pictures

[tomt]

CHAPTER 3

The Social Forces Behind the Development of Usenet
By Michael Hauben
[email protected]

Right at this moment someplace in the world, someone is being
helpful (or someone is being helped.) At the same time, others are
participating in various discussions and debates. A new communications
medium is currently in its infancy. Over the past two decades the global
computer telecommunications network has been developing. One element of
this network is called Usenet (also known as Netnews). The original
carrier of this news was called UUCPnet (or just UUCP). The rawest
principle of Usenet is its importance. In its simplest form, Usenet
represents democracy. The basic element of Usenet is a post. Each
individual post consists of a unique contribution from some user placed
in a subject area, called a newsgroup. In Usenet's very beginning (and
still to some extent today), posts were transferred using the UUCP utility
distributed with Unix. This utility allows the use of phone lines to
transmit computer data among separate computers. Usenet grew from
the ground up in a grassroots manner. Originally, there was no official
structure. What began as two or three sites on the network in 1979 expanded
to 15 in 1980. From 150 in 1981 to 400 in 1982. The very nature of Usenet
is communication. Usenet greatly facilitates interhuman communication
among a large group of users.

Inherent in most mass media is central control of content. Many
people are influenced by the decisions of a few. Television programming,
for example, is controlled by a small group of people compared to the
size of the audience. In this way, the audience has very little choice
over what is emphasized by most mass media. However, Usenet is controlled
by its audience. Usenet should be seen as a promising successor to other
people's presses, such as broadsides at the time of the American
Revolution and the Penny Presses in England at the turn of the 19th
Century. Most of the material written to Usenet is by the same people who
actively read Usenet. Thus, the audience of Usenet decides the content
and subject matter to be thought about, presented and debated. The ideas
that exist on Usenet come from the mass of people who participate in it.
In this way, Usenet is an uncensored forum for debate - where many sides
of an issue come into view. Instead of being force-fed by an
uncontrollable source of information, the participants set the tone and
emphasis on Usenet. People control what happens on Usenet. In this rare
situation, issues and concerns that are of interest and thus important to
the participants, are brought up. In the tradition of Amateur Radio and
Citizen's Band Radio, Usenet is the product of the users' ideas and
will. Amateur Radio and CB, however, are more restricted then Usenet.
Currently the range of Usenet connectivity is international and quickly
expanding around the world into every nook and cranny. This explosive
expansion allows growing communication among people around the world.

In the 1960s, the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) of the
Department of Defense began research of fundamental importance to the
development and testing of computer communications networks. ARPA
research laid the groundwork for the development of other networks such
as UUCPnet. ARPA conducted an experiment in attempting to connect
incompatible mainframe computers.(1) This experimental connection of
computers was called the ARPA Computer Network (ARPANET). ARPA's stated
objectives were:

"1) To develop techniques and obtain experience on
interconnecting computers in such a way that a very broad class
of interactions were possible and

2) To improve and increase computer research productivity through
resource sharing."(2)

ARPA was both conducting communications research and trying to study
how to conserve funds by avoiding duplication of computer resources.(3)
Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Inc. (BBN), a Cambridge, Massachusetts company,
was chosen to construct the network, and AT&T was chosen to provide the
communications lines. The ARPANET was needed because it was found that a
data connection over existing telephone voice lines was too slow and not
reliable enough to have a useful connection.(4) Packet switching was
developed for use as the protocol of exchanging information over the
lines. Packet switching is a communications process in which all messages
are broken up into equal size packets which are transmitted interspersed
and then reassembled. In this way, short, medium and long messages get
transferred with minimum delay.(5)

The ARPANET was a success. ARPA provided several advances to
communications research. ARPANET researchers were surprised at the
enthusiastic adoption of electronic mail (e-mail) as the primary source
of communication early on. E-mail was a source of major productivity
increase through the use of the ARPANET.(6) By 1983, the ARPANET
officially shifted from using NCP (Network Control Program) to TCP/IP
(Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol.) A key point to
TCP/IP's success is in its simplicity. It is very easy to implement over
various platforms, and this simplicity has accounted for its continued
existence as a de facto standard of the Internet up to the present.
ARPANET's lasting contribution was demonstrating how a backbone
infrastructure can serve as a connection between gateways. A gateway is a
computer or part of a computer programmed to receive messages from one
network and transfer them onto another network.

ARPANET grew quickly to more than 50 nodes between Hawaii and
Norway.(7) However, it did not extend to all who could utilize it.
Computer scientists at universities without Department of Defense
contracts noticed the advantages and petitioned the National Science
Foundation (NSF) for similar connectivity. CSnet was formed to service
these computer scientists. CSnet was initially financed by the NSF. Very
quickly the desire for interconnection spread to other members of the
university community and CSnet grew to serve more scientists than just
computer scientists at universities. CSnet became known as "Computer
'and' Science Network" rather than just "Computer Science network."(8)

By the mid 1980s, ARPANET was phased out by the Department of
Defense, and was replaced by various internal networks (such as Milnet).
The role of connecting university communities and regional networks was
taken over by the NSF funded NSFnet, which originated as a connection for
university researchers to the five National Supercomputer Centers. CSnet
and NSFnet were made possible by the research on ARPANET. The NSFnet
became the U.S. backbone for the global network known as the Internet.

ARPANET research was pioneering for communications research.(9)
Researchers discovered the link between computer interconnection and
increased productivity from human communication. The sharing of
resources was proven to save money and increase computer use and
productivity. The development of packet switching revolutionized the
basic methodology of connecting computers. The source of these
discoveries were the people involved. The personnel involved in the
ARPANET project were very intelligent and forward looking. They
recognized their position of developing future technologies, and thus
did not develop products that commercial industry could (and would)
develop. Instead they understood that the communications technologies
they were developing had to come from a not-for-profit body. ARPA
researchers had no proprietary products to support, and no commercial
deadlines to meet. Either would have tainted, or made developing networks
of incompatible computers impossible or limited. Current users of
international computer networks are in debt to the pioneers of ARPANET.

The ARPANET was successful in its attempt to connect various spatially
remote computers, and thus more importantly the people who used those
computers. However, these people were either professors at universities
that had Department of Defense research grants or employees of a limited
number of Defense Industry companies. There were still a mass of
people who wanted a connection, but were not in a position to gain one.
Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
were two such locations. It was in these underprivileged fertile grounds
where the grassroots computer communications breakthrough of Usenet
originated and developed.

The Unix operating system provides the basic tools needed to share
information between computers. Unix(10) was developed as "a system around
which a fellowship would form."(11) One of the programmers of Unix,
Dennis Ritchie, wrote that the intended purpose of Unix was to "encourage
close communication."(12) Unix's general principles thus conceptually
foreshadowed the basic tenet of Usenet. How else should one go about
designing communications programs, but on an operating system which was
designed with a basic principle of encouraging communication? The Unix
utility UUCP was created at Bell Labs in 1976 by Mike Lesk. It was
further developed by David Nowitz and later by Nowitz, Peter Honeyman and
Brian E. Redman. UUCP provided a simple way of passing files between any
two computers running Unix and UUCP. One of the motivations for AT&T
developing Unix was to make software production cheaper in order to bring
down the cost of telephone service. Unix's popularity also arose from
AT&T's prohibition to profit from other than their main business, phone
services, under the terms of the 1956 Consent Decree. Unix was thus
available on a "no cost" (or very low cost) basis. The operating system
was seen as an "in-house" tool on DEC and other computers and was in use
throughout Bell Labs. Many universities used the same type of computer
and were licensed by AT&T to utilize Unix. It was thus easily accessible.
Schools picked it up, and computer science students used it to learn
about operating systems, as Unix was a model of elegance and simplicity
compared to most operating systems of the time. Unix became a widely used
operating system in the academic world. This paved the way for an
international public communications system to form.

When Usenet was developed in 1979, it was created to form a `Unix
Users Network'. The developers thought Usenet would be used to discuss
problems and to share experiences about Unix. Usenet provided a forum for
people to solve problems with Unix, as AT&T initially provided little
external support for Unix. In an early handout, Usenet was originally
referred to as a "poor man's ARPANET."(13) In an email message, Stephen
Daniel explained that people who didn't have access to the ARPANET were
hungry for similar opportunities to communicate.(14)

Usenet has been full of surprises from the beginning. The
originators of Usenet underestimated the hunger of the people. As the
initial intentions were to produce an easy method of communicating with
other users at the same site, the programmers thought people would want
to have local bulletin boards.(15) However, people were attracted by the
possibility of communicating with others outside the local community as
well. Even today, the global communication it makes possible is part of
what makes Usenet so enticing. It was also thought Netnews would be
useful as a method of communications at individual locations, and between
sites close to each other.(16) Usenet grew as a grassroots connection of
people. The people who utilized Netnews wanted to communicate, and
communicate they did! People have a fundamental need to communicate and
Usenet aptly fills the bill.(17)

Early in 1981 the gap between ARPANET and Usenet was bridged.
The University of California at Berkeley had connections to both
ARPANET and Usenet. This allowed Usenet pioneer, Mark Horton,
to bring mailing list discussions from ARPANET mailing lists into Usenet
newsgroups.(18) This was a significant achievement. Communities other
than ARPA sponsored researchers were finally able to see what the
ARPANET had made possible. The gatewaying of ARPANET mailing lists into
Usenet attracted a wave of people. These people became attracted to
Usenet when two ARPANET mailing lists (SF-LOVERS and HUMAN-NETS)
began to appear on Usenet. These lists provided interesting material
and discussions. The size of the news feed (i.e., the raw data of Usenet)
thus became larger and provided more for people to read. Later
other sites would serve as gateways to even more discussion lists from
the ARPANET. Netnews was also seen as a superior method of holding
discussions. Gatewaying these FA (From ARPANET) newsgroups proved
to be politically courageous. The ARPANET was accessible by only a
certain group of people, and these gateways challenged that notion. The
effect on the ARPANET was important as Steve Bellovin, another of the
Usenet pioneers, wrote:

"The impact of Usenet on the ARPANET was more as a (strong) catalyst
to force reexamination (and benign neglect) on the strict policies
against interconnection. Uucp mail into the ARPANET became a major
force long before it was legit. And it was obviously known to, and
ignored by, many of the Powers that Were."(19)

Usenet, a network made possible by UUCP, expanded to connect people
across the entire continent. Rather early UUCP expanded across the
continent when the University of Toronto Zoology Department joined the
Net in May of 1981.(20) Two companies proved helpful to this
communication by distributing Netnews and electronic mail long distance.
Each UUCP site had to either pay the phone bill to connect to the next
system, or arrange for the other system to make the phone call. System
administrators at AT&T and DEC did the footwork in order to take e-mail
and news where it might not have reached. These people went through the
trouble in order to try to see the system work. However, easy connections
were not always available. In one example, Case Western Reserve
University graduate students had to route mail across the continent twice
in order to send mail through UUCP to reach their professors who were
connected to the ARPANET next door.(23) Usenet encouraged the idea of
connectivity to the ARPANET. Gradually the ARPANET was interconnected
with other networks eventually functioning more as a backbone to other
networks than a self-contained network.(22)

Contributed effort is the crucial foundation of UUCPnet and Usenet.
On one side, there are those who donate time and energy by contributing
to Usenet's content - writing messages and answering messages or
participating in a debate. Without the time and effort put in by its
users, Usenet would not be what it is today. Also important to Usenet's
success are the system administrators who make the functioning of Usenet
possible. Resourcewise, Netnews takes up disk space on computers
throughout Usenet, and phone calls in some cases must be made to transfer
the raw data of the news. In particular, system administrators at AT&T
and DEC found it worthwhile to transport Netnews across the country.
Certain sites emerged as clearing houses for Usenet and UUCP e-mail.(23)
These machines served as major relay stations of both news and e-mail. A
structure grew that was considered the "backbone" of "the net." Backbone
sites formed the trunk of the circulatory system of news and e-mail. A
backbone site would connect to other central distribution computers and
to numerous smaller sites. These central backbone sites provided a
crucial organization to the Usenet communications skeleton. People formed
the center of these connections. For example, 'ihnp4' at AT&T existed
mainly because of Gary Murakami's effort and only partially from
management support. Usenet services and support were not officially part
of Murakami's job description. After Gary left Bell Labs Indian Hill
Laboratory (Naperville, Illinois), Doug Price put time and effort to keep
things running smoothly. Certain system administrators in universities
also picked up the responsibility for distributing Netnews and e-mail
widely. Often these individuals would find ways of having their site pick
up the phone bill. Sometimes sites would bill the recipients. Also, those
who received a free connection were obliged to provide the same to others
for no charge.(24)

Initially, expansion of sites receiving Usenet was slow.(25)
Why did this happen? Initially Usenet was only transported via UUCP
connections. Soon, besides UUCP, other resources were used, such as weekly
airmailing of magtape data to Australia to provide connectivity.(26)
Today, Usenet travels over all types of connections. The evolving
ARPANET (and now the Internet) provided a faster way of transporting
Netnews. However, a large number of Usenet recipients only have
connectivity via UUCP. Universities and certain businesses can afford
to connect to the Internet, but many individuals also want a connection.
Even as late as 1992 when 60% of Usenet traffic was carried over the
Internet via the instantaneous Network Transport Protocol (NNTP), 40% of
Usenet was still carried through the slower UUCP connections. There are
still many examples of various types of connections using UUCP. These
representatives of the "fringe" give a clue to what the origins of this
communication must have been like.(27)

The number of sites receiving Usenet continually increased,
demonstrating its popularity. People were attracted to Usenet because of
what it made possible. People want to communicate and enjoy the thrill of
finding others across the country (or today across the world) who share a
common interest or just to be in touch with. Besides the common thrill,
it is possible to form serious relationships online. Usenet makes this
discovery possible because it is a public forum. People expose their
ideas broadly. This wide exposure makes it possible to find compatriots
in thought. The same physical connections which carry Usenet often also
transport electronic mail. Interactions and discoveries are only made
possible by the public aspect of Usenet. Mailing Lists have as wide a
range of discussion, but are available to a much smaller sized group. The
appeal of Usenet can become tiresome at times(28), but it is rare that
anyone leaves Usenet permanently. Unless, of course, someone can't find
the time to fit Usenet into his or her life. As more universities,
schools, libraries, businesses, and individuals connect, the value of
Usenet grows. Each new person eventually can add his or her unique
opinion to the collection of thoughts and information that Usenet already
has. Each new connection also increases the area where new connections
can be made through cheap local phone calls. The potential for
inexpensive expansion is limited only by the oceans, other natural
barriers or perhaps mistaken government policies.

The ARPANET was supplemented by CSnet and eventually replaced by
U.S. government funding of its successor, NSFnet. Both CSnet and NSFnet
were created by the U.S. Government in response to research scientists'
and professors' pleas to have a similar connection to the ARPANET. The
NSFnet was also created to provide access to the five supercomputer
computing centers around the country. The NSFnet, as the backbone of the
U.S. portion of the Internet, provided another route for the distribution
of Usenet. Similar to the ARPANET, NSFnet was a constant connection run
over leased lines. One of the ways Netnews is distributed is using the
NNTP protocol over Internet connections. This allows for Netnews and e-
mail to be distributed quickly over a large area. Internet connections
also assist in carrying Usenet and e-mail internationally. The Internet
class networks and connections include the established government and
university sponsored connections. However some of the way individuals are
connected at home is via phone lines and various versions of UUCP. There
are also commercial services that, for a fee, provide connections for
electronic mail and Usenet access, as well as access to the Internet.

Much of the development of Usenet owes a big thanks to the early
restrictions on commercial uses. Where else in our society has the
commercial element been so clearly separated from any entity? Forums of
discussion and communication become clogged and congested when
advertisements use space. Because of the voluntary actions of those who
use and redistribute Netnews and e-mail, people on Usenet feel it wrong
to assist commercial ventures. When people feel someone is abusing the
nature of Usenet, they let the offender know through e-mail and in public
messages. In this manner users work to keep Usenet as a forum that is
free from commercial exploitation. Usenet is not allowed to be abused as
a profit making venture for any one individual or group. Rather, people
fight to keep it a resource that is helpful to society as a whole.

On what was the ARPANET and what was afterward the NSFnet portion of
the Internet, there were Acceptable Use Policies (AUP) that existed
because these networks were initially set up, founded and financed by
public money. On these networks, commercial usage was prohibited, which
meant it was also discouraged on other networks that gatewayed into the
NSFnet. Unfortunately, the NSF encouraged privatization of the NSFnet
backbone.(29) However, the discouragement of commercial usage of the
global Usenet is separate and developed differently from the AUP.

The social network that Usenet represents supersedes the physical
connection it rides on. The current Netnews rides on many of the physical
networks that exist today. However, if ever there were the need, Usenet
could reestablish itself outside of the current physically organized
networks. Usenet's quality is such that it will survive because of its
users' determination. Usenet draws its strength from being a peer to peer
network. People who use Usenet do so because they wish to communicate
with others. This communal wish means that people on Usenet find it in
their own and in the community's interest to be helpful. In this way,
Usenet exists as a worldwide community of resources ready to be shared.
Where else today is there so much knowledge that is freely available?
Usenet represents a living library. Usenet is an important part of the
worldwide computer networks.

The very nature of Usenet promotes change. Usenet was born outside
of established "networks", and transcends any one physical network.
Currently, at this time, it exists of itself and via other networks. It
makes possible the distribution of information that might otherwise not
be heard through "official channels." This role makes Usenet a herald for
social change. Because of the inherent will to communicate, people who
don't have access to Usenet will want access when they become exposed to
what it is, and people who currently have access will want Usenet to
expand its reach so as to further even more communication. Usenet might
grow to provide a forum for people to influence their governments
allowing for the discussion and debate of issues in a mode that
facilitates mass participation. This becomes a source of independent
information. An independent source is helpful in the search for the
truth.

Administrators and individuals who handle the flow of information
have been predicting the "imminent death of the net" since 1982.(30) The
software that handles the distribution of Netnews has gone through
several versions to handle the ever increasing amount of information.
People who receive Netnews have either had to decrease 1) the number of
days individual messages stay at the site or 2) the number of newsgroups
they receive; or they have had to allocate more disk space for the
storage of Netnews. Despite all the predictions and worries, people's
desire for this communication have helped this social network develop
and expand. Brad Templeton once wrote, "If there is a gigabit network
with bandwidth to spare that is willing to carry Usenet, it has plenty
more growth left."(31) Various research labs have been working on producing
usable gigabit networks.

Usenet is a democratic and technological breakthrough. The
computer networks and Usenet are still developing. People need to
work towards keeping connections available and inexpensive, if
not free, so as to encourage the body of users to grow. There are
several cities and governments across the world where the public has
access to network services as a civic service. This direction is to be
encouraged. Exclusive arrangements for access are to be discouraged. The
very nature of Usenet means people are going to be working for its
expansion. Others will be working for the expansion for their own gain,
and some forces will be an active force against expansion of Usenet. I
can only ask that people attempt to spread this book in an attempt to
popularize and encourage the use and fight for Usenet.
--------------------------
Notes for CHAPTER 3

(1) "In September 1969, the embryonic one-node(!) ARPANET came to life
when the first packet-switching computer was connected to the Sigma 7
computer at UCLA. Shortly thereafter began the interconnection of many
main processors (referred to as HOSTs) at various university,
industrial, and government research centers across the UnitedStates."
(Leonard Kleinrock, "On Communications and Networks," IEEE
Transactions on Computers, vol C-25 no 12, December, 1976, p. 1328).

(2) F. Heart, A. McKenzie, J. McQuillan, and D. Walden, ARPANET
Completion Report, Washington, 1978, p. II-2.

(3) Alexander McKenzie and David C. Walden, "ARPANET, the Defense Data
Network, and Internet" in The Froehlich/Kent Encyclopedia of
Telecommunications, vol. 1, New York, 1991, p. 346.

(4) Lawrence G. Roberts, "The ARPANET and Computer Networks," in A
History of Personal Workstations, ed. Adele Goldberg, ACM Press,
New York, 1988, p. 145.

(5) Leonard Kleinrock, "On Communications and Networks", IEEE
Transactions on Computers, vol C-25 no 12, December, 1976, p. 1327.

(6) Alexander McKenzie and David C. Walden, p. 357.

(7) F. Heart et al, p. II-25.

(8) Alexander McKenzie and David C. Walden, p. 369.

(9) "For many of the people in government, at the major contractors,
and in the participating universities and research centers the
development of the ARPANET has been an exciting time which will rank as
a high point in their professional careers. In 1969 the ARPANET project
represented a high risk, potentially high impact research effort. The
existence of the net in practical useful form has not only provided
communications technology to meet any short term needs, but it
represents a formidable communications technology and experience base on
which the Defense Department as well as the entire public and private
sectors will depend for advanced communications needs. The strong and
diverse experience base generated by the ARPANET project has placed this
country ahead of all others in advanced digital communications science
and technology." (ARPANET Completion Report, p. II-109.)

(10) Unix was born in 1969, the same year as the ARPANET.

(11) Dennis. M. Ritchie, "The UNIX System: The Evolution of the UNIX
Time-sharing System," Bell Systems Technical Journal, vol 63 no 8,
October, 1984, p. 1578.

(12) Ibid.

(13) Stephen Daniel, James Ellis, and Tom Truscott, "USENET - A
General Access UNIX Network," Duke University, Durham, North
Carolina, Summer 1980.

(14) Stephen Daniel, a personal communication, November 1992.

(15) Steve M. Bellovin and Mark Horton, "USENET - A Distributed
Decentralized News System", an unpublished manuscript, 1985.

(16) Ibid.

(17) See, e.g., Gregory G. Woodbury's "Net Cultural Assumptions,"
reprinted in Amateur Computerist, vol 6 no 2/3, Winter/Spring,
1994-5.

(18) Comment from Steve Bellovin, October 10, 1990, Usenet History
Archive: "Correct. The original concept was that most of the traffic
would be the form now known as UNIX wizards (or whatever it's called
this week). Growth was slow until Mark started feeding the mailing lists
in because there was nothing to offer prospective customers. Given a
ready source of material, people were attracted."
(ftp://weber.ucsd.edu/pub/usenet.hist/nethist.901010.Z)

(19) Steve Bellovin, October 10, 1990 - Usenet History Archive.
(ftp://weber.ucsd.edu/pub/usenet.hist/nethist.901010.Z)

(20) Henry Spencer, Usenet History Archives, ftp://weber.ucsd.edu/pub/
usenet.hist/history.Z.

(21) From Amanda Walker, Tue, Oct. 16, 09:11 PDT, 1990, Usenet History
Archives, ftp://weber.ucsd.edu/pub/usenet.hist/nethist.901016.Z,

(22) Alexander McKenzie and David C. Walden, "Indeed, during a typical
measurement period in June 1988, over 50% of the active ARPANET
hosts were gateways, and they accounted for over 80% of the
traffic." p. 369.

(23) At AT&T, the computers 'research', then 'allegra', then 'ihnp4'
served as major mail and/or news distribution sites. At DEC - 'decvax'
gradually increased its role (e.g., 'decvax' in New Hampshire would call
long distance to San Diego across the country.)

(24) E.g., Duke University fed Usenet files to Greg Woodbury who in
turn gave "feeds" as they are called to others who requested them
from him. See "Net Cultural Assumptions."

(25) See table of site growth in Chapter 2.

(26) Andrew Tanenbaum is quoted as saying something similar to "Never
underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of 9 track tape
(or magnetic tape)."

(27) Usenet began with the spirit that still exists today. On several
newsgroups I posted a message with the following subject: "I want to
hear from the four corners of the Net - That means YOU!" In return I
received numerous wonderful answers. One new pioneer was going to use
packet radio to send e-mail up to the CIS's orbiting Mir Space Station
in the heavens. Others in Krakow, Poland, in Australia and in the
ex-USSR sent me information about their connection. Some told me of how
they made other connections possible. One user in South Africa told me
how he distributed news and e-mail and was trying to gain access to a
satellite in order to set connections up with the interior of Africa
that lacks the otherwise needed infrastructure. The world is still in
the infancy of this communications interconnectivity!
See description of this result in Chapter 1.

(28) "Flame Wars" (highly emotional attacks) can become annoying.
There are ebbs and flows of interesting posts. Even though Usenet is
addicting, it can also be overwhelming.

(29) See e.g., the U.S. Office of Inspector General's Report of April,
1993, for documentation of the process set in motion to implement
the privatization of the NSFnet.


(30) From the Usenet History Archives, ftp://weber.ucsd.edu/pub/usenet.hist/

(31) From Usenet History Archives, ftp://weber.ucsd.edu/pub/usenet.hist/
posthist.Z
-----------

Special Thanks to Bruce Jones for establishing and archiving the
Usenet History Archives at ftp://weber.ucsd.edu/pub/usenet.hist/
Also thanks to the Usenet Pioneers for getting Usenet off to the right start.

Last Updated: October 15, 1995
================================================== =============

This article is a draft chapter from Michael Hauben's
<[email protected]> and Ronda Hauben's <[email protected]> netbook
titled "Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet."
*Commercial use is prohibited*

Please send us any comments about this draft. Send comments to
both [email protected] and [email protected].

- - - Updated - - -

[tomt]

Barron Trump,

is 6 foot seven

- - - Updated - - -

A Mathematical Theory of Communication - Wikipedia

[tomt]

• 3991 replies | 740452 view(s)
  

- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -

Jackson County Executive vetoes stadium sales tax ordinance

- - - Updated - - -

[h=Edit so easily.]3[/h]

Quickly change text or swap out images right in your PDF from anywhere. Desks are now totally optional.

Learn more

[tomt]

[h=iPhone Trade-in Values]2[/h]

Your device	Estimated trade-in value footnote ¹
iPhone 14 Pro Max	Up to $620
iPhone 14 Pro	Up to $520
iPhone 14 Plus	Up to $450
iPhone 14	Up to $400
iPhone SE (3rd generation)	Up to $160
iPhone 13 Pro Max	Up to $500
iPhone 13 Pro	Up to $420
iPhone 13	Up to $320
iPhone 13 mini	Up to $300
iPhone 12 Pro Max	Up to $370
iPhone 12 Pro	Up to $300
iPhone 12	Up to $220
iPhone 12 mini	Up to $180
iPhone SE (2nd generation)	Up to $70
iPhone 11 Pro Max	Up to $270
iPhone 11 Pro	Up to $220
iPhone 11	Up to $180
iPhone XS Max	Up to $150
iPhone XS	Up to $120
iPhone XR	Up to $120
iPhone X	Up to $100
iPhone 8 Plus	Up to $80
iPhone 8	Up to $50
iPhone 7 Plus	Up to $50
iPhone 7	Up to $30

- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -

Yandex Images

- - - Updated - - -

3991 replies | 740452 view(s)

- - - Updated - - -

• 3992 replies | 741306 view(s)
  

- - - Updated - - -

Astra Linux - Wikipedia

- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -

Jetpack.com

- - - Updated - - -

[h=iPhone Trade-in Values]2[/h]

Your device	Estimated trade-in value footnote ¹
iPhone 14 Pro Max	Up to $620
iPhone 14 Pro	Up to $520
iPhone 14 Plus	Up to $450
iPhone 14	Up to $400
iPhone SE (3rd generation)	Up to $160
iPhone 13 Pro Max	Up to $500
iPhone 13 Pro	Up to $420
iPhone 13	Up to $320
iPhone 13 mini	Up to $300
iPhone 12 Pro Max	Up to $370
iPhone 12 Pro	Up to $300
iPhone 12	Up to $220
iPhone 12 mini	Up to $180
iPhone SE (2nd generation)	Up to $70
iPhone 11 Pro Max	Up to $270
iPhone 11 Pro	Up to $220
iPhone 11	Up to $180
iPhone XS Max	Up to $150
iPhone XS	Up to $120
iPhone XR	Up to $120
iPhone X	Up to $100
iPhone 8 Plus	Up to $80
iPhone 8	Up to $50
iPhone 7 Plus	Up to $50
iPhone 7	Up to $30

- - - Updated - - -

Jetpack.com

[tomt]

- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -

[h=iPhone Trade-in Values]2[/h]

Your device	Estimated trade-in value footnote ¹
iPhone 14 Pro Max	Up to $620
iPhone 14 Pro	Up to $520
iPhone 14 Plus	Up to $450
iPhone 14	Up to $400
iPhone SE (3rd generation)	Up to $160
iPhone 13 Pro Max	Up to $500
iPhone 13 Pro	Up to $420
iPhone 13	Up to $320
iPhone 13 mini	Up to $300
iPhone 12 Pro Max	Up to $370
iPhone 12 Pro	Up to $300
iPhone 12	Up to $220
iPhone 12 mini	Up to $180
iPhone SE (2nd generation)	Up to $70
iPhone 11 Pro Max	Up to $270
iPhone 11 Pro	Up to $220
iPhone 11	Up to $180
iPhone XS Max	Up to $150
iPhone XS	Up to $120
iPhone XR	Up to $120
iPhone X	Up to $100
iPhone 8 Plus	Up to $80
iPhone 8	Up to $50
iPhone 7 Plus	Up to $50
iPhone 7	Up to $30

- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -

Yandex Images

- - - Updated - - -

3991 replies | 740452 view(s)

- - - Updated - - -

• 3992 replies | 741306 view(s)

- - - Updated - - -

Astra Linux - Wikipedia

- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -

Jetpack.com

- - - Updated - - -

[h=iPhone Trade-in Values]2[/h]

Your device	Estimated trade-in value footnote ¹
iPhone 14 Pro Max	Up to $620
iPhone 14 Pro	Up to $520
iPhone 14 Plus	Up to $450
iPhone 14	Up to $400
iPhone SE (3rd generation)	Up to $160
iPhone 13 Pro Max	Up to $500
iPhone 13 Pro	Up to $420
iPhone 13	Up to $320
iPhone 13 mini	Up to $300
iPhone 12 Pro Max	Up to $370
iPhone 12 Pro	Up to $300
iPhone 12	Up to $220
iPhone 12 mini	Up to $180
iPhone SE (2nd generation)	Up to $70
iPhone 11 Pro Max	Up to $270
iPhone 11 Pro	Up to $220
iPhone 11	Up to $180
iPhone XS Max	Up to $150
iPhone XS	Up to $120
iPhone XR	Up to $120
iPhone X	Up to $100
iPhone 8 Plus	Up to $80
iPhone 8	Up to $50
iPhone 7 Plus	Up to $50
iPhone 7	Up to $30

- - - Updated - - -

Jetpack.com

- - - Updated - - -

3994 replies | 741753 view(s)

[tomt]

[h=inverted yield curve]1[/h]

- - - Updated - - -

The Federal Reserve hiked rates 11 times in the 2022-2023 cycle, spiking its benchmark rate from near 0% to a range of 5.25%-5.50%.
"As a result, I've kind of revised my opinion," he continued. "Given the circumstances, I think it is likely we do see much slower growth in 2024."

- - - Updated - - -

The inventor of the market's most famous recession indicator is confident the inverted yield curve is accurately calling a slowdown in 2024 - Google Search

- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -

[tomt]

so,

was this woman murdered in jail?


Funeral and vigil held for woman found dead in Holloway prison cell | Prisons and probation | The Guardian


‘I sleep at peace at night because I know I fought for my daughter to
the very last’ | UK news | The Guardian

- - - Updated - - -



- - - Updated - - -

Black Women and State-Sanctioned Police Violence: The Case of Sarah Reed | OpenLearn - Open University

[tomt]

"I was approached by some of my friends on the left.

I didn't know I had friends on the left,"

Hughes told The Huffington Post.


"I said, 'OK, I will go ahead and write the first check.'"

- - - Updated - - -





15 captures26 Jun 1997 - 5 Dec 2002





[table]
[TR="class: m"]
[TD="class: b, align: right"]AUG[/TD]
[TD="class: c, align: center"]OCT[/TD]
[TD="class: f"]DEC[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: d"]
[TD="class: b, align: right"][/TD]
[TD="class: c, align: center"]07[/TD]
[TD="class: f"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: y"]
[TD="class: b, align: right"]2001[/TD]
[TD="class: c, align: center"]2002[/TD]
[TD="class: f"]2003[/TD]
[/TR]
[/table]

About this capture

FILL 'ER UP[hr][/hr]Make a small box act like a larger one with polyester fiberfill
By
TOM NOUSAINEThe word "FIBER" is turning up in a lot of hip conversations these days – you know, the ones that take place in art galleries, bistros, and install bays. In the galleries, they're talking about the fiber-optic conduits through which compressed digital audio and video will travel when the Intergalactic Superhighway concludes the long and winding road to our homes. In the bistros, they're talking about the colon-scrubbing glory of fiber-rich delicacies like oatmeal quesadillas and bran flan. But, to us – the few, the proud, the mighty Box Builders – fiber means dacron-polyester fiberfill, that magic and powerful ingredient that helps deliver maximum bass from a tiny space.[table]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 4"]SEALED ENCLOSURE
1.4-ft³ Box[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Stuffing Density
(lb/ft³ )[/TD]
[TD]System Resonance
(Fsb)[/TD]
[TD]Effective
Size[/TD]
[TD]Percentage
Gain[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]56.6[/TD]
[TD]1.4[/TD]
[TD]--[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]0.70[/TD]
[TD]53.0[/TD]
[TD]1.6[/TD]
[TD]14%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]0.75[/TD]
[TD]52.7[/TD]
[TD]1.7[/TD]
[TD]21%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1.50[/TD]
[TD]51.7[/TD]
[TD]1.8[/TD]
[TD]29%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1.75[/TD]
[TD]50.8[/TD]
[TD]1.9[/TD]
[TD]36%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2.60[/TD]
[TD]50.4[/TD]
[TD]1.6[/TD]
[TD]14%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3.10[/TD]
[TD]52.6[/TD]
[TD]1.2[/TD]
[TD]-14%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/table]
It's no secret that you can use fiber- fill to make low-end magic; clever installers have been using it for years Take two boxes of the same size and type, insert the same woofer into each one, and stuff one with some fiber-fill – the one with the stuffing should kick out lower bass.
In simple terms, it works like this: The fiberfill fools the woofer into thinking that it's in a larger box (one with more air, or internal volume, in it). than it really is. And, in general, the larger the box, the lower the bass you can get out of it.
Fiberfill stuffing is a popular alternative for people who can't or don't want to allot a lot of space for a subwoofer box. A compound or Isobarik configuration, which pairs two woofers in one box, is another popular option, though it has some considerable downsides: For one thing, you have to buy two woofers. There is also a theoretical sensitivity loss (on the order of 6 dB) because you end up with twice the cone mass, though you can cut your losses – losing only a few dB SPL – by running a pair of the drivers in parallel.
[table]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 4"]SEALED ENCLOSURE
5.1-ft³ Box[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Stuffing Density
(lb/ft³ )[/TD]
[TD]System Resonance
(Fsb)[/TD]
[TD]Effective
Size[/TD]
[TD]Percentage
Gain[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]42.0[/TD]
[TD]5.1[/TD]
[TD]--[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]0.25[/TD]
[TD]42.0[/TD]
[TD]5.1[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]0.50[/TD]
[TD]41.2[/TD]
[TD]5.8[/TD]
[TD]14%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]0.75[/TD]
[TD]40.3[/TD]
[TD]6.2[/TD]
[TD]22%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1.00[/TD]
[TD]39.4[/TD]
[TD]6.5[/TD]
[TD]27%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1.25[/TD]
[TD]38.6[/TD]
[TD]6.5[/TD]
[TD]27%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1.50[/TD]
[TD]40.2[/TD]
[TD]5.6[/TD]
[TD]9%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/table]
The particulars of fiber stuffing are pretty interesting: The air inside your enclosure actually heats up as your woofer moves, making the air stiffer. (I'm absolutely serious.) When the enclosure is stuffed with fiber, the fibers wiggle, dissipating some of the heat and making the system work as though the box were larger. Theoretically, your woofer/box bass system can act like a system that's a maximum of 40 percent larger when you've latched onto the right stuffing recipe – in other words, if you have an enclosure that offers 1 cubic foot (1 ft³ ) of internal volume, in a perfect world a good stuffing job will make it perform like an enclosure that offers 1.4 cubic feet of internal volume.
There are three types of stuffing that are commonly used for this purpose: fiberglass insulation, long-fiber wool, and polyester fiberfill. Fiberfill is the best choice because it doesn't come loose and fly around and irritate your skin or lungs like fiberglass, it works as well as either of the others, it's a lot cheaper than wool, and moths hate it. I recently bought five 20-ounce bags of it at $1.99 a pop (a total of 6.26 pounds for $9.95) at Minnesota Fabrics; that turns out to be about $1.60 a pound. You should be able to find some at any fabric store or in the bedding section at friendly stores like K-Mart or Home Depot.
To evaluate the effectiveness of box stuffing, I used an MLSSA analyzer to measure the impedance of three enclosures – 5.l-cubic-foot sealed, 1.4-cubic-foot sealed, and 1.4-cubic-foot ported (the port measured 3 inches in diameter and 6 inches in length) – with various densities of stuffing. For the sealed boxes, I was able to determine the effective box size – as enhanced by the stuffing – using the system's resonant-frequency and Qes values. For the ported box, I compared the tuned frequency of the empty enclosure to the tuned frequency of the stuffed enclosure, using the Speak for Windows computer program; this enabled me to find the effective box size that fit the actual resonant frequency I'd measured.
[table]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 4"]PORTED ENCLOSURE
1.4-ft³ Box[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Stuffing Density
(lb/ft³ )[/TD]
[TD]System Resonance
(Fsb)[/TD]
[TD]Effective
Size[/TD]
[TD]Percentage
Gain[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]42.0[/TD]
[TD]1.4[/TD]
[TD]--[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]0.40[/TD]
[TD]39.1[/TD]
[TD]1.6[/TD]
[TD]14%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]0.85[/TD]
[TD]37.2[/TD]
[TD]1.8[/TD]
[TD]29%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1.25[/TD]
[TD]35.2[/TD]
[TD]1.9[/TD]
[TD]36%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1.40[/TD]
[TD]34.2[/TD]
[TD]2.0[/TD]
[TD]43%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1.75[/TD]
[TD]35.2[/TD]
[TD]1.9[/TD]
[TD]36%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/table]
In each case, the news was good – make that very good. With all three boxes, I enjoyed roughly 25 to 35 percent of "space gain" by using stuffing at a rate of 1 to 1.75 pounds per cubic foot of internal volume.
When making system performance predictions, be aware that the Qes figure – and, therefore, the Qts figure – of the sealed boxes dropped. And with the ported box, the peak of the impedance curve on the lower side of the tuned frequency became heavily damped below the box's point of resonance. I also found that there is such a thing as too much of a good thing: System resonance (Fsb) rises again, beginning with densities of around 1.5 pounds of stuffing per cubic foot of box volume; this happens because the fibers are jammed so tightly together that they stop wiggling and, consequently, stop dissipating heat.
I also found that stuffing gets less effective as box size increases. The morale: The bigger your box is, the harder it is to fool your woofer.
A few rules of thumb: Stuff small enclosures – those with up to about 3 cubic feet of internal volume or less – with 1.5 pounds of fiberfill for each cubic foot of internal volume and you should get about a 30-percent increase in box volume without seriously affecting other performance variables. For larger enclosures, add stuffing at a rate of approximately 1 pound per cubic foot and you should get a virtual-space boost of about 25 percent. One thing's certain: You'll impress the heck out of your friends at the art gallery and bistro.
[hr][/hr]CAR STEREO REVIEW®
March/April 1995
Hachette Flilipacchi Magazines
Box Builder, Page 100
E-Mail[hr][/hr]

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFGqgN7fMxw

[tomt]

nADIR

• ASTRONOMY
  the point on the celestial sphere directly below an observer.

- - - Updated - - -

Fatboy Slim - Right Here, Right Now [Official 4K Video] - YouTube

- - - Updated - - -

Cookie declarationAd SettingsAbout
Necessary (37)Preferences (6)Statistics (54)Marketing (78)Unclassified (50)
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.

Name	Provider	Purpose	Expiry	Type
campaign	allthatsinteresting.com	Used in context with promotional-codes on the websites. The cookie enables that individual codes are only presented and used once by the specific user.	1 day	HTTP
CookieConsent [x2]	Cookiebot talk.allthatsinteresting.com	Stores the user's cookie consent state for the current domain	1 year	HTTP
is_gdpr [x3]	allthatsinteresting.com cdn.allthatsinteresting.com talk.allthatsinteresting.com	Determines whether the user is located within the EU and therefore is subject to EU's data privacy regulations.	Session	HTTP
SESS# [x2]	allthatsinteresting.com The New York Times	Preserves users states across page requests.	1 day	HTTP
cookies.js_dtest [x6]	Parse.ly	This cookie determines whether the browser accepts cookies.	Session	HTTP
BT_AA_DETECTION	btloader.com	Used to determine if the visitor should be presented to popup-advertisement content on the website. This also allows the website to detect if an adblocker is present in the visitor’s browser.	Persistent	HTML
BT_sid	btloader.com	Used to determine if the visitor should be presented to popup-advertisement content on the website. This also allows the website to detect if an adblocker is present in the visitor’s browser.	Session	HTML
ak_bmsc [x3]	Dailymail.co.uk National Geographic The Washington Post	This cookie is used to distinguish between humans and bots. This is beneficial for the website, in order to make valid reports on the use of their website.	1 day	HTTP
AKA_A2	Dailymail.co.uk	This cookie is necessary for the cache function. A cache is used by the website to optimize the response time between the visitor and the website. The cache is usually stored on the visitor’s browser.	1 day	HTTP
v1st	Dailymotion	Pending	13 months	HTTP
_cfuvid	Embed.ly	This cookie is a part of the services provided by Cloudflare - Including load-balancing, deliverance of website content and serving DNS connection for website operators.	Session	HTTP
CONSENT [x2]	Google YouTube	Used to detect if the visitor has accepted the marketing category in the cookie banner. This cookie is necessary for GDPR-compliance of the website.	2 years	HTTP
1.gif	Cookiebot	Used to count the number of sessions to the website, necessary for optimizing CMP product delivery.	Session	Pixel
csrftoken	Instagram	Helps prevent Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks.	1 year	HTTP
b2b_cig_opt	The New York Times	Allow visitors to access login-restricted articles or content through company or educational login.	Session	HTTP
datadome	The New York Times	Used in context with the website's BotManager. The BotManager detects, categorizes and compiles reports on potential bots trying to access the website.	Session	HTTP
edu_cig_opt	The New York Times	Allow visitors to access login-restricted articles or content through company or educational login.	Session	HTTP
nyt-gdpr	The New York Times	Determines whether the user is located within the EU and therefore is subject to EU's data privacy regulations.	1 day	HTTP
bugsnag-anonymous-id	Megaphone	This cookie is used to detect errors on the website - this information is sent to the website's support staff in order to optimize the visitor's experience on the website.	Persistent	HTML
sc_anonymous_id	widget.sndcdn.com	Used in context with the 3D-view-function on the website.	10 years	HTTP
AWSALB [x2]	Flipboard Dailymail.co.uk	Registers which server-cluster is serving the visitor. This is used in context with load balancing, in order to optimize user experience.	7 days	HTTP
AWSALBCORS [x2]	Flipboard Dotmetrics	Registers which server-cluster is serving the visitor. This is used in context with load balancing, in order to optimize user experience.	7 days	HTTP
__cf_bm	Vimeo	This cookie is used to distinguish between humans and bots. This is beneficial for the website, in order to make valid reports on the use of their website.	1 day	HTT

[tomt]

Romeo Void - Never Say Never - YouTube