🚀 go-pugleaf

kenji@tom.astem.or.jp (Kenji Rikitake) writes:

>In article <2705@aegis.or.jp> davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane) writes:
> |I'm not sure what usage rule of Japan-US you are speaking of. 

>one more: Acceptable Use Policy imposed by NSFnet.

>On your cost complaints: I am not responsible on InetClub issue, but
>you should pay what you want to get, after all. If you don't want to
>deal, quit and find something else - that's all I can say.

That's an interesting opinion.

> |I've read where the underlying transport mechanism of the Internet
> |doesn't lend itself to charging according to who uses how much of
> |what. [...]

>Your analogy on national highway system is interesting, but I guess
>the actual reason why Internet is not imposing usage accounting is
>that the cost of accounting itself is too high.

Yes, that's what I was saying. It's too expensive to impose usage
accounting due to the nature of the Internet. Thus insisting that
people should pay for what they get will mean additional expenses. 
It may be "fair" but it won't be cheap :-)

> |While Japan's system may be "fair" it will also be much more
> |expensive. And because of that expense only large companies or
> |Mombusho-supported universities will be able to use the Internet
> |which is the hidden agenda: keeping the information in the hands of
> |those in power. Not that this is said, or even thought of, but this
> |cultural assumption can be easily observed by just looking at the
> |structure of Japanese society. 

>Information IS power indeed. And you have to pay for it. So I pay for
>myself and trying to keep the power myself - although I am trying to
>re-distribute some of them to others. 

Another interesting opinion. 

>Maybe from an American point of view Japan is not an open country. Or
>it may be rather a closed country. But making things too open will
>lead to a social chaos and a catastrophe. And Internet in Japan itself
>is not at all "authorized" or "supported" by the government - so
>you've got to be very careful on running it. The reason why access to
>the Internet is so restricted in Japan is simple - no bandwidth, no
>money, and no administrative organizations enough to support "a public
>service". If you are going to make it a public service, NTT, KDD and
>other telecom carriers will complain and try to intervene and that's
>not what the key people running JUNET/WIDE and Internet in Japan want.

While I happen to have U.S. passport, I don't believe the idea that
Japan isn't an open country is an "American opinion"; it's a fact of
life. As you say, information is a commodity and NTT, KDD, etc.
have control of it's distribution and don't want to give up their
power. That's OK for Japan domestically as it is free to make
whatever policies it wants. All I'm pointing out is that under these
conditions it isn't possible for Japan to become part of the world
Interent where information is being shared and that sharing is being
supported by national governments and large corporations. 

> |IMHO, Japan is at a crossroads. For the past 50 years it has gained
> |immense economic power and part of this has been to have lots of
> |information come in, and very little leave. But I think those days
> |have come to an end, and either Japan will need to become a fully
> |equal partner in sharing information or it will be seen as getting a
> |free ride and cut off. 

>Your phylosophy is right - but without money you won't be able to do
>much. 

I don't know if my philosophy is "right" or not. I'm only trying to
figure out which way the tide is running and go with it. And right
now the tide seems to be for openness and communication in all
aspects of international life. 

As for the money, yes, we need money to do things, but there is
already enough money in Japan to support the Internet many times
over ... only it's being spent on other things as communcating with
other people in words doesn't have a high social value here. 

While communicating non-verbally is a powerful medium, it's not very
efficient internationally.  And this is the main point I think. If
people in Japan want to maintain their preferred medium of
communication there is no way they can take part in international
affairs on an ongoing basis. 

Even if there was enough money to pay for the transport involved
international face-to-face encounters, there just isn't enough time
to move one's body from one place to another so you can do so. IMHO,
telecommunication (video, voice, fax, email, news) has developed in
response to the need for people to communicate without having to be
face-to-face. But this idea hasn't caught on in Japan and both
ordinary people and the power possessors place so little value on
non-face-to-face communication there aren't enough resourcees
allocated to support it at the same level as other countries. 

This is, of course, a big gamble. The bet is letting people at all
walks of life commuicate freely Good Things will happen. It may fail
and the feudal-isolationist communication patterns of Japan (which
have worked so wonderfully for the thousands of years) will win out
but I don't think so. Instead, I think Japan will find itself in
the position of IBM: having to downsize and open up because the
world has move onto another way of doing things.

Ooops, I see I really wrote a lot. Sorry about that, but I couldn't
figure out how to say what I wanted in less words. 

>BTW please post John Perry Barlow's essay here. Some fj readers will
>show interests.

I'll post it as a separate article later on,

Dave

--
Dave McLane  davidg@aegis.or.jp
You're free to copy/quote/translate as long as credit is given. 
Nagaokakyoshi, Kyoto Japan Tel: +81-75-951-1168 Fax: +81-75-957-1087