the modern medium.

He cares deeply about the name, having led a fight for
years to ensure that its use is not restricted or abused by
the corporation that received the trademark in 1989.

A settlement was reached two years ago with the company now
known as Concord EFS. The company agreed that it would not
dun people who used the word, which meant that "Internet"
now belongs to everybody, Mr. Kahn said.

"We defended the right of people to use the word `Internet'
for what we think of as the Internet," he said.

THAT was the important fight, according to Mr. Kahn.
"Whether you use a cap I or little I" hardly matters, he
said.

Which leads us back to a profound question for Mr. Turow:
Don't you have anything better to do?

"That's a really interesting question," he said. "I was an
English major. I'm very sensitive to the nuances of words,
and I'm very concerned about the nuances, the feel that
words have within the society."

Fair enough; Perhaps the next big thing, after all, will be
small. At least initially.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/29/weekinreview/29SCHW.html?ex=1042266298&ei=1&en=a1d8d3cfcbb6f3ad

HOW TO ADVERTISE
---------------------------------
For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters
or other creative advertising opportunities with The
New York Times on the Web, please contact
onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media
kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo

For general information about NYTimes.com, write to
help@nytimes.com.

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company

--------------3DE92D1599869C2C4B87C03F-- From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Mon Dec 30 12:40:14 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id B9BD656FF9; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:40:13 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3663B56FF4 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:40:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from 207-237-116-202.c3-0.23d-ubr1.nyr-23d.ny.cable.rcn.com ([207.237.116.202] helo=rcn.com) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18T70y-00066h-00; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:00:00 -0500 Message-ID: <3E10B3C5.7050101@rcn.com> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:59:49 -0500 From: Gary Richmond User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] NYTimes.com Article: Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do References: <20021230163818.9A0C2C432@email4.lga2.nytimes.com> <3E10A7EF.1BB1208A@sympatico.ca> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080908060409070906020906" Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org --------------080908060409070906020906 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Henry, I'm a bit confused about your response; perhaps I forwarded the wrong NYTimes articles? There's this one (re: a lower case "internet"), and another on a challenge to Microsoft's "Windows" copyright: >from the article: > > Lindows.com's stated intention is to market desktop operating software based on Linux, an operating system, distributed free, whose basic code is written and debugged by a volunteer community of programmers. To date, Linux has done well as an operating system for the server computers that run corporate networks and the Internet. But it has made scant progress in loosening Microsoft's grip on the market for PC operating systems, where Microsoft enjoys a monopoly. > > > >Glass Panes and Software: Windows Name Is Challenged > >December 30, 2002 >By STEVE LOHR > You wrote: > You know, I never liked it very much when the Telephone rings while I > am listening to a fine concert on the Radio. Or when suddenly the > Electricity goes off while I am watching tv.. Which seems to refer to yet another article in the Times (on answering the telephone by calling out a phrase) which I don't believe I forwarded. The strangest thing for me is that I didn't receive the ba-unrev posts which contained the forwarded articles to check what I forwarded. Curiouser and curiouser. . . Anyhow, I'm glad you enjoy the articles I send, which I hope relate to the interests of the readership of this list. Have a healthy, happy and prosperous New Year, in any event. Gary Henry K van Eyken wrote: > Yes, Gary. You know, I never liked it very much when the Telephone > rings while I am listening to a fine concert on the Radio. Or when > suddenly the Electricity goes off while I am watching tv.. > > And so, when may we expect to comfortably browse the worldwide web? > (ww or www?) > > Henry > > BTW. I do appreciate your references to the New York Times. > > garyrichmond@rcn.com wrote: > >> This article from NYTimes.com >> has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com. >> >> The opening of the article: >> >> SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about families >> and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next spring: The >> capital I that usually begins the word "Internet." >> >> Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at >> the University of Pennsylvania, studies how people use online >> technology and how that affects their lives. He has begun a small >> crusade to de-capitalize Internet -- and, by extension, to >> acknowledge a deep shift in the way that we think about the online >> world. >> >> Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do >> >> December 29, 2002 >> By JOHN SCHWARTZ >> >> ] >> --------------080908060409070906020906 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Henry,

I'm a bit confused about your response; perhaps I forwarded the wrong NYTimes articles? There's this one (re: a lower case "internet"), and
another on a challenge to Microsoft's  "Windows" copyright: 
from the article:

 Lindows.com's stated intention is to market desktop operating software based on Linux, an operating system, distributed free, whose basic code is written and debugged by a volunteer community of programmers. To date, Linux has done well as an operating system for the server computers that run corporate networks and the Internet. But it has made scant progress in loosening Microsoft's grip on the market for PC operating systems, where Microsoft enjoys a monopoly.



Glass Panes and Software: Windows Name Is Challenged

December 30, 2002
By STEVE LOHR 
You wrote:
You know, I never liked it very much when the Telephone rings while I am listening to a fine concert on the Radio. Or when suddenly the Electricity goes off while I am watching tv..
Which seems to refer to yet another article in the Times (on answering the telephone by calling out a phrase) which I don't believe I forwarded. The strangest thing for me is that I didn't receive the ba-unrev posts which contained the forwarded articles to check what I forwarded. Curiouser and curiouser. . .

Anyhow, I'm glad you enjoy the articles I send, which I  hope relate to the interests of the readership of this list.

Have a healthy, happy and prosperous New Year, in any event.

Gary

Henry K van Eyken wrote:
Yes, Gary. You know, I never liked it very much when the Telephone rings while I am listening to a fine concert on the Radio. Or when suddenly the Electricity goes off while I am watching tv..

And so, when may we expect to comfortably browse the worldwide web? (ww or www?)

Henry

BTW. I do appreciate your references to the New York Times.

garyrichmond@rcn.com wrote:

This article from NYTimes.com
has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com.

The opening of the article:

 SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about families and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next spring: The capital I that usually begins the word "Internet."

Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, studies how people use online technology and how that affects their lives. He has begun a small crusade to de-capitalize Internet — and, by extension, to acknowledge a deep shift in the way that we think about the online world.

Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do

December 29, 2002
By JOHN SCHWARTZ
 
]


--------------080908060409070906020906-- From owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Mon Dec 30 15:50:17 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk-list@bi0.bootstrap.org Received: by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix, from userid 2001) id C7B4956FF9; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:50:16 -0800 (PST) Delivered-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Received: from tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.185]) by bi0.bootstrap.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F98256FF4 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:50:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from Montreal-ppp-86828.qc.sympatico.ca ([64.228.165.159]) by tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with ESMTP id <20021231001007.PPKP12793.tomts23-srv.bellnexxia.net@Montreal-ppp-86828.qc.sympatico.ca> for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:10:07 -0500 Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] NYTimes.com Article: Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do From: Henry K van Eyken To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org In-Reply-To: <3E10B3C5.7050101@rcn.com> References: <20021230163818.9A0C2C432@email4.lga2.nytimes.com> <3E10A7EF.1BB1208A@sympatico.ca> <3E10B3C5.7050101@rcn.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-10) Date: 30 Dec 2002 18:57:29 -0500 Message-Id: <1041292650.972.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org Gary. My comment concerned the capitalization of Internet which, it seems to me, is no more justified than capitalizing telephone or radio or electricity or highway. It was a reply to the NYT article's opening paragraph. Sorry if I caused confusion. Henry On Mon, 2002-12-30 at 15:59, Gary Richmond wrote: > Hi Henry, > > I'm a bit confused about your response; perhaps I forwarded the wrong > NYTimes articles? There's this one (re: a lower case "internet"), and > another on a challenge to Microsoft's "Windows" copyright: > > >from the article: > > > > Lindows.com's stated intention is to market desktop operating software based on Linux, an operating system, distributed free, whose basic code is written and debugged by a volunteer community of programmers. To date, Linux has done well as an operating system for the server computers that run corporate networks and the Internet. But it has made scant progress in loosening Microsoft's grip on the market for PC operating systems, where Microsoft enjoys a monopoly. > > > > > > > >Glass Panes and Software: Windows Name Is Challenged > > > >December 30, 2002 > >By STEVE LOHR > > > You wrote: > > > You know, I never liked it very much when the Telephone rings while I > > am listening to a fine concert on the Radio. Or when suddenly the > > Electricity goes off while I am watching tv.. > > Which seems to refer to yet another article in the Times (on answering > the telephone by calling out a phrase) which I don't believe I > forwarded. The strangest thing for me is that I didn't receive the > ba-unrev posts which contained the forwarded articles to check what I > forwarded. Curiouser and curiouser. . . > > Anyhow, I'm glad you enjoy the articles I send, which I hope relate to > the interests of the readership of this list. > > Have a healthy, happy and prosperous New Year, in any event. > > Gary > > Henry K van Eyken wrote: > > > Yes, Gary. You know, I never liked it very much when the Telephone > > rings while I am listening to a fine concert on the Radio. Or when > > suddenly the Electricity goes off while I am watching tv.. > > > > And so, when may we expect to comfortably browse the worldwide web? > > (ww or www?) > > > > Henry > > > > BTW. I do appreciate your references to the New York Times. > > > > garyrichmond@rcn.com wrote: > > > >> This article from NYTimes.com > >> has been sent to you by garyrichmond@rcn.com. > >> > >> The opening of the article: > >> > >> SOMETHING will be missing when Joseph Turow's book about families > >> and the Internet is published by M.I.T. Press next spring: The > >> capital I that usually begins the word "Internet." > >> > >> Mr. Turow, a professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at > >> the University of Pennsylvania, studies how people use online > >> technology and how that affects their lives. He has begun a small > >> crusade to de-capitalize Internet -- and, by extension, to > >> acknowledge a deep shift in the way that we think about the online > >> world. > >> > >> Who Owns the Internet? You and i Do > >> > >> December 29, 2002 > >> By JOHN SCHWARTZ > >> > >> ] > >> >