Feb 23 - Feb 25, 1998

Following is a summary of points discussed in the parallel Japanese Online Conference.

16th February to 18th February
On the question of information overflow, case studies were presented. It was pointed out that the question of information overflow on the Internet overall needs to progress through various stages, and that there are knotty problems at each stage.
1) Access to information (finding)
2) Assessing the information (accept or reject)
3) Managing the information

With regard to the Internet and human rights, in addition to government legislation, when the providers decide upon voluntary restraints, where these are uniformly fixed among the providers, the ordinary user has no choice but to accept what they offer, or to give up altogether. In this light, the question of what kind of process is to be adopted in the forming of these agreements is a major issue.

Referring to the translated comment:
With regard to the Internet and human rights, in addition to government legislation, when the providers decide upon voluntary restraints, where these are uniformly fixed among the providers, the ordinary user has no choice but to accept what they offer, or to give up altogether. In this light, the question of what kind of process is to be adopted in the forming of these agreements is a major issue.

This is a problem well recognized with various self-regulatory industry groups, especially if driven by government authorities - these are often used as means for protectionism. But even worse is the situation where an incumbent, dominant player is allowed to effectively set the rules.

Responding to the post by Jim Johnson [035]
We have enjoyed exploring many different ideas these past weeks concerning the nature of the global information infrastructure, the networked society, global electronic commerce, the various roles of present institutions in the future cyber world, the kinds of leadership needed to carry us into the future, and how we should educate and prepare the next generation for their brave new world.

It is good to see this broad framework being presented as a question to those in the online Nikkei forum.

I would like to challenge all of you, now, to frame these ideas in the form of some friendly advice that you would give to interested citizens in Japan.

This is a welcome challenge.

As you know, one of the reasons that Nikkei has organized this global net conference is to point toward a launchpad event on March 10, the Global Information Summit. This Summit is designed to increase awareness among Japan's leaders to what is happening around the world in the information revolution. This event is envisioned as the beginning of a process of thought leadership and debate to prepare the nation for the future.

Good to hear that it is envisioned as a beginning of debate and that the goal is to prepare for the future. Those are constructive and important aims.

Frame your comments in terms of what you would advise our friends in Japan: What new ideas need to be circulated to help get Japan ready for the networked world?

1)Firstly, what I propose, is consideration of the essence of the online achievement of a global network. I hope to continue my comments on this is a future post, but the nature of the Net as a new form of *communication* (as opposed to those who look to it as information), and the *regenerative* quality of such communication is a crucial foundation for any discussion of the Net.

2)Secondly, I propose, is understanding that people developing technology is part of the crucial understanding in which discussion of the future Net should be framed.

Based on what you know about Japan: their business structures, their political institutions, their education system, their cultural patterns, how would you recommend they change?

Having been online over several years I was impressed with contributions of the Unix community in Japan to the worldwide Net. Also I was impressed by the spirit and support of university based contributions to the Net.

In the U.S. there is much to learn from the way the Net developed at the university toward how it can be spread among other sectors of the population. I wonder if this is true in Japan as well, and would be interested in knowing more of the development of the Net in Japanese universities and if there are lessons from this development that can fruitfully help to guide how the Net is spread among the population without access at the Universities.

For example at universities in the U.S. access to email and unix based computer accounts helped to make it possible for those who came online to customize their Net usage to usage that would be helpful in their work. Also access to Usenet and other networking aspects like telnet, ftp etc. gave a broad range of what was possible once one got an account online.

In the U.S. I have seen schools where students, if they have any computer access at all, are being restricted to access to Windows95.

That means there is a much more limited range of computer activity to learn and utilize, than what a Unix account on the Internet would make possible.

I am struck by how much more dynamic it would seem to have a public school make linux available and allow all students to have email accounts, access to Usenet and www etc. (Especially if students are high school age).

I don't know what is happening in Japan currently with spreading Net access among K-12 grade students, particularly among older students (those in 6th - 12 grades).

But I have seen the excitement even of students who didn't have Net access but who wrote email messages that their teacher typed in so they could send them to other students and get email messages back.

The ability to communicate with other students in another geographical area (another State in the U.S. or another country) was very exciting for students and they eagerly looked forward to reading and writing these email message.

This is a minimal but actual example of how seeing the Net as a new means of communication among people is at the essence of what should guide those who are concerned with Net development.

What can they draw upon from the past and present to use in building the future information society?

What is there about Japan now that enables them to be leaders in the information age?

Sadly I have not yet been to Japan so I can only respond from my experience outside of Japan.

However, I have been impressed by the people I have met who are part of trying to spread the Net in Japan. It is clear from my conversations with them that there is a real desire in Japan to be part of the Global world the Net is making possible, and that there is a pressure to make sure that Japan is not behind or left out of these important developments.

Also the support given by various people in Japan to the print publication of a Japanese translation of our book 'Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet' has been very encouraging and demonstrates that there is a hunger in Japan for real information about how the Net has developed and of its importance and there are those who are working to make such information and discussion possible.

These are very positive signs.

Also, it seems there is an understanding that there is a need to hear from the grassroots on issues, that there is a need for discussion among people at a grassroots level to determine the vision and needs for the future of the Net in Japan and in the world.

What new things and new ideas do they need to grasp to move forward?

What I have found most important in my study is that technological development is important, and that based on that development prototypes for the future vision can be grasped and implemented.

For example, Licklider and Taylor had a vision of the Net as a new means of human to human communication, and that this communication would make it possible for something creative and new to develop. This view grew out of and also gave support to the development of the time sharing communities that grew up in the 1960's.

From viewing the actual achievements of these new online communities that grew up in the development of time sharing operating systems, a vision of a broader network grew up, one that would link these time sharing communities together.

In a similar way when Usenet pioneers began Usenet, they took up the actual problems of linking together different campuses with UUCP and newsgroups, and felt that solving those real problems would help to make a broader network possible.

This combining of actual technological development with the study and discussion of what vision the developments help to clarify, is a methodology that helped those who built the Net and will I believe help those who want to contribute to its future growth and development.

What specific changes need to happen, and in what frameworks? The schools? the businesses? the political institutions? the legal system?

I would need to know more about the details of Japanese institutions and society and welcome hearing from those who have that knowledge and learning more myself, hopefully by visiting Japan sometime in the near future.

I look forward to advice. Thank you,

Thank you for posing these interesting questions. These questions, it seems to me are a form of leadership for Japan, as they are questions that need to be asked in other countries (like for example the U.S.) as well and it is exciting to see that such questions are being raised and discussion is being encouraged online of them. I had hoped that the publication of 'Netizens' in a print edition would help to stimulate such questions and such discussion, and it is good to see that at least in Japan, such thoughtful dialogue is being taken up.

I look forward to learning how these questions will be raised at the event on March 10, at the Global Information Summit, and how discussion afterwards will be continued.

problem reduction versus (social) Networking capability of computer net

Responding to a comment by SHIMASAKI, Nobuhiko [038]

(...)

It could be a little bit too late to raise this kind of rather specific question/discussion, at this time frame, about a topic: 'Population problem reduction versus (social) Networking capability of computer net', described in Haubens' instructive and interesting book: 'Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet', I am afraid.

Good to hear from you and of this question from your reading of 'Netizens'

There is still some time to discuss such issues it would seem.

Though, I hope this comment would be of some use to the preparation of the possible other advice to Japan concerning the deployment of Network Society, a set of Networked Communities of Common Interest.

(...)

DDD: (My comments in Japanese English)
I can agree to Mr. M. Hauben's optimistic/positive observation that Population growth need not mean limited resources any more -- rather that very growth of population now means an improvement of resources.----- Every new person can mean a new set of perspectives and specialties to add to the wealth of knowledge of the world.-----, if it is assumed that the 'population', 'people' and 'every person' Michael is talking about, mean mainly those information-'pro-sumer' being (or being given good opportunity to be raised to be) enough powerful/abundant in terms of computer-literacy of certain level, i.e. the 'information/computer-wise powerful' people, plus their 'colleague' in the same real (NOT-cybernetic/virtual) communities of 'not-for-profit' type and 'profit-pursuing' type.

I cannot respond for Michael who wrote this chapter of Netizen (chapter 1), but I felt this was a subject I would like to comment on as well.

I am not so sure whether the Netizen growth would catch up with the general population growth (or rather explosion) in this Globe/Earth eventually, even though I do recognize that the CURRENT netizen growth rate (differential) is amazing, promising and greater than the general population growth !

Yes the growth of Netizens is quite amazing and promising, but I also feel it has some implications for population growth in general, as Michael also indicated in his chapter of Netizens.

(...)

I share also the view with the Haubens about the importance and synergetic/generative power of the combination of netizen population growth and universally accessible computer-net deployment.

Yes the regenerative power of the communication among Netizens is a very important aspect of the promise for the future development of the Net.

And the netizen population growth means the provision of many information-intensified work/pleasure opportunities of the both types: 'not-for-profit' type and 'profit-pursuing' type, in various geographical regions.

I feel that it is not an issue so much of 'information ... opportunities' but rather of the communication between and among netizens that is the significant new development represented by the Net.

Still, the above good combination seems not (yet) good enough to solve smoothly the serious/deep problems of population growth pressure in general, I am afraid. The problems are of course such as the earth environment contamination prevailing, the resource shortage for comfortable life-maintenance, the life level gap of information-wise 'haves' and 'have-nots', in many developing countries/region and even some reasonably industry-wise developed countries.

These are important considerations. However, the increased access to communication will be a way for people to solve these problems. For example, in the early days of Usenet, some of those online had a problem with a car they had bought which had a faulty radiator that caused the engine to overheat and become damaged. Because of their online communication they were able to discuss and determine how to be helpful to each other about this problem.

In a similar way, some of those online on an early ARPANET mailing list discussing the problem of the nuclear armaments race. Though those involved in the discussion disagreed, their discussion helped to clarify the issues involved so a way could be found to deal with the problem.

Thus the Internet and Usenet make it possible to have the kind of online discussion and communication that will make it possible for people to solve real world problems that exist off line.

Mr. Michael Hauben mentioned in his line as ----it reduces the problems of population growth. ----- . Perhaps he does mean just 'reduction' and NOT 'elimination' of population growth problem, thus the difference of his observation and mine might be rather small. But, in Japanese edition, the Japanese word: 'kokufuku' (coresponding to rather 'overcome' in English) is utilized in this aspect, and perhaps it might provide Japanese print edition readers with a bit stronger impression than what the author originally meant. Anyway --------.

It is good to hear a question from the translation into Japanese of Netizens as this can lead to interesting discussion.

FFF: Japan herself is currently suffering from the problems coming up (rather) from 'the quick growth of aged population portion in the already existing high population density status' internally, rather than the ordinary population growth pressure. But, due to the geographically internal natural resources (especially human food and livestock feed) limit situation, the fortune of Japan is closely linked to the global population growth pressure.

It is helpful to hear of this problem. On the Japanese version of the list it seems there was some discussion of senior-net where older people have a networking discussion so they can help each other solve problems.

Professor John McCarthy who was one of the pioneers of time- sharing, also has done work on the concept of how it is possible to have adequate resources for all the world's population.

And in the English version of Netizens, chapter 17, 'Arte': An Economic Perspective: The Role of 'Arte' in the Production of Social Wealth, describes the role that technology plays in making more resources available, and making them available more cheaply. The chapter gives various examples, including in the first footnote, an examle of the use of arte in Finland where the use of advanced technology made it possible to cut up a log producing more wood than previously, and thus fewer trees had to be cut down.

Also the Net makes it possible for people to communicate around the world while much less paper and other resources need to be used in the process.

Thus there are real examples of how developing technology like the Net can save resources and thus support greater population growth (in physically as well as virtual terms) than before.

GGG: I have no doubt about the observation that the above combination of netizen population growth and universally accessible computer-net deployment is essential also to solve the above Japan's problems coming from 'the quick growth of aged population portion'. But to support the relatively aged information-wise 'have-nots' in the real (not-cybernetic/virtual) communities seems to me a left-open item. It requires additional Japanese-culture-(reservation/modification) based measures of slow (not quick) effect type, which would be not necessarily relevant to computer-net-based informatization and ('digital') information-networking.

But computer-net-based means can be helpful - for example in various cities in the U.S. there are city specific newsgroups on Usenet, like in NY nyc.general

In these city specific newsgroups people can discuss what resources there are available in the community to be helpful to different sectors like the elderly. Though I don't see government efforts in NYC to get seniors online, this would be a way that seniors could be active in supporting each other in dealing with the kinds of problems seniors are more likely to have.

EEE: Any critique and advice to/against the above comments, based upon relevant recent study/consideration results are very much appreciated.

Thanks for quoting from the book as I think Michael is pointing out the way the Net changes what is available to those online from the 'limited gateways' of offline to help 'overcome' the limitations inherent in such offline 'limited gateways'.

Thus Michael is commenting on how the Net makes a broader set of people and resources available to those online, which can overcome the limitations that one who isn't online is faced with.

A few days after the opening ceremony of Nagano Olympic, I had a bad flu that lasted over 10 days. Deprived of both mental and physical energy, I couldn't even lurk. In the meanwhile this electronic conference is coming to the end.

Anyway, I took one day to read through all the messages posted here and found them fascinating and encouraging. I am particularly greatful to Jim Johnson forhis call to give friendly advice to citizens in Japan. Thanks Michael, for you taking initiative to respond.

On my part, I was, sort of, culturally overwhelmed by the exchanges between Ronda and Howard, I mean, by the 'confrontational?' way you discuss things. So let me just make a brief intervention to their discussion about the 'relative roles, or different functions, of the private sector vs. government.'

I admit that some governments are (sometimes) bellicose and/or tyrannical. I also admit that private sector, particularly some corporations, are greedy. Nevertheless, the role of government has definitely changed in this century as their prestige game lost legitimacy in the international society. Its role will continue to change in the coming century. For example, its role as the main financial sponsor of socially useful activities (such as researches) and also as the main redistributor of income and wealth will be reduced. Instead, the private sector will take up more of these roles. But the government will continue to be an important and ultimate constabulary force to confirm and enforce a new set of rules in the coming information society. Governments will have to collaborate globally in order to play this role successfully.

The private sector in the future will consist not only of business organizations but also of NGO-NPO-type organizations and individuals. They are 'intelprises (intellectual enterprises)' according to my neologism in the sense that their main interest is not in accumulation and demonstration of wealth but in acquisition and exhibition of intellectual power.

I would like to argue, following David Ronfeldt, that an indispensable condition for the success of information revolution is that collaborative (not competitive) relations prevail among the government, business enterprises, and intelprises. They will have to learn how to trust each other. (My cultural bias is in that I am inclined to assume that confrontation doesn't produce mutual trust and collaboration. But at the same time I am aware of the danger of stressing the importance of 'harmony (WA in Japanese)' too much, leading into closed collusion and acquiescence of structural corruption. It is not easy to strike a happy mean:-)

Mr. Hauben's advice underscores a strategic aspect of the Net that is often being overlooked by non-American interests and societies.

Despite the current domination of the Internet by American content, the reality is that the Net provides to many cultures a cost-effective tool for producing and disseminating valuable resources which provide to the world's children, and their children, the knowledge to understand the originating cultures differently.

As I have grown older, I have been dismayed by the degree to which many cultures have edited the records of history, particularly the schoolbooks, to present perspectives which are incomplete, inaccurate and often perpetuate biases that have been otherwise discarded (or at least brought into disrepute). My sense of world history, and of the cultures which populate this earth are far different as a result of my travels and direct interactions with others. These experiences have left me with radically different views of the 'real world'.

The Internet presents to each of our cultures an enormously important tool with which to aggressively provide true knowledge about what makes our cultures, economies and histories important and worth knowing. I have confidence that children, equipped with technology, will be more empowered to seek the truth - but we must commit to producing the information - the content - that will motivate the children to engage in the quest.

Thus, not for democracy (as argued by Mr. Hauben) but with the ambition of facilitating mutual respect, I would encourage the same activities for which he has been an articulate advocate. Let us use this technology to produce the knowledge about each other that will allow succeeding generations to understand the world differently.

I note with interest the vigorous discussion occurring within the Japanese portion of this Symposium regarding content control. One aspect of the problem (and of constructive solutions) that has been overlooked is the degree to which self-enforcement within the confines of a private network can be successful in regulating behavior and in eliminating those who fail to abide by appropriate rules.

One of the value-added services which a major American provider offers is that those venues - electronic mail, chat rooms, and the like - which are most likely to present opportunities for improper content (particularly defamation, adult content, etc) are governed by system rules that are agreed to by each subscriber as part of their commercial contract for service. Monitors are on-line watching the content (not email but chat groups) and complaints are vigorously investigated. Wrong-doers, particularly those who persistently mis-behave, can be terminated from receiving service as a 'private remedy' for violating the rules.

Although the Internet is often perceived as an open space, in reality much of its infrastructure consists of the private systems of commercial providers. Through the development of system rules within each private network that respond to the social ills that are the reason for the kinds of regulation that are feared, providers can achieve much of the same effect, without government regulation/monitoring/moral judgments.

This self-regulatory strategy, if sufficiently embraced by providers, actually sets up the opportunity for competition among the networks to develop the 'best' predictable, stable environments of system rules which will attract commercial and consumer participation. This is the vision that has been used to advocate for self-regulation - but if industry does not seize the opportunity, then the risks (and realities) of abuses will certainly compel governments to intervene.

Below are some answers in response to Jim Johnson's questions about how we might 'advise our friends in Japan':

Johnson: What new ideas need to be circulated to help get Japan ready for the networked world?

Comment: The 'new ideas' which need to be circulated are not unique to Japan. They are common to all of us. Because of the dynamics of participation and growth which computer and communication technologies are unleashing, we must accept change and recognize that the velocity of it and the flattening direction of it will present difficulties as well as opportunities to all.

Johnson: Based on what you know about Japan: their business structures, their political institutions, their education system, their cultural patterns, how would you recommend they change? What can they draw upon from the past and present to use in building the future information society.

Comment: It is much easier said than done, but all societies must question the assumptions of their institutions, and do so in light of the transforming nature of the technologies. This may result in confirming some of the historic values and amending or changing others, and accepting that this process of examination will be on-going and continuous. Probably the most critical change will be to have greater confidence in the contributions of the younger members of society.

Johnson: What is there about Japan now that enables them to be leaders in the information age?

Comment: Among many strengths, there are three which seem to me to cause Japan to be a natural leader in the information age: (1) Japanese knowledge about the importance of data and information; (2) The societal commitment to education; (3) The experience of Japan in developing export markets and of ultimately seeding enterprises in those markets.

Johnson: What new things and new ideas do they need to grasp to move forward?

Comment: Japan's financial contribution to assist social and economic growth of developing world is at a level which the rest of the world should emulate. What is needed now is to couple its financial contributions with Japanese personal involvement to assist development beyond what it is already doing with its volunteers, and to do so in partnership and cooperation with residents of the countries it is assisting.

Johnson: What specific changes need to happen, and in what frameworks? The schools? the businesses? the political institutions? the legal system?

Comment: We live in a world which grows smaller with each day that passes. All of us regardless of national origins must be concerned that this transforming period -- the convergence of new technologies in information and communication transfer -- reaches all peoples within and outside of our societies; this is both an economic and social stability imperative in addition to being a moral responsibility. Together, we can make that happen.

I have enjoyed the conference, albeit mostly lurking, and appreciate the submissions and Jim's leadership.