> Arun Mehta wrote: > [snip] > >My advocacy of satellite broadcasting of Usenet was not to suggest > >"private" Usenet, rather a means to make it more public. Those that > >not have access to all of Usenet today, and most don't, should be a > >get it cheap. Cable modems will soon become affordable. Of course 2 > >is better than 1-way, but 1-way is better than no-way. > > If it's all 1-way, what's the source of the content? Sounds like > tv, not usenet. > > ---Steve (Steve Eppley •••@••.•••) Of course I'm not talking about _all 1-way_. Today, your local ISP can censor Usenet for a lot of people by simply not carrying certain newsgroups. Broadcasting Usenet routes around that. People who have to make long-distance calls (e.g. from rural areas) to access the net are hardly going to download Usenet -- like receiving a haystack for the needle that might be in there. They could benefit from Usenet broadcasts too. For all these people, posting to Usenet was never the problem. And people who have good 2-way access will hardly get deprived of their ability to post to Usenet by this! You may want to read my Byte commentary "Radio Free Usenet", where I talk about this in greater detail. http://www.byte.com/art/9507/sec14/art1.htm Arun Mehta, B-69 Lajpat Nagar-I, New Delhi-24, India. Phone 6841172,6849103 http://mahavir.doe.ernet.in/~pinaward/arun.htm •••@••.••• •••@••.••• •••@••.••• "There is enough in the world for man's need, but not for his greed"--Gandhi
