Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!gatech!mcnc!wolves!ggw From: ggw%wolves@cs.duke.edu (Gregory G. Woodbury) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: Face it, Abernathy is clueless (was Re: JSC phone ripoff Summary: usenet != internet Message-ID: <1990Dec22.012411.1862@wolves.uucp> Date: 22 Dec 90 01:24:11 GMT References: <1990Dec10.042944.1860@lavaca.uh.edu> <5884@qip.UUCP> Reply-To: ggw%wolves@cs.duke.edu Followup-To: comp.org.eff.talk Organization: Wolves Den UNIX Lines: 73 X-Checksum-Snefru: 0d554f28 187f3c90 384e756b dc8c14ad In article <5884@qip.UUCP> john@qip.UUCP (John Moore) writes: >In <1990Dec10.042944.1860@lavaca.uh.edu> (J. Eric Townsend) writes: >] >]I talked to Abernathy on the phone soon after his big "porn on >]the internet" story. >] >]I tried to explain to him several times that USENET is *not* the >]Internet, and that they aren't even the same sort of thing. (One's >]a network, one's information.) >] >]And he said something to the effect of "yes, but they are they same >]thing, really." >] >]He went on to say that "he was on the Internet". : : >]being able to ping, telnet and ftp), and he still insisted he was on >]the Internet and that the Internet was the same as USENET. > >In this sense I tend to agree with Abernathy. We are a uucp site, but >most of our feeds come to us via the internet, and I exchange a lot >of email through the internet. Since many gateways exist between >the internet and usenet, it is IMHO reasonable to consider them to >be one big net. True - the modes of transfer and interaction are >different. Usenet doesn't have TCP utilities (finger, ftp, etc). >But - from the point of view of transportation of "pornography", I >am reasonably sure that the "pornography" that we and many other >usenet sites receive comes over the Internet. I think you are picking >at a nit and missing the important point. The problem is that it is a damned important nit! I run sites that are both uucp/usenet only AND that are INTERNET connectible. There is a major difference - the INTERNET site has a FORMAL agreement in place concerning the behaviour of the machine and its users in terms of the network connection. (Note: I say internet connectible. It currently follows all the rules of the INTERNET even though the net is not directly connected at this point in time. I have an official registered IP address set and will be totally ready once I get a physical wire from the site to another site for use!) This message is being posted, however, from the usenet/uucp site and there are no formal agreements binding it or me. There are several mutual understandings between me and mail site connections, to the extent that they feel comfortable allowing my machine to use them as mail forwarders and to accept news and messages from my site. In various ways, I WISH I could get a real internet connection at home for the same cost and ease as my usenet/uucp connections come to me! To iterate some definitions that I have heard. The INTERNET is a formal network and protocol suite that requires specific agreements and behaviours. UUCP is a protocol suite that defines how certain machines can exchange data. No binding aregeements are *required* to use uucp per se. (Sites may have various degrees of agreements) USENET is an ad hoc collection of sites (on several different networks and using several different protocols) that exchange messages in a compatible format and nominally all subscribing to the group named news.announce.important. If anything USENET is a logical network that interesects in many cases with the INTERNET. As J.Eric pointed out, Abernathy is being willfully ignorant (yes - STUPID!) by insisting there is no difference. -- Gregory G. Woodbury @ The Wolves Den UNIX, Durham NC UUCP: ...dukcds!wolves!ggw ...mcnc!wolves!ggw [use the maps!] Domain: ggw@cds.duke.edu ggw%wolves@mcnc.mcnc.org [The line eater is a boojum snark! ]