🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1991Jun8.194822.2332@newshost.anu.edu.au> cmf851@anu.oz.au (Albert Langer) writes:

>No need for a satellite transceiver and netblazer to achieve TCP/IP 
>to the Internet. Just the PSTN, and an ordinary Trailblazer or other high speed 
>modem (perhaps even a relatively cheap fax modem with lots of forward error
>correction, though the high cost of international calls makes it more
>economical to lay out the capital for a better modem). People are doing
>it now with FidoNet and UUCP to developing countries.

That's us alright (the Fidonet/uucp/developing country bit).  And yes,
it can work just fine.  But we go back again to "just the PSTN, and..".
Like it or not, this is one of the key requirements.

>Useful for IMPROVING things in that area, but feasability has
>ALREADY been proved. The problems are in administering the email
>and news system GIVEN an adequate communications link.

Oh no... you don't slip out of it that easily... ;-)  You aren't given
an adequate comms link.  This was the assumption that initially started
my diatribe about why developing countries haven't already popped up all
over the net.  It is, in my opinion, the single most important reason.
But I give you that there are a large number of countries out there with
'adequate' comms that aren't yet up and running.

>>And don't say X.400!

I was teasing... but half serious, in that X.400/X.500 seem bound
together with the way a PSTN sees their future market.  I see X.400
taking off only when PSTN's can offer it as a commercial subscriber
product.  Of course, at that point, many of the problems we are talking
about disappear because you can then get an email service in the same
way you get a telephone.  But it isn't a short or even medium term
scenario.

>International email is significantly cheaper than international airmail
>(let alone the costs of telex and fax that are widely used in developing
>countries). Inwards news is more expensive but the costs are not
>dramatic compared with the benefits.
>There are
>lots more situations that cannot handle the administrative costs
>of providing a sysadmin or sysop than situations where the
>telephone costs are prohibitive.

I made a point several messages ago about internal (within a country)
networking being one of the pre-requisites for email/news to 'take off'.
Cost sharing is one of them - it is a hell of a lot easier to justify an
expensive international feed if you can somehow maximize the number of
people benefitting from it.  Make no mistake, dialup uucp over
international links costs two orders of magnitude more than you can
'hide' in a departmental budget.

The other point about internal networking, which I didn't belabour too
much at the time, is that it provides exactly the kind of de-centralised
support you are talking about.  It becomes easy to obtain assistance
from a site in the next town if you already have a rudimentary link in
place.  The ease with which a site can bootstrap itself into more
sophisticated networking has to be seen to be appreciated.  But you need
that first tiny link.

>A general discussion on Eurocentrism and
>cultural relativism etc probably belongs elsewhere. If such a 
>discussion were unavoidable here, I would take a position similar to
>Marx in "The British Rule in India".

I was probably overdoing the descriptive bits about another unaddressed
problem - i.e. why, given perfect software/hardware/comms, email isn't
just going to happen.  It is (currently) a Eurocentric phenomenon, and
even there it afflicts only the subset that is computer 'literate'. 

OK, so let's try and reach some sort of consensus.  Here are my modified
views:

1 - good, or adequate communications infrastructure is desirable - but
there are mechanisms available for use in situations where comms is
abysmal.  But in the case of abysmal comms, you need a very strong
desire to communicate to overcome your disadvantages.

2 - a major problem is the configuration and maintenance of an
'email/news engine' (hardware+o/s+enduser software) - but with a bit of
thought and care it may be possible to put together some sort of turnkey
system that could just about be dropped by parachute with a note on the
power cord saying "plug me in here".  That's not intended to sound
facetious - I reckon most of us reading this group could get quite far
down the road to putting together and configuring just such a system.

3 - user education is the crux, in two senses - firstly as to "How do I
send a message" and secondly to address the problem of "Why the hell
should I bother about sending messages".  These two educational tasks
are vastly different in scope, but both need to be addressed - in
different contexts.  The first is a technical problem, and the second is
'political'.

4 - you can't do it alone - you need a support group of some sort.  By
this I mean a site in a developed country that is well connected to
existing networks and that is prepared to allow you to connect up to
them (and possibly bear the costs of dialup as a gesture of goodwill
towards the developing country) and is prepared to do a lot of initial
baby sitting.

None of that sounds impossible, does it?  I can think, offhand, of
several countries around here that could benefit instantly if such a
'package' could be put together.  However, few sites are altruistic
enough to spend the time and money required.  Perhaps they should be.

--
  F.F. Jacot Guillarmod     PO  Box 94     \        |     ccfj@hippo.ru.ac.za
  Computing Centre       Grahamstown 6140   \      /     +27 461 22023 xt 284
  Rhodes University        South Africa      ;___*/   33 18 30 S | 26 31 45 E