View Full Version : Actually...The government didn't invent the internet...
USANick7
07-23-2012, 00:05
http://culpeperrepublican.com/2012/07/23/actually-no-the-government-didnt-invent-the-internet-neither-did-al-gore/
Once again... the free market comes out on top, and Obama has his history wrong...:lifter
Actually, this is what I have always been taught - that it was not the govt creating the Internet to maintain commo during a nuclear strike, but it was developed through DARPA funded research projects.
http://www.internetsociety.org/internet/internet-51/history-internet/brief-history-internet
And in the History of its development, look at the timeline in the article at which point the Xerox PARC labs appear upon the scene. ;)
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
I thought Al Gore invented the internet :confused:
:D
Dozer523
07-23-2012, 05:05
I thought Al Gore invented the internet :confused:
:D
I understand your confusion. That sometimes happens when you insist on believing something ONLY because you like to hear it and say it over and over and over again. http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
"he was not claiming that he invented the Internet (in the sense oh having designed or implimented it) but that he was responsible in a legislative sense foro fostering the development of technology that we now know as the internet. . . .
Gore never used the word "invent" and the transcripts are clear and available. The legeslative record is equally clear.
Similiarly, President Eisenhower is regared as the creator of the Interstate Highway system. Having slogged Armies across Europe on crappy roads he was amazed when he reached the German autobahns. But no one teases that he was drawing lines on a map, blasting tunnels or laying asphalt. 'Create' and 'invent' are different word because they mean different things.
TXGringo
07-23-2012, 05:33
I understand your confusion. That sometimes happens when you insist on believing something ONLY because you like to hear it and say it over and over and over again. http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
"he was not claiming that he invented the Internet (in the sense oh having designed or implimented it) but that he was responsible in a legislative sense foro fostering the development of technology that we now know as the internet. . . .
Gore never used the word "invent" and the transcripts are clear and available. The legeslative record is equally clear.
Similiarly, President Eisenhower is regared as the creator of the Interstate Highway system. Having slogged Armies across Europe on crappy roads he was amazed when he reached the German autobahns. But no one teases that he was drawing lines on a map, blasting tunnels or laying asphalt. 'Create' and 'invent' are different word because they mean different things.
"In 1988, a National Research Council committee, chaired by Kleinrock and with Kahn and Clark as members, produced a report commissioned by NSF titled "Towards a National Research Network". This report was influential on then Senator Al Gore, and ushered in high speed networks that laid the networking foundation for the future information superhighway."
That's the only time Gore is mentioned in Richard's link. He "fostered the development of technology" after 1988? I think that train was well on its way before Gore was "influenced." I also think that, regardless of how you interpret his choice of words, he's full of shit.
Badger52
07-23-2012, 07:10
I also think that, regardless of how you interpret his [Gore's] choice of words, he's full of shit.I agree. Folks talk alot about the infrastructure behind it and there's no doubt firms like Sprint who stuck their neck into fiber networks in the late 80's helped once the MIL split occurred. Lots of pieces coming together; I remember Univ of IL (Champaign-Urbana) had a thing called 'Mosaic' - they called it a browser.... browser? hmmm WTF is a browser?
:cool:
Dozer523
07-23-2012, 08:53
I also think that, regardless of how you interpret his choice of words, he's full of shit.
And your vulgar opinion should matter because . . . ? of March 2013?
Padawan,
The point being made is: the Government, via DARPA, was very involved in what would later become the WWW. The second point, thanks to Messuer T-Rock sharing an untruth, is that the former VP never claimed to have invented it either. Many people contributed to the creation/invention of the internet. The WWW continues to evolve (who would have imagined Facebook or the success of internet porn 30 years ago?) and will continue with many contributors in the future.
The story that fascinates me regarding the Internet is how much of what we have today was a result of people recognizing another use for something others developed for a more limited task.
It is a story of minds that remained open. Good luck at SFQC.
And your vulgar opinion should matter because . . . ? of March 2013?
Padawan,
The point being made is: the Government, via DARPA, was very involved in what would later become the WWW. The second point, thanks to Messuer T-Rock sharing an untruth, is that the former VP never claimed to have invented it either. Many people contributed to the creation/invention of the internet. The WWW continues to evolve (who would have imagined Facebook or the success of internet porn 30 years ago?) and will continue with many contributors in the future.
The story that fascinates me regarding the Internet is how much of what we have today was a result of people recognizing another use for something others developed for a more limited task.
It is a story of minds that remained open. Good luck at SFQC.
That's right, many people did. Then it is equally incorrect for President Obama to say "Government research invented the internet" inferring that only government was involved.
Then it is equally incorrect for President Obama to say "Government research invented the internet" inferring that only government was involved.
Actually, he said:
"The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/13/remarks-president-campaign-event-roanoke-virginia
He might have been a bit more specific in his remarks, but - technically speaking - he's correct as it was the DARPA research which initially funded and fostered the programs that, when combined with later research, eventually led to the Internet's development.
As far as what people ("pundits" and "opponents") "infer" - well...
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
Actually, he said:
He might have been a bit more specific in his remarks, but - technically speaking - he's correct as it was the DARPA research which initially funded and fostered the programs that, when combined with later research, eventually led to the Internet's development.
As far as what people ("pundits" and "opponents") "infer" - well...
And so it goes...
Richard [/COLOR]:munchin
I disagree with your assessment. Even reading the link you provided, it is clear that the creation of the internet was not any one entity. While it might have been, originally, government funded, that doesn't mean they "created" it anymore than it means that government built the roads when, in reality, government collected taxes that paid for building roads through contracted private entities did the actual work. The "creation" of the internet was far more diffused than even that example. Again, his stating "Government research created the interrnet" does exactly what I said it does in my original statement. It co-ops for government something that isn't theirs to co-op.
The second point, thanks to Messuer T-Rock sharing an untruth, is that the former VP never claimed to have invented it either.
Sorry, my bad…., I’ll use pink font next time. He created the internet….lol :D
“…During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the internet…” ~Al Gore~
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
The DARPA funded research which created the ARPANET in support of furthering their research programs (among other uses) - and was managed and directed solely by DARPA for its first several years of existence - was not the origins of the Internet? :confused:
Thus, by the end of 1969 four host computers were connected together into the initial ARPANET, and the budding Internet was off the ground. Even at this early stage, it should be noted that the networking research incorporated both work on the underlying network and work on how to utilize the network. This tradition continues to this day.
The original ARPANET grew into the Internet.
Richard :munchin
Even if the president's critics establish definitively that his comments about the government's role in the invention of the internet are historically inaccurate, his supporters could still point to many other examples in which .GOV played a role in this nation's economic development.
Rather than getting mired in the history and historiography of this topic, I think the president's opposition could get more traction if it developed arguments that turned the president's comment on its head.
My $0.02.
Stargazer
07-23-2012, 13:54
.... and listen to this long video titled, "Bob Taylor (internet visionary)talks at UT Austin"...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvbGAPJSDJI
Bob Taylor was the first project manager and person most responsible for the creation of the first national network -- the ARPAnet -- which is universally regarded as the precursor to today's Internet.
If you walk away with the sense that it was 'created' by the government, I will be surprised. It to me, is a collective effort of visionaries, brilliant engineers, captial and ARPA research arm...
With respect to the POTUS words, I maintain his comments minced fact with 'crap'... in an effort to push his agenda.
I love the stories.. and found it to be interesting... favorite Bob Taylor quote which seems quite fitting at times... "why are there so many more horses asses than there are horses"....
Dozer523
07-23-2012, 14:16
Sorry, my bad…., I’ll use pink font next time. He created the internet….lol :D
Use any color you want and make any face you like (maybe it'll get stuck that way) but it won't make it true.
On the one hand, you use snopes.com as a source.http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.aspOn the other hand, you recently questioned the legitimacy of snopes.com as a reliable source.I’m willing to bet if a Muslim were refused service for the way he or she is dressed, the media would be all over it. And if the owners of the station happen to be confronted by the media, snopes, or whoever, watch how fast they backtrack and engage in al-Taqiyya… :munchin
wala’ wa bara’
> http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-specter-of-muslim-disloyalty-in-america/Is it your position that snopes.com is reliable when it servers your political/ideological interests but not when it doesn't?
If so, are you saying that the requirements of a political/ideological argument is more important than intellectual consistency?:munchin
If you walk away with the sense that it was 'created' by the government, I will be surprised. It to me, is a collective effort of visionaries, brilliant engineers, captial and ARPA research arm...
I found the Bob Taylor explanation at 1:06-1:16 (NASA and ARPA funding, vision, C2 of ARPANET development) and 1:40-1:41 (Al Gore) to be interesting. :D
Richard :munchin
TXGringo
07-23-2012, 16:46
And your vulgar opinion should matter because . . . ? of March 2013?
Padawan,
The point being made is: the Government, via DARPA, was very involved in what would later become the WWW. The second point, thanks to Messuer T-Rock sharing an untruth, is that the former VP never claimed to have invented it either. Many people contributed to the creation/invention of the internet. The WWW continues to evolve (who would have imagined Facebook or the success of internet porn 30 years ago?) and will continue with many contributors in the future.
The story that fascinates me regarding the Internet is how much of what we have today was a result of people recognizing another use for something others developed for a more limited task.
It is a story of minds that remained open. Good luck at SFQC.
I have to get selected first, but thank you.
However, I never questioned the government's involvement. I questioned Al Gore's. He "took the initiative in creating the internet?" 20 years after DARPA? I stand by my assessment of Mr. Gore.
Stargazer
07-23-2012, 17:04
I found the Bob Taylor explanation at 1:06-1:16 (NASA and ARPA funding, vision, C2 of ARPANET development) and 1:40-1:41 (Al Gore) to be interesting. :D
Richard :munchin
Well, of course you did, Richard... LOL!! :D
I found Bob Taylor to be interesting and loved his stories and stories about him... at the closing during QA he says the government had a big impact on the internet but he never credited ARPA or any other government agency with it's creation, unless I missed it...
Doesn't change my view on the POTUS bloviating.
On the one hand, you use snopes.com as a source.
On the other hand, you recently questioned the legitimacy of snopes.com as a reliable source.
I recently questioned factcheck.org as a source because of the Obama-Ayers ties to the Annenberg Foundation, not snopes...
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/172313/obama-ayers-fact-check/stanley-kurtz
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=459899&postcount=11
I’m willing to bet if a Muslim were refused service for the way he or she is dressed, the media would be all over it. And if the owners of the station happen to be confronted by the media, snopes, or whoever, watch how fast they backtrack and engage in al-Taqiyya…
Sigaba, I wasn’t questioning snopes, I was making the point that Taqiyya is often used and most Muslims are familiar with the principles of Islam that justify lying in situations as a preventive measure against anticipated harm to one's self or fellow Muslims.
Use any color you want and make any face you like (maybe it'll get stuck that way) but it won't make it true.
Al gore was not around when ARPANET was created …
Al Gore Claimed That He Was Responsible for The Creation of the Internet-Truth!
> http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/goreinternet.htm
Edited to add:
(00:48 - 00:54) > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RuvZ9_3XvE
Stargazer
07-23-2012, 20:04
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/goreinternet.htm
Well... wait until I run into Bob Taylor... he seemed credible and I bought the koolaid...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnFJ8cHAlco
Sigaba, I wasn’t questioning snopes[....]Thanks for the clarification.
Thanks for the clarification.
You’re welcome Sigaba.
Some interesting reading.
The Arpanet: Forerunner of Today's Internet
http://www.bbn.com/about/timeline/arpanet/
◦“A History of the ARPANET: The First Decade,” a technical report by Bolt Baranek and Newman, Inc., April 1981.
http://www.darpa.mil/About/History/PARTIAL_BIBLIOGRAPHY_OF_THE_INTERNETARPANET.aspx
What Is The Internet (And What Makes It Work) - December, 1999
By Robert E. Kahn and Vinton G. Cerf
From One Network to Many: The role of DARPA
Modern computer networking technologies emerged in the early 1970s. In 1969, The U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (variously called ARPA and DARPA), an agency within the Department of Defense, commissioned a wide-area computer network called the ARPANET. This network made use of the new packet switching concepts for interconnecting computers and initially linked computers at universities and other research institutions in the United States and in selected NATO countries. At that time, the ARPANET was essentially the only realistic wide-area computer network in existence, with a base of several dozen organizations, perhaps twice that number of computers and numerous researchers at those sites. The program was led at DARPA by Larry Roberts. The packet switches were built by Bolt Beranek and Newman (BBN), a DARPA contractor. Others directly involved in the ARPANET activity included the authors, Len Kleinrock, Frank Heart, Howard Frank, Steve Crocker, Jon Postel and many many others in the ARPA research community.
http://dr-net-cyber.blogspot.com/2007/03/internet.html
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
This article appeared in the WSJ by Gordon Crovitz on 22 July:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444464304577539063008406518.html
An excerpt:
That fired imaginations, and by the 1960s technologists were trying to connect separate physical communications networks into one global network—a "world-wide web." The federal government was involved, modestly, via the Pentagon's Advanced Research Projects Agency Network. Its goal was not maintaining communications during a nuclear attack, and it didn't build the Internet. Robert Taylor, who ran the ARPA program in the 1960s, sent an email to fellow technologists in 2004 setting the record straight: "The creation of the Arpanet was not motivated by considerations of war. The Arpanet was not an Internet. An Internet is a connection between two or more computer networks.
If the government didn't invent the Internet, who did? Vinton Cerf developed the TCP/IP protocol, the Internet's backbone, and Tim Berners-Lee gets credit for hyperlinks. But full credit goes to the company where Mr. Taylor worked after leaving ARPA: Xerox."
Sadly, I'm sure Sigaba and Richard will find a way to discredit this.
USANick7
07-24-2012, 11:25
The satire sarcasm directed against Al Gore with relation to the "invention of the internet" was a direct result of his own inflated sense of self with with respect to the project.
The larger narrative is that the Democratic party, especially the liberal wing (which has essentially taken over) has adopted a far more "command" view of the economy.
There is no question in my mind that government can assist in economic development, but the notion that it drives it is very problematic for me. When government sticks to its basic, and I would argue legitimate functions of establishing clear and easily understandable regulations that focus primarily on the punishment of rather than the prevention of acts such as murder, fraud, theft, etc. Government can play a valuable economic service.
At times, it can play a valuable role with regard to investing in those entities which provide services directly related to its legitimate functions, i.e. defense, law enforcement, etc.
I do not accept some of the arguments put forth with respect to benefits of the New Deal etc. on the evidence given, since it cannot be determined that such improvements would not have taken place through private means had government not intervened in the way that it did.
To sum up...I believe that the private sector has been the driver of economic advancement with the government damaging that drive far more than assisting it over the last 100 years.
V/R
USANick7
07-24-2012, 11:28
and for fun...and education
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc
Airbornelawyer
07-24-2012, 11:35
Actually, he said:
"The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."
[COLOR="lime"]He might have been a bit more specific in his remarks, but - technically speaking - he's correct as it was the DARPA research which initially funded and fostered the programs that, when combined with later research, eventually led to the Internet's development.
Further to and somewhat redundant of what USANick7 says, because he posted as I was writing:
The problem with the President's statement is not the assertion that the government created the Internet, and the subsequent argument here and elsewhere over the degree to which DARPA gets credit for its role in the Internet's creation. I think we are losing sight of the forest arguing over who planted which tree (and I realize I am mixing up my metaphor here).
The problem is in the assertion that "Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet". To the extent that government research was involved in the Internet's creation, it was in pursuit of its own ends, not so that private companies could make money. There is a long list of areas where government spending in pursuit of legitimate government functions like national defense has had obvious ancillary benefits to private commerce, from aerospace to computing to nuclear power to Tang. But their purpose was not economic.
Even large infrastructure projects, whose commercial benefits are readily apparent, are not necessarily purely commercial in intent. Interstate highways, for example. As stated in the text of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, "It is hereby declared to be essential to the national interest to provide for the early completion of the 'National System of Interstate Highways', .... Because of its primary importance to the national defense, the name of such system is hereby changed to the 'National System of Interstate and Defense Highways'." [emphasis added]
President Obama, however, appears to ascribe to a corporatist economic model which sees economic growth as being driven from the top down, by governmental actors determining the most efficient way to allocate resources to achieve not just growth, but the right kinds of growth. His model is not purely socialist, though he has a long history of associating with traditional socialists, since it allows for private ownership of property. It is more akin to the corporatism popular among both Progressives in this country and fascists in Europe in the period between the world wars (fascism became a dirty word after the rise of the Nazis, but the fascist social and economic model as developed especially by Mussolini was extremely popular among and influential on Progressives). Also, for that matter, much of what passes for socialism among the social democracies of Western Europe is a form of corporatism.
For the President, the argument is "the government created the Internet, and look how good that worked out," so lets get the government out there creating even more. He constantly describes government spending as "investment", and attacks those who would restrain government spending as wanting to stop investing in our future. Never mind that the biggest drivers to burgeoning government spending are not investments in our future, but our past (interest on accumulated debt, Social Security, Medicare).
And, as noted, the corporatist model is not just about the spending which coming from government, but about the government's role in deciding the best allocation of resources. We see this in "green investments", with the smaller embarrassments like Solyndra masking the bigger picture of government officials hell-bent on allocating taxpayer dollars to create what they know in their wisdom is the right kind of energy economy.
And there are plenty of rent-seeking corporations more than willing to ally with government officials and get on the corporate welfare bandwagon. Why spend your own money on R&D when you can get the government to do it, and undercut your competition? Why not support "smart" regulation that through your lobbyists you can help write and that ensures regulatory barriers to entry that will keep new competition from arising? And then there are government procurement contracts and the hundreds of millions of dollars spent by the government to market products (see the Market Access Program, for example). So why go out into the market and compete when you can ally with the government to defray your costs, find your customers, and prevent competition. Call it what you want, but this is not capitalism, and it is surprising in light of all this how surprised many people are to find major business leaders supporting Democrats, supposedly against their "class" interest. Tiny little Solyndras are rank amateurs when it comes to rent-seeking compared to GE, Honeywell, Dow Chemical and big agribusinesses.
USANick7
07-24-2012, 11:52
Further to and somewhat redundant of what USANick7 says, because he posted as I was writing:
The problem with the President's statement is not the assertion that the government created the Internet, and the subsequent argument here and elsewhere over the degree to which DARPA gets credit for its role in the Internet's creation. I think we are losing sight of the forest arguing over who planted which tree (and I realize I am mixing up my metaphor here).
The problem is in the assertion that "Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet". To the extent that government research was involved in the Internet's creation, it was in pursuit of its own ends, not so that private companies could make money. There is a long list of areas where government spending in pursuit of legitimate government functions like national defense has had obvious ancillary benefits to private commerce, from aerospace to computing to nuclear power to Tang. But their purpose was not economic.
Even large infrastructure projects, whose commercial benefits are readily apparent, are not necessarily purely commercial in intent. Interstate highways, for example. As stated in the text of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, "It is hereby declared to be essential to the national interest to provide for the early completion of the 'National System of Interstate Highways', .... Because of its primary importance to the national defense, the name of such system is hereby changed to the 'National System of Interstate and Defense Highways'." [emphasis added]
President Obama, however, appears to ascribe to a corporatist economic model which sees economic growth as being driven from the top down, by governmental actors determining the most efficient way to allocate resources to achieve not just growth, but the right kinds of growth. His model is not purely socialist, though he has a long history of associating with traditional socialists, since it allows for private ownership of property. It is more akin to the corporatism popular among both Progressives in this country and fascists in Europe in the period between the world wars (fascism became a dirty word after the rise of the Nazis, but the fascist social and economic model as developed especially by Mussolini was extremely popular among and influential on Progressives). Also, for that matter, much of what passes for socialism among the social democracies of Western Europe is a form of corporatism.
For the President, the argument is "the government created the Internet, and look how good that worked out," so lets get the government out there creating even more. He constantly describes government spending as "investment", and attacks those who would restrain government spending as wanting to stop investing in our future. Never mind that the biggest drivers to burgeoning government spending are not investments in our future, but our past (interest on accumulated debt, Social Security, Medicare).
And, as noted, the corporatist model is not just about the spending which coming from government, but about the government's role in deciding the best allocation of resources. We see this in "green investments", with the smaller embarrassments like Solyndra masking the bigger picture of government officials hell-bent on allocating taxpayer dollars to create what they know in their wisdom is the right kind of energy economy.
And there are plenty of rent-seeking corporations more than willing to ally with government officials and get on the corporate welfare bandwagon. Why spend your own money on R&D when you can get the government to do it, and undercut your competition? Why not support "smart" regulation that through your lobbyists you can help write and that ensures regulatory barriers to entry that will keep new competition from arising? And then there are government procurement contracts and the hundreds of millions of dollars spent by the government to market products (see the Market Access Program, for example). So why go out into the market and compete when you can ally with the government to defray your costs, find your customers, and prevent competition. Call it what you want, but this is not capitalism, and it is surprising in light of all this how surprised many people are to find major business leaders supporting Democrats, supposedly against their "class" interest. Tiny little Solyndras are rank amateurs when it comes to rent-seeking compared to GE, Honeywell, Dow Chemical and big agribusinesses.
Incredibly well explained...thank you for posting...You have done a great job not only on this point but also highlighting the difference between many who claim to be "pro business" vs. those of us are pro "free market".
The Reaper
07-24-2012, 17:14
Where does government get the money for these activities from?
TANSTAAFL.
TR
GratefulCitizen
07-24-2012, 20:35
All of this government glorification has the end goal of displacing any higher power.
It's the return of emperor worship.
Naked you came from your mother's womb, -- (born into debt, actually)
And naked you will depart. -- (inheritance tax)
The government gave and the government has taken away; -- (income redistribution)
may the name of the government be praised. -- (you didn't build that)
I beg to differ.
All men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.
What word is it that the POTUS keeps omitting...