-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 12 Jul 1996, Deranged Mutant wrote:
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 07:55:12 +0000 From: Deranged Mutant <WlkngOwl@unix.asb.com> To: Daniel Salber <daniel.salber@imag.fr> Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Minitel "saved" by hackers?
On 12 Jul 96 at 5:51, Daniel Salber wrote: [..]
As Minow pointed out, this is not the only case of "hijacking". The telephone was first intended as a way to listen to remote concerts. Then users found out they could use it for one-to-one conversations.
This is innacurate. No, methinks it's wrong. From every history of telephones I have read and heard, it was never that way.
The original conception was of using the telephone for broadcasting. It's implementation in most countries was for point-to-point communication... it wasn't a matter of the users 'found they could use it' (at least not in the US).
[SIG skipped] Umm.. check again... Bell origonally conceived the telephone as a means of broadband communication, like radio is today. Bruce Sterling explains this exceptionally well in his book "The Hacker Crackdown" (Nonfiction) -- Deviant -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMeijDjAJap8fyDMVAQHObQf+IKVX42WUmnareinWeKoYtvuSXG3+8gB7 +wmxyXkKc6Qs7Xgi7N3PMlLqkdnZhI/Q1JxQmj2FshwvMN1gsVeP3ZUnADrjCJXw JR6JvXggchkWUR4lANVE8LUmktdcdtmiCPile9fpj5BF07Yi0z9mAesLxnk1SZWm +M7dYvUgByDjF0QuiEjGu0yTNxHWf9MTZlDkGmFZGgn9oUXalPNHJKcm7Vmg1i5J I5zFcaG3EnvLSPsLw6rh9HK93QAjeRxnCjKdiCdznp8QjeF8R8Mq1yFidxcEaplO JW3yx8PASUhAtqDXfte5QT85iqzOehauWQrnDxMqIR+4hN2/r8krhQ== =1Tzv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----