Re: VR: Lat/Long of Internet Servers
vincent bilotta (vincent@vern.amplexis.com)
Mon, 18 Jul 1994 17:10:43 -0400
On Jul 18, 4:45pm, Mark Waks wrote:
> Subject: Re: VR: Lat/Long of Internet Servers
> Ken writes:
> >I think we need the lat/long client/server to form the basic grid of
> >cyberspace. The rest of cyberspace can literally be built on this
> >foundation.
> "Need" is a very strong word. And, quite frankly, I disagree
> vigorously. When I'm wandering around the Web, I don't care *where* a
> server is located -- it's the furthest thing from my mind. I wander
> from California to Norway at a shot, if that's where the data happens
> to be. My expectation of cyberspace is very much the same way -- I
> want to know *what*, not *where*. (Or, at most, I may want to know
> where something is logically, but don't give a damn where it is
> physically.)
>
> I could see building a map like this on *top* of a purely logical
> system. Indeed, it shouldn't be especially hard -- it's almost
> exactly analogous to the map-based systems springing up on the Web.
> But in my experience, those systems are at best marginally useful
> unless I'm trying to find out information about a specific locale,
> which is rare.
>
> As a possible application -- sure. As the fundament of cyberspace --
> I don't think so...
We've been shown so many stupid lobsters that we've come to believe
that my pologonal coffee table is what folks want to waste bandwidth to
rotate. On the other hand a structural tool that grows a view of infospace
bigger than Digital Domain and ILM could model is a vision that makes
a vmrl extension worthwhile. Then we can play stickball in traffic.
vincent
--
vincent bilotta
vincent@amplexis.com
"pluck your magic twanger froggie!"