From extropians-request@extropy.org Thu Aug 26 19:14:09 1993 Return-Path: Received: from usc.edu by chaph.usc.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1+ucs-3.0) id AA13848; Thu, 26 Aug 93 19:14:04 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: from ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.ed (ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu) by usc.edu (4.1/SMI-3.0DEV3-USC+3.1) id AA06300; Thu, 26 Aug 93 19:13:58 PDT Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu id AA08388; Thu, 26 Aug 93 22:11:00 EDT Received: from news.panix.com by ude.tim.ia.ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu via TCP with SMTP id AA08381; Thu, 26 Aug 93 22:10:32 EDT Received: by news.panix.com id AA03798 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for exi-maillist@ung.gnu.ai.mit.edu); Thu, 26 Aug 1993 22:10:34 -0400 Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 22:10:34 -0400 Message-Id: <199308270210.AA03798@news.panix.com> To: Extropians@extropy.org From: Extropians@extropy.org Subject: Extropians Digest X-Extropian-Date: August 27, 373 P.N.O. [02:10:20 UTC] Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: RO Extropians Digest Fri, 27 Aug 93 Volume 93 : Issue 238 Today's Topics: Congratulations to Ray & Hawk [4 msgs] DIET/REVIEW: E. & P. Kronhausen's _Formula For Life_ [1 msgs] Extropian Inquisition Modestly Proposed [1 msgs] MEDIA: Review of Extropy #11 [1 msgs] META/INVEST/PERSONAL - I am in Limbo! [1 msgs] META: What does the list SW do when ... [1 msgs] Message for Alex Chislenko [2 msgs] POLI: More stupid patents... [1 msgs] POLI: More stupid patents... [1 msgs] PPL?: privacy and dissertations (was: Free-doom and theses...)[1 msgs] Plugging Game Computers into the Net [2 msgs] a little birdie told me this... [4 msgs] Administrivia: No admin msg. Approximate Size: 55689 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 01:33:24 EST From: wit@MIT.EDU (paul whitmore) Subject: Congratulations to Ray & Hawk i wanted to personally express my great appreciation, but i thought it might flood the list if everyone, and i'm sure almost everyone would say, what i do: the software is great! if there is any heavy work involved in tuning it for other lists, to be used by listserv etc, iwould bet that all the people on compuserve and other commercial nodes, who must pay per msg, would be able to chip in quite a lot to finance this venture. how can this be relayed to the wider world? --paul whitmore ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Aug 93 23:35:23 -0700 From: davisd@pierce.ee.washington.edu Subject: POLI: More stupid patents... Could someone in the legal know comment on the possible success of this scheme, detailing the requirements for trademark infringement? > From: Alexander Chislenko > > Recently, I came up with a 'great' idea: to register trademarks > for 'Hexium', 'Septium' and 'Octium' so that Intel would either > have to change the naming for its x86 - Pentium line, or pay me > to give those trademarks up. Then I dropped this idea as too > cheap and dirty. > Maybe, I was wrong... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 05:06:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Harry Shapiro Subject: Congratulations to Ray & Hawk a conscious being, paul whitmore wrote: > > i wanted to personally express my great appreciation, but i thought it Thanks. > if there is any heavy work involved in tuning it for other lists, to be > used by listserv etc, iwould bet that all the people on compuserve and Not sure. I think we have at least a years' work to go on it; at our present rate. > how can this be relayed to the wider world? Not sure. I am strongly considering releasing the basic package under a GNU "type" copyright/licence. /hawk -- Harry S. Hawk habs@extropy.org Electronic Communications Officer, Extropy Institute Inc. The Extropians Mailing List, Since 1991 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 08:26:23 EDT From: Brian.Hawthorne@east.sun.com (Brian Holt Hawthorne - SunSelect Engineering) Subject: Congratulations to Ray & Hawk > Not sure. I am strongly considering releasing the basic package under > a GNU "type" copyright/licence. Whatever for? Is the code owned by you, Ray, or EXI? If it is the latter, why not sell it for a reasonable price and use the funds to help subsidize extropy.org, at the very least? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 08:16:40 -0500 From: extr@jido.b30.ingr.com (Freeman Craig Presson) Subject: Congratulations to Ray & Hawk In <9308261226.AA12079@sea.East.Sun.COM>, Brian Holt Hawthorne - SunSelect Engineering writes: |> > Not sure. I am strongly considering releasing the basic package under |> > a GNU "type" copyright/licence. |> |> Whatever for? Is the code owned by you, Ray, or EXI? If it is the latter, |> why not sell it for a reasonable price and use the funds to help subsidize |> extropy.org, at the very least? My first thought also. Maybe he wants to get it in wide use and then sell intelligent agents for it? ^ / ------/---- extropy@jido.b30.ingr.com (Freeman Craig Presson) /AS 5/20/373 PNO /ExI 4/373 PNO ** E' and E-choice spoken here ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 09:39:59 -0400 (EDT) From: bhaworth@acpub.duke.edu (W. Blair Haworth Jr.) Subject: PPL?: privacy and dissertations (was: Free-doom and theses...) Andrew Cohen (wow, I didn't know there were any other Triangle extropians) writes: [...] > Besides: why should people have _automatic_ access to my work? If > I spent years rummaging through excrutiating works on philosophy, all > in order to synthesize a "New Contribution" to the body of philosophical > knowledge, I don't see why anyone has an automatic claim to look at > it. On the other hand, if I dare to seek a degree from this fine > university, I had better work and play well with others. This means, > if I want my doctorate from UNC, I should be prepared to play by the > rules of the academic game. So, I would sign a release. I agree with the conclusion there, but speaking as a doctoral candidate myself, as well as a library type, that strikes me unnecessarily mechanistic, and giving too much homage to the university to boot. Aside from its largely counterproductive function as a credential mill and bottleneck in the intellectual labor supply (a topic on which I've ranted at length in the past), a university is essentially a communication system - along with being a node in a larger one, of course. If anyone doesn't want to be in that system, they're probably better off braving the perils of autodidactity. Autodidactitude? Autodidacticity? Never mind... Anyway, the whole notion of dissertations being a secret is so spectacularly silly that it could only have been promulgated by the government. To begin with, they're at least nominally publicly defended, almost everyone copyrights them, and almost everyone broadcasts them via UMI. The whole thing will be a nonissue unless archivists stage a "white mutiny" to point up the absurdity of the matter (I understand that's what started it), some bureaudroid gets _really_ bored, or someone admits in court that they believe their (approved!) thesis is so atrocious that it should be suppressed. Now that I think of it, if you buy into the idea of professional credentials at all (N.B.: I'm at best ambivalent, and pretty well convinced that in the liberal arts the Ph.D.is simply an expensive union card for a closed shop), this idea is more than asinine, it's actively evil. Without a publicly scrutable masterwork, an advanced degree is simply a decree of institutional tractability issued by either an arm of the state or a large self-interested corporate entity that can only be confirmed empirically. In which case, why insist on a credential? I suppose you could argue it to be a wager of reputation by the institution and the supervising committee, but again, it strikes me as a stretch. Assuming I ever get finished, anyone is welcome to read my dissertation, although the main conclusion they'll likely draw from it is that I was in a hell of a hurry to get out of grad school. Wait for the book for a learning experience. And, not coincidentally, a royalty. --Blair Haworth bhaworth@acpub.duke.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 10:03:11 -0500 From: extr@jido.b30.ingr.com (Freeman Craig Presson) Subject: META: What does the list SW do when ... Suppose Alice Extro posts on subject E, and then later decides to exclude the thread. Bob Outward then picks up her old message, and does a ::reply to it. Does Alice get Bob's message? If not, does he get told why not? Does ::reply return something intelligent on any similar failure? (::exclude all/user, unsubscribed, etc.) I know, the design review was last month ;-) BTW, this software needs a name. ^ / ------/---- extropy@jido.b30.ingr.com (Freeman Craig Presson) /AS 5/20/373 PNO /ExI 4/373 PNO ** E' and E-choice spoken here "There are only about 50 people in the world who understand how to use remote procedure calls." -- John Edwards, Exec. VP, Novell, Jan. 1992 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 8:06:23 PDT From: thamilto@pcocd2.intel.com (Tony Hamilton - FES ERG~) Subject: POLI: More stupid patents... > > From: Alexander Chislenko > > > > Recently, I came up with a 'great' idea: to register trademarks > > for 'Hexium', 'Septium' and 'Octium' so that Intel would either > > have to change the naming for its x86 - Pentium line, or pay me > > to give those trademarks up. Then I dropped this idea as too > > cheap and dirty. > > Maybe, I was wrong... > > Could someone in the legal know comment on the possible success of > this scheme, detailing the requirements for trademark infringement? Probably won't work. If I know Intel, (and I do _not_ speak for them) they probably have already registered trademarks on whatever names they plan on using. Either that, or the next-generation processor names won't be quite as simple as those given above. Now, somewhere I heard that in order to have a trademark, you have to have a product, or something to attach it to, or soemthing like that. So, my guess is that maybe Intel has registered it with a white paper or something describing, in general, what those products are, and when they plan on using the trademarks. Maybe you have a certain amount of time to use it or the trademark is revoked or something. ?? Tony Hamilton thamilto@pcocd2.intel.com HAM on HEx ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 10:59:26 CDT From: Derek Zahn Subject: MEDIA: Review of Extropy #11 Another fabulous issue. Details: Layout: Continuing the evolutionary improvements from #10, #11 introduces some nice touches. The font changes work very well, and the overall style is becoming more consistent, sophisticated, and distinctive. One problem, though: Where are the pictures? Ralph Merkle and Julian Simon are the only contributors pictured in the whole issue (well, except for my hand). I like the picture feature, and hope that in the future it will be used more consistently (though, obviously, if authors refuse, there's little to be done). Merkle's "Uploading": Despite some Extropians' disparaging remarks about this kind of "best guess" speculation, I found it quite fun (even though I think he's a bit credulous to use Landauer's 2 bps lower bound as probably within an order of magnitude of memory capacity). Clearly there's lots more mileage to be given to Uploading in future issues! More's "Principles": The very idea of an evolving set of "principles" is interesting in itself. I think they're evolving splendidly. Price's "Contact!": We'd seen this before on this list. I think it's a tour de force. Especially keen: the annotated references. Contains everything I'll need (whenever I have time, probably post-upload!) to delve deeper into many interesting diversions. Dani, could you someday elaborate your modeling method to the list? I'd like to put it into Mathcad and play with it. Miller/Krieger's "Part Two": Rather better than part one, though I still wish that a clear explanation of an agoric system was given (perhaps as a sidebar) and a few words on the future of Xanadu would have been timely and interesting. I hope we can have a debate about "nanarchy". Miller seems to be saying that a "pure" anarchy in a post-nanotech society can't work and that we'll need some sort of blue goo to make things work (and nanarchy is only one of many flavors of bluegoo, mostly distasteful). If this is right, we'd better make sure that the principles behind blue goo design restrict the exercise of our free wills (by a "law of physics", a nice way of looking at it) as little as possible! Or is the very idea of promoting any blue goo repulsive? Could "true" anarchy actually work? Simon's "Bunkrapt": I've actually only read one of Simon's books: _How to Start and Operate a Mail-Order Business_ (pretty good, BTW), so this material was new to me (in its particulars at least). I liked the article a lot; it covered a lot of ground. In fact, I'd like to give it to a few statist-environmentalist friends of mine (environmentalism is not bad IMO; any increase in the power of states is... anti-statism and environmentalism can in fact work together.) I realize that space was limited but I'd really like to have seen some model actually showing that things overall get better and better. The assumptions of such a model can help us get at the root disagreements between Extropians and other humans. Reviews: this note is longer than I'd intended so suffice it to say that they were good. I'd like to read Gelernter's book... I'd always wondered how a truly large-scale tuple space could be managed. I hope that once Extropy goes quarterly Max decides to open a letters column. I'm sure that if he simply announced it periodically to the list, he'd get lots of feedback and probably some interesting material to fill a few pages. derek start writing your Extro 1 papers right away! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 11:34:39 CDT From: Derek Zahn Subject: a little birdie told me this... Perry "Dorfman" Metzger writes: > A little birdie told me this. Seems Al Gore wasn't needed after all.. > > PSI and Continental Cablevision > Announce Plans to Deliver Internet Over Cable TV Ooh, I like it a lot! 1. If projections of Internet growth, capacity, and use are discussed at the Extropaganza, could somebody please summarize them to the list? It seems to me that 10-20 million users in 3 years is a reasonable guess... 10 million new users are 10 million people deciding what tools to use. I smell opportunity. 2. The 10 Mbit/sec connection speed isn't nearly as important as the (larger than I'd have guessed) 100 Mbit/sec overall network bandwidth. They will price in such a way as to maximize profit, which is likely about when the bandwith is all used. It's not clear to me how much the result will cost, but I'd guess that their average user will be paying between $50 and $150 per month for the service (not dirt cheap, alas; can't hook up all of S.F. with 0.1 gigabits; plus there will be a significant startup cost for some kind of adapter). I'd guess that most businesses and all BBS's will hook up, as will some future-looking and/or wealthy individuals. Others will settle for a cheaper, slower link via the telephone lines. If the cable company is able to put packet routers in local hubs that will help somewhat since some higher than average proportion of traffic will be very local. I don't think it'd help that much, though. Business idea: a nintendo e-mail cartridge that includes some hardware to connect to the cable-tv adapter widget. If and when billing can be done "per packet" [which should be doable at not too high a cost as if I remember correctly IP packets contain their return address and the IP protocol could be part of the cable converter], it would be an incredibly cheap way for many many people to hook up to email, since most of them will use very little bandwidth and the manufacturing cost of the cartridge would be very low. Permanent storage of mail folders could be a hardware option. At any rate, it appears that competition in the industry of hooking up people to the Internet is fierce and getting fiercer, and the Net will grow and grow at astonishing rates. Does anybody know if PSI is publicly traded? Does anybody have an address where I can write them for information? If all this is true, I could easily see their earnings going through the roof in the next couple of years. derek have fun at the party, everybody! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 9:54:57 PDT From: Robert Brooks Subject: Message for Alex Chislenko Hi Anton, Alex Chislenko inquired about a ride from SF to BC Friday night and I replied that my plans would probably mesh nicely. He in turn replied that he is interested in taking me up on my offer, and furthermore if it might be possible for him to also camp at the HP recreation site where I and my family are staying. Unfortunately, I didn't get that message until this morning after he had already departed for SF. He indicated that he might be staying with you tonight, so I assume you will at least be in contact with him, so could you relay the following? "We should arrive at Freedom's Forum between 3 and 4. We will likely stay an hour or less, since we'll have our small kids with us. We could then have dinner in town, elsewhere en route, or at the campsite. Guests are allowed at the HP site and it is unlikely to be full Friday night, so you could probably use a nearby site. If not, you can share ours. If you didn't bring your tent, I have one you could borrow. The campground is likely to be full Saturday night, however. My phone numbers are 916-785-5032 (work) and 916-771-2010 (home). I'll also check my email before leaving about noon tomorrow. Looking forward to seeing you." (and you, Anton, and Tim) Robert -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ Robert Brooks ~ ~ Hewlett Packard Company ~ ~ rb@hprpcd.rose.hp.com ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 10:06:30 PDT From: thamilto@pcocd2.intel.com (Tony Hamilton - FES ERG~) Subject: a little birdie told me this... > 1. If projections of Internet growth, capacity, and use are > discussed at the Extropaganza, could somebody please summarize > them to the list? It seems to me that 10-20 million users > in 3 years is a reasonable guess... 10 million new users are > 10 million people deciding what tools to use. I smell opportunity. I seem to recall a number of something like 10,000 new users per day on the Internet, and this seems to fold very nicely into the 10 million new users in 3 years estimate. I expect, however, that the rate of growth itself will increase. So, I'd guess that 20 million wouldn't be all too wild of an estimate - assuming of course the 10K figure I recall is correct. > Business idea: a nintendo e-mail cartridge that includes > some hardware to connect to the cable-tv adapter widget. > If and when billing can be done "per packet" [which should > be doable at not too high a cost as if I remember correctly > IP packets contain their return address and the IP protocol > could be part of the cable converter], it would be an > incredibly cheap way for many many people to hook up to > email, since most of them will use very little bandwidth > and the manufacturing cost of the cartridge would be very > low. Permanent storage of mail folders could be a hardware > option. Only problem - Nintendo may not be the way to go. From what I have seen and heard, Sega may be a better bet for the next couple of years, with Atari making a big comeback. Also, think about who uses these systems. I am sure this is a generalization, but _most_ of the more mature video-game junkies I know play Sega, while most Nintendo owners I know are young teen agers. It's just a guess, but I'd bet the marketing stats show Sega owners to be somewhat older on average. In either case, however, we're assuming that a great majority of video game system owners want/need email. I wouldn't agree with that assumption. I firmly believe that it is far more important and relevant to focus firstly on getting all PC's (including Macs and Amigas) hooked up. ANd, given all the recent alliances between computer companies and telecommunication companies, I think we're all going to be using email in just a few years anyway. The industry has been targeted by all the players, its just a matter of time now. > At any rate, it appears that competition in the industry of > hooking up people to the Internet is fierce and getting > fiercer, and the Net will grow and grow at astonishing > rates. Well, I believe it is really larger than just the Internet. Initially, most consumer email services probably _won't_ be based on the Internet, but will certainly be connected. Then, at some point, the combination of telephone, cable, wireless, and Internet networks will eventually form a combined virtual network much larger than our precious Internet. > Does anybody know if PSI is publicly traded? Does anybody > have an address where I can write them for information? > If all this is true, I could easily see their earnings > going through the roof in the next couple of years. Anyone who can make a significant entry into this market (our CEO, Andy Grove, calls it the NCCI - New Computing and Communications Industry) will be profiting this decade. (please note - everything above is just speculation. I am not claiming absolutely that any of it will actually happen as stated. Just my own person take on the issue) Tony Hamilton thamilto@pcocd2.intel.com HAM on HEx ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 10:10:50 PDT From: "Randall M. Clague" Subject: Extropian Inquisition Modestly Proposed LOL! A lovely parody, and a gentle reminder. Thanks. Randall -- Randall M. Clague | "Assembly of Japanese bicycle require great Coast Micro Inc. | peace of mind." rclague@netcom.com | -- Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 13:23:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Elizabeth Schwartz Subject: META/INVEST/PERSONAL - I am in Limbo! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 12:52:53 CDT From: Derek Zahn Subject: a little birdie told me this... Tony Hamilton: > Only problem - Nintendo may not be the way to go. I used 'nintendo' as a generic. Clearly multiple game and 3DO-type platforms should be targeted. > we're assuming that a great majority of video game > system owners want/need email. Not at all. What are there, maybe a hundred million homes in USA with nintendos? Suppose that just one percent could be convinced to do email. That's a million sales; not $billions in earnings, but pretty significant in any case. In reality ("don't let your children fall behind as we shoot into a new millenium...") I'd think that one percent is conservative. > I firmly believe that it is far more important and relevant to focus > firstly on getting all PC's (including Macs and Amigas) hooked up. Maybe. what does "important" mean? I'm looking for profits! I agree, though, and am developing some software to apply to that market (though actually for Windows because that's what I have tools and experience for). > Well, I believe it is really larger than just the Internet. Initially, > most consumer email services probably _won't_ be based on the Internet, How about this for a (modest) product idea: 1. Developer studies and keeps on top of all the strange connectivity and routing and cost and ... issues in e-mail. 2. Developer writes software to assist programs or users in using this information. 3. Developer licenses or packages and sells this software. 4. Developer publishes newsletter/database updates as part of product. > Anyone who can make a significant entry into this market (our CEO, Andy Grove, > calls it the NCCI - New Computing and Communications Industry) will be > profiting this decade. It would be interesting to create and study a mock mutual fund of such companies, and/or an "NCCI Index" to quantitatively plot the industry's progress. One problems is that many of the biggest players (e.g. intel) only devote a small part of their business to internetworking per se. derek any other ways to profit directly and dramatically from extropian industries? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 11:06:51 PDT From: Robert Brooks Subject: Message for Alex Chislenko Well, the darn "reply" button finally got me, too. That was obviously supposed to be personal to Anton/Alex. Sorry. Robert ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1993 14:07:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Edward J OConnell Subject: Plugging Game Computers into the Net The obvious reason to plug your game computer into the internet isn't e-mail, really. Its MUDs. Or some more visual multi-player, multi user game. The E-mail would be a side thing. Who wants to write, really? Perhaps simple macros to remember anniversarys and Birthdays would be popular, though--The Forget me Not cartridge, from SEGA... there would be places you could e- mail stuff, that would print them out and snail it for you, like CheckFree... I'm not really sure what would be feasible, in terms of muliplayer games through existing internet type lines. I guessing you wouldn't be able to fence with someone in realtime--but you might be able to run Sim City like things, where everyone is nudging some simulation. We used to play a game in highschool we called INS, sort of like D+D, but we were all pre WWI countries, and we turned our moves in once a week, with lots of contingencies written in... the referee figured out what happened, and told you. Germany and Austria Hungary kept teaming up and taking over Europe. It was fun as hell. My other hair-brained money making thought these days is a VR exersize machine. The Norictrak is boring! The only reason anyone can use one is television. What if you could put on a helmut display, and slide through nifty landscapes? Have an algorhythm that chased you with velocioraptors when you're heart dropped below your target range? A sight to shoot at things with? New cartridges when you got bored. Hand held 'weapons' that you could move around for more exersize value, dataglove like. Yes, there is indeed money to be made. If only I could get a piece of it! ;-) Jay ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 11:48:25 PDT From: thamilto@pcocd2.intel.com (Tony Hamilton - FES ERG~) Subject: a little birdie told me this... > > we're assuming that a great majority of video game > > system owners want/need email. > > Not at all. What are there, maybe a hundred million homes in USA > with nintendos? Suppose that just one percent could be convinced > to do email. That's a million sales; not $billions in earnings, > but pretty significant in any case. In reality ("don't let your > children fall behind as we shoot into a new millenium...") I'd > think that one percent is conservative. Perhaps you should rethink those numbers. There are what, 3-400+ million Americans, children included? To me, this means that there are probably no more than about 100 million homes here, period. Of those with children, (I won't guess how many), I'm certain no more than 25% have a game system. Remember, we're including all people, from rich to poor, and certainly not everyone who has the money has one of these things. Then you have to think of all the homes that _don't_ have children (or others likely to have a game system). Now add in all the systems stashed in the closet, all the systems which rarely get used, and so forth and so on. I'd still give it your 1% figure on number of system owners who might do email (and now I call this realistic, not conservative). After all these hypothetical factors are worked in, you probably _still_ have some respectable numbers, at least enough for a short-term niche market, but I doubt anywhere near a million. Don't forget that these folks don't just pay for the cartridge, but also for the service. If we look at Prodigy, and its mixed success, and realize that this _is_ on a PC, used mostly by computer-literate folk (despite what they'd like us to think, which is that it is a bunch of housewives and children who previously knew little about computers), you might be able get some good statistics on the acceptance of this kind of service. > > I firmly believe that it is far more important and relevant to focus > > firstly on getting all PC's (including Macs and Amigas) hooked up. > > Maybe. what does "important" mean? I'm looking for profits! I > agree, though, and am developing some software to apply to that > market (though actually for Windows because that's what I have > tools and experience for). You and a lot of other people. Good luck (and this is sincere.) And I did mean "important" in both ways, both for profit and societal evolution. > > Well, I believe it is really larger than just the Internet. Initially, > > most consumer email services probably _won't_ be based on the Internet, > > How about this for a (modest) product idea: > 1. Developer studies and keeps on top of all the strange connectivity > and routing and cost and ... issues in e-mail. > 2. Developer writes software to assist programs or users in using > this information. > 3. Developer licenses or packages and sells this software. > 4. Developer publishes newsletter/database updates as part of > product. I think it is a great idea. Has it already been done? Is there a magazine, journal, foundation, or whatever, devoted to electronic communications of all kinds? If not, I think it is needed. > > Anyone who can make a significant entry into this market (our CEO, Andy Grove, > > calls it the NCCI - New Computing and Communications Industry) will be > > profiting this decade. > > It would be interesting to create and study a mock mutual fund of such > companies, and/or an "NCCI Index" to quantitatively plot the industry's > progress. One problems is that many of the biggest players (e.g. intel) > only devote a small part of their business to internetworking per se. Well, first, I think Intel is a _big_ player, but not one of the biggest. AT&T would qualify for that, as would MCI, Motorola, and a few others. I am sure Intel _wants_ to be one of the biggest, though :-) But, on the issue of investment into this industry, you might want to take another look. 2 years ago it may have been difficult to see the investments and the strategies, but not today. The market doesn't even fully exist yet, and the race is already well underway. But you do bring up an interesting point, going back to your indicator suggestion. Because some of the largest players are so very diversified, you'd have to focus on specific business units. For instance, say Intel strikes it rich in this industry, but their microprocessors wither and die. If the communications stuff couldn't offset the other, then as part of this index, Intel's stock price would artificially bring it down. I think it is simply a matter of measuring sales. They've something like between a $100 and $200 billion market in the next 5 years I believe (inferring that would be the per year market at the end of 5 years or whatever). > any other ways to profit directly and dramatically from extropian > industries? Well, I do think if you were to invest in a fund, or manage your own, which focused on those companies which are going to be the big players in this industry in the next 5 years, you can't go wrong. The market will expand so fast that the winners and standards wouldn't be determined for at least a decade, meaning anyone who plays gets a piece of the pie. Kind of like computers in the late 70's and early 80's, where presence in the market is more important at first than competitive advantage. From there it is just a matter of which companies had better strategic visions. But where can the little guy fit in? Probably in software is my guess. So often a new computing capability - and all this email qualifies as that - is often not well understood or utilized. Just look at two things in Unix - mail and news. I can't think of two better examples where it has just taken _forever_ to get good standards and software out there for these services. Much still needs to be done. If you can do some quick-turn, value-added software development to take advantage of emerging technologies and capabilities, you can probably turn a good profit. It sounds as though this is what you are now trying to do. Tony Hamilton thamilto@pcocd2.intel.com HAM on HEx ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 14:47:14 CDT From: Derek Zahn Subject: Plugging Game Computers into the Net [Yikes! The 30-year "long" bond is yielding 6.09% !!!] Edward "Jay" OConnell > The obvious reason to plug your game computer into the internet isn't > e-mail, really. You might be right... my concern when thinking about this is the message latency in a network of this type. I would think that there could be considerable delays in packet delivery, on the order of seconds even. If somebody disagrees with this for a technical reason, please speak up... it would be useful to try to pin down how the net of the future will perform. > Its MUDs. Or some more visual multi-player, multi user game. I'm curious about the packet charge. If it costs a penny to deliver a 1K email message, that's probably okay. But if it costs too much per play to play a game (say, more than a nickel a minute) the market will be restricted. Of course, different games have different bandwidths... consider an ICS (internet chess server, available for quite a while) client. It won't really need to send more than a couple of bits per second. Internet Relay Chat - type things could be effective as well. Action games start at the level of complexity of nettrek which is (barely) usable on well-connected internet sites. I think it will be quite a while before cable-TV network connections will be quicker at delivery than the workstation on my old desk at UW. So I'd say that nettrek provides an approximate upper bound on what we can expect to do soon in our target world. Still, a nettrek (or similar) cartridge would probably sell quite well! As to MUDs, I don't know. A vanishingly small fraction even of computer freaks like and use them (I tried for a while once but found it a hideous waste of time... sure I got to chat with people in amateurish and stereotyped "surroundings" but neither the surroundings nor the people were particularly interesting!). I have yet to be convinced that MUD/VR apps for networked entertainment will be terrifically popular even ten years from now when the technology for doing it reasonably well will be affordable. I suppose that one can look at CompuServe and get a feel for what seems to work and what doesn't. One could build a general-purpose internet interface gadget (if those machines have some kind of peripheral port it would be particularly good, i don't know because i've rarely even used one) that independent game and application developers could use. Be the standard! Of course, the game manufacturers themselves are probably at least thinking about hardware along these lines. Starting point for such an industry: First, look at data that's already being delivered via cable TV, like the stock quote service and maybe other stuff like usenet news. Develop cartridges that manage and play with this information. It's VERY widely available today, wouldn't require a TCP implementation, and the RS232 interface hardware should be straightforward. Not a huge market, but would provide valuable experience and preparation for later more lucrative opportunities when networking spreads widely to cable TV. > We used to play a > game in highschool we called INS, sort of like D+D, but we were all pre > WWI countries, and we turned our moves in once a week, with lots of > contingencies written in... the referee figured out what happened, and > told you. Germany and Austria Hungary kept teaming up and taking over > Europe. It was fun as hell. There is a similar game called "Diplomacy". There is an internet server for it that is reasonably popular (of course, you need e-mail to negotiate between players!) > My other hair-brained money making thought these days is a VR exersize > machine. Make a gadget that attaches to the flywheel of the nordic track and plugs into a Sega with helmet! Not even very expensive (though the percentage of people with nordic tracks [etc] and Segas may be rather small). Keep it up! I love talking about business ideas -- who cares if we never actually do them; we're honing our prediction skills! derek ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Aug 93 15:52:48 -0400 From: hhuang@Athena.MIT.EDU Subject: DIET/REVIEW: E. & P. Kronhausen's _Formula For Life_ I do not know if this book has been reviewed before on this list before, but I will briefly plug for it. _Formula For Life: The Definitive Book on Correct Nutrition, Anti-Oxidants and Vitamins, Disease Prevention, and Longevity_ is authored by Eberhard and Phyllis Kronhausen ``with Harry B. Demopoulos, M.D.,'' ``known for his research in the fields of free-radical pathology and retarding the aging process.'' It's available in paperback for $14.95. Dr. Demopoulos runs Health Maintenance Programs (HMP), Inc., (7 Westchester Plaza, Elmsford, NY, 10523, (914) 592-3155 in NY, 1-800-362-8673, toll-free outside NY), which sells its own patented line of anti-oxidant supplements and offers free information and consultation for customers. I decided to call HMP because Pearson and Shaw recommended Dr. Demopoulos highly in both indices of _Life Extension_ and the _Life Extension Companion_ for having conducted reputable research into anti-oxidants and free-radicals. On the phone, I spoke with Dr. Demopoulos. Among other things, I asked Dr. Demopoulos regarding lecithin supplements, and he said that he has tested many lecithin supplements on the market, and he would not recommend (nor does he sell) lecithin supplements as most market phospholipids are badly peroxidized. Give HMP a call. If the doctors are in (they are out on vacation until next Monday as of this moment), they will be happy to talk to you. Dr. Demopoulos also recommended _Formula For Life_ (copyright 1989) as an ``update'' on Pearson and Shaw's books, which are copyright 1980's. This was how I got to hear of the Kronhausen's book. _Formula For Life_ is indeed more updated than _Life Extension_. If you're familiar with the anti-oxidant/free-radical explanations for much of aging and illness, then much of the book will be old hat to you. However, unlike Pearson and Shaw, the Kronhausens cover quite a bit regarding diet, stress, as well as containing chapters on unhealthy habits (the eternal twin evils of smoking and drinking) and healthy habits such as exercise. I have long felt that Pearson and Shaw, as well as many of the mega-supplementation anti-oxidant promoters, to be oddly deficient in their recommendations as to what is the proper type of diet. The Kronhausens are more conservative in their recommendations, reflecting in part the orientation of Dr. Demopoulos, than much of the supplementation advocacy groups. For example, there are no recommendations for any type of ``smart drug'' and the only amino acid they recommend supplementing with is with glutathione, which appears to be a potent, if expensive, anti-oxidant worthy of supplementation. Furthermore, they recommend fewer and less mineral supplementation than many other health books. However, this more conservative orientation makes them more reliable than the more ``adventurous,'' if you will, sectors of the megasupplementation crowd. In this respect, they are more similar to Roy Walford, whose most recent book is _The 120 Year Diet_ and whose major contribution to life extension is his promotion of Caloric Restriction, and who is skeptical of many of the wilder claims made by the anti-oxidant promoters. One of the most useful pieces of information that I have gotten out of _Formula For Life_ is regarding vitamin E supplementation. I am now convinced that Dr. Demopoulos' vitamin E products are the best, as they are in *non*-dry dl-alpha tocopherol acetate capsule form, whose oils are packed under nitrogen (to prevent oxidation), and are otherwise well protected from rancidity. Dr. Demopoulos tells me that the problem with E-succinate is that it is not so biologically available, and the problem with dry E-acetate is that half of it degrades. The potency given on vitamin E products is still accurate, but having filled my own size 00 dry-E capsules, I have to agree with the Kronhausens' sentiment, ``There is also, frankly, a limit to how many capsules of anything even enthusiastic life-extenders like us are ready to swallow in any twenty-four-hour period.'' I find 3 or so 400 IU vitamin E softgel capsules simply more convenient and easier to swallow than, say, 5 or so size 00 capsules. (One of the problems with large capsules is that you often need more water to swallow them.) You can also buy the HMP Pure-E product in oil dispenser form, which will save you some more dollars. Furthermore, vitamin E oils and creams are reputedly very good for any sort of skin problem or sores. Provided that, of course, the E substrate isn't rancid (as many standard commercial vitamin E capsules or oils are likely to be) and that the E potency is of a high enough concentration. So if there were one ``layman''s book which seems to be the best as a general introduction to the diet, nutrition, and supplementation quicksands, I'd say this would be the one. The authors seemed to have taken more care in getting an honest look at the data and experiments than most others. The Kronhausens have written another book since this one, which also has the title of _Formula For Life_, though with a separate subtitle. It is currently available only in hardcover. I believe the price is $21.95. I cannot comment as I am still awaiting for it to arrive at a Harvard Square bookstore (Wordsworth), where I ordered both Kronhausen books from. -Han Y. Huang hhuang@athena.mit.edu ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V93 #238 *********************************