Permission is granted to freely distribute this newsletter in electronic
form for non-commercial use. All other rights reserved.
Send your comments, letters to the editor, and related articles to seltzer@samizdat.com For information on who we are check www.samizdat.com/who.html
To access other issues, go to www.samizdat.com/ioad.html. The full text of all issues is available for free, with hypertext links to the sites referenced. (Please keep in mind that URLs frequently change. We will attempt to update the information in this on-line edition, but don't expect perfection.)
For plain-text books on CD ROM, a library for the price of a book, visit our online store at http://store.yahoo.com/samizdat
You can now receive Internet-on-a-Disk by email, by signing up
at Yahoo Groups. Either send email to subscribe-ioad@yahoogroups.com
, or register at the Web site http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ioad.
You can also use that group to discuss related matters and share insights
with other readers and with me (Richard Seltzer seltzer@samizdat.com).
Table of Contents
Political web sites and community by Alfred C. Thompson II
Whatever happened to virtual companies? by Richard Seltzer
Web-site superglue -- the Nutrition Calculator at Healthwatch by Richard Seltzer
Content wars: video vs. text. Welcome to Lilliput, Mr. Gulliver. by Richard Seltzer
New electronic texts: from Gutenberg
The problem with political web sites is that they are embassies to cyberspace rather than part of cyberspace. They provide a place to get information about a candidate, contribute money, volunteer to help but little more. I suspect that many candidates would ask, "what else is there?"
The answer is dialogue. Community is a second answer that is a natural result of dialogue.
All of the sites I have visited have some way to give feedback. This alone does not create a dialogue. I have sent email directly to a supplied address or by filling out an online form to six major Republican Presidential candidates. One had an automatic reply that sounded promising but for which there was no follow-up. A second candidate's campaign sent a reply that appeared to be sent by a real person. Unfortunately the reply was a canned answer that I had already read at the web site. Four other campaigns sent no reply. Since I clearly identified myself as an undecided voter in the hotly contested and critical New Hampshire primary the different campaigns had as much incentive to reply as could be imaged short of offering a huge donation. My conclusion is that these email drops are a placebo. Nothing more than a way to get people to think they are communicating while not actually doing anything.
Cybercitizens expect more. They actually expect email to be answered. If they ask a question it is because they want to know the answer. Not only that but they expect that a "wrong" answer is the start of a discussion.
The lesson of the last 20 years of online discussion is that people in cyberspace will listen to others but expect others to listen to them as well. The demographics of cyberspace are different than the general population and not just in areas like education, income, and age. The cybercitizen uses the Internet for real communication.
Much has been made of the "success" of John McCain's web site. It has been instrumental in bringing in millions of dollars and thousands of volunteers. At this point, after the NH and NC primaries, both money and volunteers have been critical in keeping the McCain campaign viable. On the other hand, I cannot help but wonder if better use of the Internet earlier in the season might not have built a stronger campaign earlier in the race.
The "town meetings" McCain held all over New Hampshire are the main reason he won that primary. Internet town meetings held as chat sessions and using threaded discussion tools may be able to extend this feeling of attachment more globally. Not everyone has Internet access of course but those who do use it to research what is important to them. Contrary to recent, questionable, studies my experience is that people who are active in online communities are very likely to convert online discussion into real world action.
The answer to growing feelings that politicians are isolated from and unconcerned with the needs and opinions of the voters is to provide the people with a truly interactive communication path. The Internet can be that path. It does require a serious commitment. The computer resources are the easy part. The real commitment involves the candidate being willing to answer tough questions with more than canned answers. The must be willing to clarify answers and engage in real dialogue. Surrogates can enter some of the replies but the tone of the replies must be the candidate's. The candidate must be intimately involved. The first time a candidate is asked in real life about a topic under discussion online and they are unaware of it or they disclaim "their" replies will be the death of the online community. On the other hand the potential for building a strong supportive community is great. It will be interesting to see if someone eventually takes advantage of this opportunity.
Back in September 1996, I held a series of chat sessions about virtual work and virtual companies. At that point, some companies were already letting regular employees work from home for lower overhead costs, greater flexibility and the ability to draw on a broader skill base. The Internet was just speeding up that process, making it easier for people to work together at a distance.
The next logical step was contract workers and virtual teams. In this case, workers often provide their own equipment and work at home. They work for one employer at a time, but do not receive benefits from that employer. Sometimes they work through an intermediary company that finds them jobs with one company after another, provides them with benefits, and takes care of tax collection and governmental paperwork.
At that time, virtual work service companies were just starting to appear -- companies devoted to making it easier for other companies to work in virtual mode. This includes companies like Kinkos that provide office equipment at their sites for use by customers who are on the road or don't yet need such facilities all the time.
Back then, we expected to see the rise of Internet-based tempo agencies. And in fact, those have appeared in the form of numerous Web sites devoted to all kinds of job-matching, including short-term assignments. Some provide a modicum of support for the people they find work for, such as enabling them to purchase group insurance.
We also expected the rise of Internet-based consultants. In this model, the individual worker is his/her own employer and contracts his/her services to various clients. While the contract worker has one employer at a time and works through an intermediary company, the consultant typically has more than one client at a time and operates as a "company" (as far as governments are concerned) and has to continually market/sell to get new assignments.
Consultants tend to have special knowledge/skills/experience that make them unique in some way. It would be hard to plug someone else in to finish the job. That uniqueness is the value-added which enables them to charge far more for their services than a contract worker. And that additional revenue is needed to cover the extra burden of taxes and paperwork, and to fund marketing/sales efforts, including generating proposals for jobs that don't materialize, and to bridge slow periods, when little work is available. Internet capabilities make it easier for consultants to handle more clients more quickly and effectively, while reducing the need for travel and making it easier to market to and serve remote clients.
Given that approach, it seemed that the old formula of linking one worker to one employer at a time need not continue to apply. Different classes of workers (not just top-notch professionals) might find it desirable and profitable to work for more than one employer at a time, in a mode similar to consultants. New kinds of agencies might be able to offer the services of such individuals on a time-shared or project-goal defined basis, rather than exclusively. Companies that employed workers in that mode would truly be virtual companies.
While logical, this model raises a number of issues. How do you manage employees in this environment? What constitutes conflict of interest when one worker serves several companies simultaneously? What's the applicability of laws designed to protect the rights of workers? If one country protects such people and another does not, issues of cross-border competition come into play. While virtual companies of that kind seem to promise the ultimate in flexibility for both employer and employee, they also entail considerable complexity; and perhaps the unpredictability and the management cost outweighs the benefit. Today, that model seems to be a deadend.
Meanwhile, in the summer of 1997, we held some chats about value-added services from ISPs and others: an alternative business model for commercial Web sites. As Internet-related technology and business practices matured, it seemed natural that some companies would specialize in providing services such as Web hosting, and pre-packaged online stores and online community applications. Then companies wanting to do business on the Internet wouldn't have to build it all from scratch or run it all on their own systems, but rather would choose the building block services they needed.
That trend has grown rapidly. Today there are service companies for half a dozen different specialties of Internet marketing, and branded auction services, as well as numerous specialties that relate to the infrastructure of the Internet, and that are largely invisible to the end user.
This development can be seen as a natural extension of the out-sourcing movement. Companies seek to identify their core strengths and focus on those, while turning to service companies to take care of their other needs. The more such services are available, the smaller the core team and the smaller the capital outlay needed to run an Internet business.
So what we see today is more like virtual rope than virtual companies. The businesses of separate companies are interwoven in complex ways. Each operates independently, but they stick together for the long haul, each taking care of one narrow area of expertise. In some cases, that expertise might resemble what was handled by a department in a traditional company, only now the same group provides that service to more than one company at the same time. As the common needs of Internet companies have matured and the solutions have been systematized more such services have appeared.
Creating a new company today means hiring a small team and partnering for everything else. There's enormous flexibility at the beginning, but the interwoven elements are likely to remain stable for a long time -- so long as the individual companies perform as expected and stay in business. The stability increases predictability and reduces management cost and risk. Over time, as Internet business and technology evolves still further, various partners may outsource to other service companies work that they used to do directly, but the customer only sees and cares about the results. So the threads become thinner and more numerous and more complexly interwoven, and yet the rope becomes ever more stable and strong.
This is a very different kind of outcome than we imagined four years ago, one that focuses on long-term relationships among companies, rather than fluctuating and flexible relationships between virtual employees and virtual companies.
At the same time, all these companies periodically need the services of consultants, even for basic business brainstorming, because their narrow focus and small staff size might otherwise leave them vulnerable to tunnel vision -- failing to see opportunities and risks that are very real, but just out of sight. It's an interesting new world of business, and a great world in which to be an Internet business consultant.
As a kid I could eat any amount of anything, and I'd still look and feel starved. As I've gotten older, my metabolism has slowed down, to the point that it is very easy for me to gain weight and very difficult to lose it, and hence despite intermittent efforts at watching what I eat and exercising like crazy, my weight kept creeping upward.
If I cut back on what I ate, I started feeling tired, couldn't concentrate the way I normally do, and didn't have the energy to exercise.
I couldn't bring myself to stick to an elaborate fixed diet -- that required too much planning ahead, too much discipline, Watching what I ate consisted largely of avoiding snacks and foods that obviously had lots of calories. But I couldn't get into calorie counting -- looking everything up and adding it all. It was simply too tedious.
I got a treadmill just before Christmas and got into walking while watching football games -- sometimes as much as 10 miles in a day. But even that seemed to make little difference in my weight. All that exercise gave me an appetite.
When I put on another 10 lbs. in the two months after Christmas, this was getting scary.
Then, researching an article about fitness Web sites, I chanced upon CBS Healthwatch. That's http://cbs.healthwatch.com
They have a Nutrition Calculator. You enter what you eat or what you plan to eat, and how much of it. And they quickly calculate the calories, fat, carbohydrates, vitamins, minerals etc. And they also store the information for you in your own Daily Calendar area, and let you quickly generate neat graphs.
Actually, it isn't all that quick. The first time it seems quick because it's so neat and unexpected. But when you start doing this two, three, four, and even more times a day, it starts to feel very slow. The Java applet drags, even with a DSL connection.
With this tool, it very soon became glaringly clear which of the foods that I used to eat regularly, I should stay away from. Spaghetti in particular. A typical helping of my favorite dish, cooked my special way probably amounts to about 2000 calories, all alone. Every time I eat spaghetti, I inevitably gain 1-2 pounds. (If only I had had the common sense to realize that before.)
Then there are the little surprises, like salad dressing. Lettuce and tomatoes have very few calories, but two tablespoons of my favorite Russian salad dressing comes to about 160 calories , which is more than a hot dog. Even some of the "good stuff" -- the vegetables I would add to my meal not because I liked them, but because I thought they were good for me, were costing me dearly. For instance, just a cup of peas comes to 117 calories -- more than twice as much as a cup of popcorn.
I started to think in terms of budget. I have only so many calories to spend a day, and I can spend them on things I enjoy eating or things that I don't. That salad dressing simply isn't worth a hot dog to me. I'd rather stick to the lettuce and tomato, maybe add some celery and carrot, and skip the peas, then splurge on a piece of pie. And the summary display for the day, also gives me happy faces in all the categories, like vitamins and minerals where I'm on target for my daily needs; and up and down arrows for those that I'm not, so I can make some last minute adjustments -- perhaps enjoying a late snack to nudge the numbers in the right direction.
As a result, I've cut my calorie intake significantly, while keeping my energy level high, And I've been able to be far more regular about my exercise. Over the last couple weeks, I've gradually dropped about five pounds. And now I seem to have some degree of control over my weight.
So what does this have to do with the Internet?
The calculator is the ultimate sticky application. It's now a fixed part of my regular daily routine. I go back again and again, both to calculate and to check my records -- in particular to get the gratification of seeing a graph.
It isn't a social application in the usual sense -- it doesn't put me in touch with other people. It also isn't "content" in the usual sense. But here I am, essentially, carrying on a dialogue myself at this Web site, day after day. The calculator makes useful information readily available to me, and the record acts as my conscience and helps keep me on track. The graphs are a fun extra touch.
This is an aspect of the Web that I hadn't been aware of before. And I could imagine a number of other applications, based on similar psychological principles. Provide useful conversions from real-world experiences to numerical values, and store the personal records for future reference and to track progress toward set goals.
Even looking at Health Watch, there's so much more that could be done. As it is, they let you enter your weight and how much you have exercised, but those numbers are just static -- they don't do anything with them and don't combine them in any way with the nutrition information. It's easy enough to just write your weight down, and write down how much you exercise, and that's all the site does, just provides you with a space to record that static information. But they, or someone else could provide calculations of how many calories you burn with certain amounts of certain kinds of exercise; and provide a total tally of calories taken in minus calories burned. And with enough data about your food intake, exercise, and weight, it should be possible to arrive at some metric for metabolism and some estimate of how projected changes in what you eat and how much you exercise are likely to change your weight.
Or imagine a Web site that tried to do something similar with regard to your financial budget -- so you don't have to enter each and every penny spent, like you do with a Quicken, but rather enter activities by chunks and let the calculator fill in a likely estimate (with some tweaking over time by you) -- for instance, you click that you went to a movie, or had lunch out, or drove a hundred miles. And if you shop online a lot, even have a little app that reminds you while you are shopping what your budget allows for that kind of thing this month and where you stand now.
Imagine, too, that you add to this kind of online conscience a link to a friend who has your best interest at heart. Say you find it very difficult to discipline yourself with regard to food or finances or whatever. Then you name a buddy, and once a week that buddy gets an email reminder with a URL that will show them the graph of your progress, so that buddy can cheer you on and share in the joy of your little victories or give you a kick, if necessary.
I guess the Web and the new capabilities it provides are becoming an important part of our daily lives -- not just a source of information, and not just a communication medium -- an extension of ourselves, a way for us to help ourselves become what we want to become.
As a kid I could eat any amount of anything, and I'd still look and feel starved. As I've gotten older, my metabolism has slowed down, to the point that it is very easy for me to gain weight and very difficult to lose it, and hence despite intermittent efforts at watching what I eat and exercising like crazy, my weight kept creeping upward.
If I cut back on what I ate, I started feeling tired, couldn't concentrate the way I normally do, and didn't have the energy to exercise.
I couldn't bring myself to stick to an elaborate fixed diet -- that required too much planning ahead, too much discipline, Watching what I ate consisted largely of avoiding snacks and foods that obviously had lots of calories. But I couldn't get into calorie counting -- looking everything up and adding it all.
It was simply too tedious.
I got a treadmill just before Christmas and got into walking while watching football games -- sometimes as much as 10 miles in a day. But even that seemed to make little difference in my weight. All that exercise gave me an appetite.
When I put on another 10 lbs. in the two months after Christmas, this was getting scary.
Then, researching an article about fitness Web sites, I chanced upon CBS Healthwatch. That's cbs.healthwatch.com
They have a Nutrition Calculator. You enter what you eat or what you plan to eat, and how much of it. And they quickly calculate the calories, fat, carbohydrates, vitamins, minerals etc. And they also store the information for you in your own Daily Calendar area, and let you quickly generate neat graphs.
Actually, it isn't all that quick. The first time it seems quick because it's so neat and unexpected. But when you start doing this two, three, four, and even more times a day, it starts to feel very slow. The Java applet drags, even with a DSL connection.
With this tool, it very soon became glaringly clear which of the foods that I used to eat regularly, I should stay away from. Spaghetti in particular. A typical helping of my favorite dish, cooked my special way probably amounts to about 2000 calories, all alone. Every time I eat spaghetti, I inevitably gain 1-2 pounds. (If only I had had the common sense to realize that before.)
Then there are the little surprises, like salad dressing. Lettuce and tomatoes have very few calories, but two tablespoons of my favorite Russian salad dressing comes to about 160 calories , which is more than a hot dog. Even some of the "good stuff" -- the vegetables I would add to my meal not because I liked them, but because I thought they were good for me, were costing me dearly. For instance, just a cup of peas comes to 117 calories -- more than twice as much as a cup of popcorn.
I started to think in terms of budget. I have only so many calories to spend a day, and I can spend them on things I enjoy eating or things that I don't. That salad dressing simply isn't worth a hot dog to me. I'd rather stick to the lettuce and tomato, maybe add some celery and carrot, and skip the peas, then splurge on a piece of pie. And the summary display for the day, also gives me happy faces in all the categories, like vitamins and minerals where I'm on target for my daily needs; and up and down arrows for those that I'm not, so I can make some last minute adjustments -- perhaps enjoying a late snack to nudge the numbers in the right direction.
As a result, I've cut my calorie intake significantly, while keeping my energy level high, And I've been able to be far more regular about my exercise. Over the last couple weeks, I've gradually dropped about five pounds. And now I seem to have some degree of control over my weight.
So what does this have to do with the Internet?
The calculator is the ultimate sticky application. It's now a fixed part of my regular daily routine. I go back again and again, both to calculate and to check my records -- in particular to get the gratification of seeing a graph.
It isn't a social application in the usual sense -- it doesn't put me in touch with other people. It also isn't "content" in the usual sense. But here I am, essentially, carrying on a dialogue myself at this Web site, day after day. The calculator makes useful information readily available to me, and the record acts as my conscience and helps keep me on track. The graphs are a fun extra touch.
This is an aspect of the Web that I hadn't been aware of before. And I could imagine a number of other applications, based on similar psychological principles. Provide useful conversions from real-world experiences to numerical values, and store the personal records for future reference and to track progress toward set goals.
Even looking at Health Watch, there's so much more that could be done. As it is, they let you enter your weight and how much you have exercised, but those numbers are just static -- they don't do anything with them and don't combine them in any way with the nutrition information. It's easy enough to just write your weight down, and write down how much you exercise, and that's all the site does, just provides you with a space to record that static information. But they, or someone else could provide calculations of how many calories you burn with certain amounts of certain kinds of exercise; and provide a total tally of calories taken in minus calories burned. And with enough data about your food intake, exercise, and weight, it should be possible to arrive at some metric for metabolism and some estimate of how projected changes in what you eat and how much you exercise are likely to change your weight.
Or imagine a Web site that tried to do something similar with regard to your financial budget -- so you don't have to enter each and every penny spent, like you do with a Quicken, but rather enter activities by chunks and let the calculator fill in a likely estimate (with some tweaking over time by you) -- for instance, you click that you went to a movie, or had lunch out, or drove a hundred miles. And if you shop online a lot, even have a little app that reminds you while you are shopping what your budget allows for that kind of thing this month and where you stand now.
Imagine, too, that you add to this kind of online conscience a link to a friend who has your best interest at heart. Say you find it very difficult to discipline yourself with regard to food or finances or whatever. Then you name a buddy, and once a week that buddy gets an email reminder with a URL that will show them the graph of your progress, so that buddy can cheer you on and share in the joy of your little victories or give you a kick, if necessary.
I guess the Web and the new capabilities it provides are becoming an important part of our daily lives -- not just a source of information, and not just a communication medium -- an extension of ourselves, a way for us to help ourselves become what we want to become.
An old friend who works with clients in the entertainment industry, keeps telling me that today's text-based Internet will vanish in a couple years, when most people will have persistent high bandwidth connections, like DSL and cable. He's sure that the show-biz types will remake the whole system, if necessary, to push their style of content in your direction and get at your dollar.
Obviously, multi-media beats out text as entertainment when the high bandwidth is there. But there are four problems with that proposition. First, they are focusing on content as entertainment. Second, the Internet is not just another mass medium; the competitive environment here is far more complex than television and radio. Third, they're far too optimistic regarding the capabilities of today's high bandwidth connections, and how fast such connections will become widespread. Fourth, they are forgetting about another important wave of change -- wireless Internet.
First, content on the Internet can serve multiple purposes. Most of it is intended to inform or to communicate with a circle of friends, and was never intended as entertainment.
And all content on the Internet, if properly designed, can serve as a marketing asset, in addition to informing, communicating, or entertaining. Here text is king, and will be for quite some time to come, because of the nature of search engines.
Multimedia might make the experience at a Web site far more compelling.
But text indexed by search engines is what gets people there in the first place. Regardless of what wild and wonderful multimedia experiences may be available some day over the Internet, people navigate by search engines which are fuelled by text.
Those sites that don't have lots of good and interesting text that is well-indexed by search engines wind up paying far more for advertising to get the same level of traffic as comparable sites with lots of text.
Second, the Internet is not a few-to-many (mass media environment).
With television and radio the medium itself is a limited resource, with very few channels allocated by regulations and licenses to even fewer companies. But on the Internet, there is an infinitely expanding, unregulated universe of content -- nearly a hundred million Web sites already, and growing fast.
And all that content -- the amateur as well as the professional -- competes for the same limited resource -- the time and attention of users. Tens of millions of people use their own Web sites to talk to one another and express themselves. Your buddy in Topeka, that artist in Detroit, the new rock band in Honolulu that few people have heard of yet, that lady in Tampa who sells so much good stuff at auctions, that high school kid in New Orleans who always seems to know what's wrong with your computer.
The proverbial Joe-six-pack isn't just a viewer/consumer, he's also a competitor for the time and attention of his friends. Today he uses just text and pictures, but he'll soon be playing with audio and video as well. In a competitive environment like that, where the level of chaos keeps increasing, it's a very good idea to take advantage of all available means -- including search engines -- to make it easy for people to find your site during the fleeting moments when are interested in your kind of content.
Third, it will be considerably longer than a couple years before the broadband heaven of show business people is a reality -- perhaps as long as 5-10 years. It will take 2-3 years just for DSL to become commonplace, and DSL isn't fast enough, yet, for delivery of quality video.
As for cable, in that case bandwidth is shared, so as more people connect, the bandwidth available to everyone in that same neighborhood goes down, until the cable provider makes significant new investments -- which is a slow, iterative process.
Fourth, while broadband is gradually expanding, so is wireless/mobile. And because of limitations of both screen-size and bandwidth, wireless is likely to give new life to the importance of text on the Internet.
So for the foreseeable future, it looks like text is likely to win the content wars -- not highly polished professional video content that costs a fortune to produce and to advertise and that only major media companies can provide; but rather, plain old words that anyone can post in free Web space, and that anyone can readily find by search engines. The little guys are a lot stronger than you thought. Welcome to Lilliput, Mr. Gulliver.
Adding dozens of new titles every month, Gutenberg has already made about 2500 etexts available for free over the Internet. These include classic works of literature and history, as well as out-of-print and little-known works by great authors. If you can, connect by ftp, rather than the Web, to get the most recent ones. Here's a list of those recently added, alphabetized by author. The file name is useful for fetching the text from the ftp site. Many of these are also available on diskette from PLEASE COPY THIS DISK for those who cannot get them themselves. For the current catalog, check http://www.samizdat.com/catalog.html or send your email request to seltzer@samizdat.com)
Honore de Balzac -- Repertory of the Comedie Humaine (index of characters and events (part 1 = 1rthc10.txt, part 2 - 2rthc10.txt)
Thomas Carlyle, History of Friedrich II of Prussia Volume 17 (17frd10.txt), Volume 18 (18frd10.txt), Volume 19 (19frd10.txt), Volume 20 (20frd10.txt)
Victor Cherbuliez -- Samuel Brohl & Company (brohl10.txt)
Joseph Conrad -- Under Western Eyes (wstys10.txt)
James Fenimore Cooper -- New York (nwyrk10.txt)
Edgar B.P. Darlington
Emile Gaboriau -- Caught In The Net (cnnet10.txt)
John Glasworthy -- Beyond (byond10.txt)
David Grayson -- The Friendly Road (frnrd10.txt)
B. Perez Galdos -- Dona Perfecta, Trans by Serrano (donap10.txt)
Bret Harte --
Herman Hesse -- Siddhartha (8-bit German = 8sidd10.txt) (7-bit German = 7sidd10.txt)
Robert Hichens -- The Prophet of Berkeley Square (tpobs10.txt)
Henrik Ibsen -- Ghosts, A Domestic Tragedy (ghsts10.txt)
Henry James -- The Madonna of the Future (mdftr10.txt)
John Keats -- Lamiav(lamia10.txt)
Hugh Latimer -- Sermons on the Card (srmcd10.txt)
Joseph Lincoln --
Edward Bulwer Lytton -- The Lady of Lyons (ladyl10.txt)
J. MacCaffrey -- History of the Catholic Church Volume 1 (hcath10.txt), Volume 2 (2hcth10.txt)
Machiavelli -- History of Florence and Italy (hflit10.txt)
Posper Merimee -- Carmen (carmn10.txt)
Charles Reade -- White Lies (whtls10.txt)
Arthur B. Reeve -- The Silent Bullet (sbllt10.txt)
Margaret E. Sangster -- Cross Roads (crsrd10.txt)
Harriet Beecher Stowe -- Queer Little Folks (qltfk10.txt)
Ivan S. Turgenev -- Virgin Soil (vgnsl10.txt)
Return to Internet-on-a-Disk
Go to Readers' Room
and Writers' Showcase
My
Internet: a Personal View of Internet Business Opportunities
by Richard Seltzer, on CD, includes four books, 162 articles, and 49 newsletter
issues that will inspire you and provide the practical information you
need to build your own personal Web site or Internet-based business, helping
you to become a player in this new business environment.
Web
Business Boot Camp: Hands-on Internet lessons for manager, entrepreneurs,
and professionals by Richard Seltzer (Wiley, 2002).
No-nonsense guide targets activities that anyone can perform to achieve
online business
success.
Reviews.
A
library for the price of a book.
This site is
Published by Samizdat Express, 213 Deerfield Lane, Orange, CT 06477. (203) 553-9925. seltzer@samizdat.com
.
<