Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Is Al Gore The Father of the Internet?

1,516 views
Skip to first unread message

Jay Maynard

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 9:56:25 AM9/3/00
to
On 02 Sep 2000 21:29:34 -0800, Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
> "During my service in the United States Congress,
> I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>One way of looking at that is he is claiming to have created the
>Internet, and another way is that of all the people who helped
>create it, he is the Congress person who took the initiative
>required. The former is clearly not true, and the later clearly
>is true.

You should go to work as a political spin doctor. You're a natural.

Only a tortured reading of Gore's words can be assigned the latter meaning.
A plain English reading can only honestly be assigned the former. The
former meaning is laughable to those who understand just what it took to
create the Internet.

Mike Meredith at home

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 8:06:02 PM9/3/00
to
In article <773408232...@kruskcontrol.ru>,
ho...@underice.ru (Hook) writes:
> * The Internet does not need fat lazy dudes in orange vests
> standing around near it leaning on shovels shoving donuts in
> their faces while they are supposed to be pretending they
> are turning potholes into bumps.

Really ? Every time work's Internet connection gets
upgraded/repaired, we have a bunch of guys that sound
suspiciously like the above. Funnily enough the guys who break
work's Internet connection from time to time look very similar
...

Floyd Davidson

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 1:09:37 PM9/3/00
to
"Sjoerd Langkemper" <s.lang...@chello.nl> wrote:
>"Floyd Davidson" <fl...@ptialaska.net>:
>> diony...@hotmail.com (dionysus) wrote:
>> >>
>> >Being a foreigner, please excuse my ignorance, but what exactly did Al
>> >Gore do for the internet's reputation apart from coin a rather silly
>> >phrase?
>>
>> Money.
>>
>> He was basically responsible for introducing key legislation and
>> guiding Internet projects through the US Congress. He did that
>> at a time when most Congress critters had *no* idea what the
>> significance was. He did that at a time when virtually the
>> entire telecommunications industry had *no* idea what the
>> Internet was. Well actually, he did that at a time when hardly
>> *anyone* had any idea what it was! (Al Gore's legislation is
>> what changed the ARPANET to the NFSnet and caused it to become
>> known as The Internet too.)
><cut>
>
>Tell me if I'm wrong but to me it looks stupid to spend money to something
>where nobody ever heard off.

In this instance at least, you are clearly wrong. Give it some
thought, and be glad that money is spent on R&D every day,
exploring things that "nobody ever heard of".

--
Floyd L. Davidson fl...@barrow.com
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Gore_In_Conte...@no-spam.com

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 1:50:06 PM9/3/00
to
On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:12:29 GMT, gr...@apple2.com.invalid wrote:

>In article <39b7e258...@news.sonic.net>,
>Gore_In...@tripod.com wrote:
>
>> Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,talk.politics.misc,alt.os.linux
>
>Ah, another lesson in why folklore and politics don't mix?
>
>> To say that an 'interent' existed before Gore expanded it, is a
>> stretch. Almost everythign we call the internet was produced as a
>> result of his bills.
>
>And this is a good thing? I for one would be happy to go back to an
>Internet pre-Veep Gore.

Pre-1992? How about pre-Congressman Gore? Before Gore's 1986 "Supercomputer Network
Study Act" or whatever it was called.


> Back to the days when every new user was both
>willing and able to learn, and peer pressure exerted by experienced
>users upon newbies actually worked. Back when the most serious net
>abuse one could expect was an e-mail bomb.

Before Gore took the initiative among Congressmen of his term, there WERE no users
outside military, iirc. Maybe a very few on mainframes at MIT.

See http://Gore_In_Context.internet.html

Diogenes


*************************************************

http://Gore_In_Context.tripod.com -- my new site

Pew/PEJ report: media coverage favors Bush:
http://www.journalism.org/publ_research/character1.html

Re campaign finance see
http://www.salonmagazine.com/news/col/cona/2000/06/07/china/index.html
At my site see link direct to "Temple in a Teapot", a very well-written
article at americanlawyer.com debunking Gore campaign
finance charges.

Other good sites debunking anti-Clinton/Gore stories:
http://www.dailyhowler.com/
http://www.americandispatches.com/index.html
http://www.consortiumnews.com/
http://www.prospect.org/

Vote out the Impeachers! moveon.org & pfaw.org
*************************************************

Floyd Davidson

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 1:14:04 PM9/3/00
to

Jay you are a well known distortionist. :-) But you have always been
far too crude to work as a "spin doctor". It might sell to boneheads,
but not to anyone else.

In plain English, including the context of the statement, there is
little doubt that in NO WAY did he mean the former.

Ian Stirling

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 2:05:37 PM9/3/00
to
Hook <ho...@underice.ru> wrote:
>> His [ Al Gore's ] "Information Superhighway" metaphor is brilliant

>The Super Highway metaphor is severely flawed:
<snip>


>* The Internet does not need fat lazy dudes in orange vests
> standing around near it leaning on shovels shoving donuts in
> their faces while they are supposed to be pretending they
> are turning potholes into bumps.

Depending on your ISP, they may well be there though.
(Not to mention the numerous cases of chopped data cables.)

--
http://inquisitor.i.am/ | mailto:inqui...@i.am | Ian Stirling.
---------------------------+-------------------------+--------------------------
"I am the Emperor, and I want dumplings." - Austrian Emperor, Ferdinand I.

Floyd Davidson

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 1:32:47 PM9/3/00
to
jmay...@thebrain.conmicro.cx (Jay Maynard) wrote:
>On 03 Sep 2000 01:08:48 -0800, Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
>>Apparently the truth escapes some. Al Gore is just about as
>>much the creator of The Internet as any other individual.
>
>That's the point, though: No one person created the Internet. I'd go so far
>as to say that no hundred people created the Internet.
>
>Failing to realize that is what makes Gore's claim so thoroughly laughable.

Jay, get real.

"During my service in the United States Congress,
I took the initiative in creating the Internet."

He did not say he invented the Internet. He said that he is the
one in Congress who took the inititative. That is absolutely a
true statement. No other Congressperson shared that initiative
either.

You and I (and many others who read and/or post to
alt.folklore.computers were using the Internet before Gore made
it a household word, but what percentage of those reading this
in talk.politics.misc had even heard of TCP/IP until Gore ran
for VP? How many of them, even then, had access until after
1995? Perhaps 90% of what the Internet is today, is because of
Al Gore. That is true even if you are not part of that 90%.

Floyd Davidson

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 1:24:10 PM9/3/00
to
lwi...@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) wrote:
>> Reality check. Gore is a lawyer by trade, and a politician by chioce
>> -- so, like what do you think! Granted his SuperComputer Network Act
>> of 1986 suggested that a "net" might be a good idea. However, I was
>> "chatting" with folks around the world via the Source and later with
>> CompuServe as far back as 1983 -- and this on a 1200 bps modem!
>
>So what?
>
>The community of 'talkers' back then was very limited. The
>Internet's crowning achievement is linking lots of computers
>everywhere in a unified standard at an affordable cost.

We might note also that CompuServe is *not* what evolved into
a worldwide network with millions of computers and many tens of
millions of users.

Al Gore's vision of The Internet did.

>> You "political folks" should take a
>> science course or two -- perhaps then you'd know how silly the
>> question is regarding Gore's role in the deployment of the internet..
>
>Others have already explained how the enviromental climate was
>necessary for the technology to take root and become widespread.

One might also note that the most techie of all the techies
involved, Vinton Cerf, allows that Al Gore is indeed due some
great amount of credit. And, he says that by 1988 he had
realized that The Internet could not realize his vision of what
it should be if it remained entirely a government funded
network. We might note that Cerf may have invented the
technology, but he pointedly says it was not viable in the
context that he worked with it. What he credits Al Gore with
doing is exactly what allowed that technology to be enabled.

Just consider the alternatives... we could all be using what?
Compuserve? Tymnet? and maybe dozens of other similar distinctly
less useful network protocols.

Thomas Andrews

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 2:37:32 PM9/3/00
to

I wonder if people would still be objecting of Gore had said:

"As a member of Congress, I took the legislative initiative in
creating the internet."

It's almost exactly the same sentence - the word "legislative" is
redundant with "as a member of Congress" - but it would be harder
to snip and misrepresent.

--
Thomas Andrews tho...@best.com http://www.best.com/~thomaso/
"What's a man like me supposed to do,
With all this extra savoir-faire?" - TMBG

Chris Hedley

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 3:03:08 PM9/3/00
to
In article <a1puo8.91q.ln@lucifer>,

I'm still frankly suspicious of this newfangled "internet" malarkey,
if we'd stuck with good ol' X.25 things'd be much better. In my day
we were happy with- [cont p.94]

Chris.

Bill Bonde

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 3:10:42 PM9/3/00
to

Floyd Davidson wrote:
>
> jmay...@thebrain.conmicro.cx (Jay Maynard) wrote:
> >On 03 Sep 2000 01:08:48 -0800, Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
> >>Apparently the truth escapes some. Al Gore is just about as
> >>much the creator of The Internet as any other individual.
> >
> >That's the point, though: No one person created the Internet. I'd go so far
> >as to say that no hundred people created the Internet.
> >
> >Failing to realize that is what makes Gore's claim so thoroughly laughable.
>
> Jay, get real.
>
> "During my service in the United States Congress,
> I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>
> He did not say he invented the Internet. He said that he is the
> one in Congress who took the inititative. That is absolutely a
> true statement. No other Congressperson shared that initiative
> either.
>
> You and I (and many others who read and/or post to
> alt.folklore.computers were using the Internet before Gore made
> it a household word, but what percentage of those reading this
> in talk.politics.misc had even heard of TCP/IP until Gore ran
> for VP?
>

I knew about it. Gore claimed to have taken the initiative in creating
the Internet. That is way over the top.

Bill Bonde

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 3:17:31 PM9/3/00
to

Loren Petrich wrote:
>
> In article <39B1EE9C...@mail.com>, Bill Bonde <std...@mail.com> wrote:
> >Gore_In_Conte...@no-spam.com wrote:
>
> >> As was the case with
> >> the physical highway system championed by Mr. Gore's father, the
> >> government role in the information economy has been crucial.
> >> Lest anyone forget, the Internet came into existence through
> >> government initiative.]]
> >But not Gore's initiative. He's part of the group that brought us the
> >Assholes On Line.
>
> And how did that happen?
>
The way in which the private sector was brought into the Internet
brought us the likes of AOL. You know, that group of child
pornographers, thieves and low lifes that made it impossible for normal
people to sell products online by just sending checks back and forth.


> And I'm surprised that Mr. Bonde is not defending AOL as an
> organization that is exempt from all the rules that he believes ought to
> govern all ordinary citizens -- which is what he seems to believe about
> those who run businesses.
>
When have I said that? I support some level of sanction against
Microsoft for their illegal actions. Why should I like AOL?


> >> To say that an 'interent' existed before Gore expanded it, is a stretch. Almost
> >> everythign we call the internet was produced as a result of his bills.

> >Did Gore create usenet? No. Did Gore create the Web? No. Don't lie to
> >us, we know the truth.
>
> However, he was responsible for funding its early infrastructure.
>
Gore paid for the early internet infrastructure? The truth is that the
person's claim is wrong. Gore didn't even create usenet that thing that
some of us are communicating with now.

Bill Bonde

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 3:12:22 PM9/3/00
to

Gore_In_Conte...@no-spam.com wrote:
>
> Take a look at what Gore really did to make our Internet possible. He wrote and
> pushed the bills which allowed it to happen.
>
> http://Gore_In_Context.tripod.com/internet.html
>
> All he claimed was that he led the Congressmen of his term during its creation. This
> is true.
>
Actually, he claimed far more than that. I don't know why you think that
the current version of the internet is the only internet that ever
existed.

Floyd Davidson

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 3:29:01 PM9/3/00
to
vi...@weyl.math.psu.edu (Alexander Viro) wrote:
>Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
>>
>>Apparently the truth escapes some. Al Gore is just about as
>>much the creator of The Internet as any other individual. He is
>>the one member of Congress that had the vision to see what it
>>could be, and *fund* it while also setting up the legal
>>environment necessary for it to exist. If he had not, then IP
>>and HTTP would be things that roughly a million or two techies
>>would all know about, and the other dozens of millions of people
>>who know about them today would never had heard of them.
>
>Apparently, Gore isn't one of those dozens of millions.

You are saying Gore has never heard of IP or HTTP? Are you daft?

>"Open source webpage", anyone? Simple experiment for
>talk.politics folks: go to _any_ webpage and ask your browser
>to show the source.

How is being able to see the source to a web page linked in
any way to the phrase "Open source webpage"??? You can read
a lot of books too, and they are still very much copyrighted
material. So are many web page source listings that your
browser will allow you to read.

Your experiment is nonsense.

>Simple thought experiment: assume the somebody took a copy of
>Gore's page, modified it and put it for public access. Predict
>the reaction.

So? Copyright violations are against the law. Do you have
any concept of what a copyright is?

>Exercise: find definition of Open Source, read it and draw your
>conclusions.

It isn't what you seem to think it is.

>Another exercise: try to imagine the laughter on the net that
>followed Gore's playing with buzzwords.

How about the giggling following _your_ attempt above!

>"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
>"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.

We probably should also note that your attribution is incorrect.
Dilbert did NOT say that, which is what you are claiming. In fact
it was from a "Dilbert Cartoon". See the difference?

Ian Stirling

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 4:37:47 PM9/3/00
to
Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
>jmay...@thebrain.conmicro.cx (Jay Maynard) wrote:
>>On 03 Sep 2000 01:08:48 -0800, Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
>>>Apparently the truth escapes some. Al Gore is just about as
>>>much the creator of The Internet as any other individual.
>>
>>That's the point, though: No one person created the Internet. I'd go so far
>>as to say that no hundred people created the Internet.
>>
>>Failing to realize that is what makes Gore's claim so thoroughly laughable.

>Jay, get real.

> "During my service in the United States Congress,
> I took the initiative in creating the Internet."

Putting other words in someones mouth

"During my years as president, I took the initiative in creating the
apollo program"

He diddn't invent rocketry, or directly participate, either, before,
any lunar programs were strictly of the paper type, and unfunded,
existing as dreams from those involved in missile research, but
not having a concrete form.

Without that particular initiative, the evenutal manned landings on
the moon would have taken quite different form, even if it was eventually
the US that landed.

>He did not say he invented the Internet. He said that he is the
>one in Congress who took the inititative. That is absolutely a
>true statement. No other Congressperson shared that initiative
>either.

--
http://inquisitor.i.am/ | mailto:inqui...@i.am | Ian Stirling.
---------------------------+-------------------------+--------------------------

Two parrots sitting on a perch. One asks the other, "Can you smell fish?"

Floyd Davidson

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 4:05:15 PM9/3/00
to
Bill Bonde <std...@mail.com> wrote:

>Floyd Davidson wrote:
>> "During my service in the United States Congress,
>> I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>>
>> He did not say he invented the Internet. He said that he is the
>> one in Congress who took the inititative. That is absolutely a
>> true statement. No other Congressperson shared that initiative
>> either.
>>
>> You and I (and many others who read and/or post to
>> alt.folklore.computers were using the Internet before Gore made
>> it a household word, but what percentage of those reading this
>> in talk.politics.misc had even heard of TCP/IP until Gore ran
>> for VP?
>>
>I knew about it. Gore claimed to have taken the initiative in creating
>the Internet. That is way over the top.

And just who were the other Congress critters who also took
some initiative? Name one.

Alexander Viro

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 4:57:07 PM9/3/00
to
In article <87em31p...@barrow.com>,
Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
>vi...@weyl.math.psu.edu (Alexander Viro) wrote:

>>"Open source webpage", anyone? Simple experiment for
>>talk.politics folks: go to _any_ webpage and ask your browser
>>to show the source.
>
>How is being able to see the source to a web page linked in
>any way to the phrase "Open source webpage"??? You can read
>a lot of books too, and they are still very much copyrighted
>material. So are many web page source listings that your
>browser will allow you to read.

Many? Make it _all_ - rendering happens on the client side.

>Your experiment is nonsense.

>>Simple thought experiment: assume the somebody took a copy of
>>Gore's page, modified it and put it for public access. Predict
>>the reaction.
>
>So? Copyright violations are against the law. Do you have
>any concept of what a copyright is?

Sure I do. The little problem, though, is that Open Source implies
pretty specific kind of license. And I quite agree with you, using it
for a webpage would be a total nonsense.

Go and find the legal definition. Read it. Notice that one of the
requirements is that license must allow redistribution with any
modifications.

Now, care to translate Gore's babbling about his website being "Open Source"
into plain English? "Source is available" doesn't cut it - see above.
"You can modify and redistribute" _obviously_ is not true. IIRC, his
attempts to spin it (when the laughter came) were along the lines of
"We would be glad to hear your suggestions on potential improvements".
Officially, so would Microsoft, when it comes to suggestions on potential
improvements to any of their products.

If you can come with a plausible interpretation different from
* Gore was not aware that HTML _is_ the source, or
* Gore used a buzzword without any idea of its meaning
I would be very impressed.

Frankly, I find your utter lack of personal integrity rather amusing
(as in "oh, look - this freak got three legs"). Let's see what else
you can come up with. So far it was not too boring...

--

Bill Bonde

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 5:15:20 PM9/3/00
to

The Internet already existed at this point. You can't take initiative to
create something that is already here. In any case, there were plenty of
congressmen who voted for these bills or they would not be law.

Jay Maynard

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 5:43:52 PM9/3/00
to
On 03 Sep 2000 09:32:47 -0800, Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
> "During my service in the United States Congress,
> I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
>He did not say he invented the Internet. He said that he is the
>one in Congress who took the inititative. That is absolutely a
>true statement. No other Congressperson shared that initiative
>either.

Your absurd insistence on limiting the possible contenders to those serving
in Congress during Gore's tenure there is why this is nothing but spin
control.

If you examine that sentence from the rules of English, you'll notice that
the first part is a dependent clause, used to explain or amplify the basic
meaning of the sentence of which it is a part. The part you appear to be
willfully ignoring is that there's nothing in that sentence that limits
Gore's claim to the legislative arena. He could just as easily have been
working on it in his copious free time.

The meat of the sentence is in the independent clause, the part you have
written on the second line of your quotation. Here, Gore claims that he took
the initiative in creating the Internet. This totally ignores the
contributions of literally thousands of people down in the trenches who were
doing the real work of building hardware and designing protocols and writing
software...you know, the things that made the Internet possible at all.
Creating it.

Now, if Gore had said that "I took the initiative in funding the Internet",
I would have no argument with his statement at all. As it stands, however,
it's so far out in left field, and so true to the standard politician trick
of claiming credit for things that he didn't do, that it's nothing but
laughable - it's so obviously false that it's not even insulting.

John Galt

unread,
Sep 3, 2000, 6:21:51 PM9/3/00
to
Floyd Davidson wrote:

> >Yup. There is no doubt about it. Algore and Tipper are also the models
> >for _Love Story_. (By the way, is "Tipper" her real UID? or just her
> >effective UID?) Algore discovered "Love Canal."

The _Celebrity Who's Who_ says he is married to a woman named Mary Elizabeth
Aitcheson


Karri Kalpio

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 4:20:48 AM9/5/00
to
Mark Hohn <ho...@earthlink.net> writes:

> Gore said he invented the internet. Gore said him and his wife were what love
> story was based on. Gore looking at Picture of George Washington once asked
> "WHO is that?" Now I agree those aren't important issues, but they did
> happen.

No, he didn't.

No, he didn't.

No, he didn't.

Now, can we discuss about real topics and forget the BS? Yes, I know
we can't. People just don't bother to check out what they are talking
about... Sometimes[1] I hope that Mr. Gore hadn't "taken the initiative"
to help to make internet a public playground. Internet users were so
much more informed when internet was mostly an academic thing...

--k

[1] Actually, nowadays, most of the time...

--
/"\ : Karri Kalpio
\ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign : ka...@moremagic.com
X Against HTML Mail : [+358] (40) 5926895 (mobile)
/ \ : [+358] (9) 75111771 (work)

Chris Hedley

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 4:56:00 AM9/5/00
to
In article <87k8crz...@batcave.moremagic.com>,

Karri Kalpio <ka...@batcave.moremagic.com> writes:
> Now, can we discuss about real topics and forget the BS? Yes, I know
> we can't. People just don't bother to check out what they are talking
> about... Sometimes[1] I hope that Mr. Gore hadn't "taken the initiative"
> to help to make internet a public playground. Internet users were so
> much more informed when internet was mostly an academic thing...

This is all nice and groovy, but could we keep US politics on US politics
newsgroups, please? I'm not sure where this all started, but the link to
alt.folklore.computers is becoming increasingly tenuous IMHO...

Chris.

gr...@apple2.com.invalid

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 5:18:49 AM9/5/00
to
In alt.folklore.computers,
in article <39b58e9a...@news.sonic.net>,
Gore_In...@tripod.com wrote:

> See http://Gore_In_Context.internet.html

As soon as the top level domain ".html" becomes valid.

Al Gore did not found the Internet. He found the Internet.
There's a difference.

--
__ _____________ __
\ \_\ \__ __/ /_/ / <http://www.war-of-the-worlds.org/>
.\ __ \ | | / __ /----------------------------------------------------
^ \_\ \_\|_|/_/ /_/ Don't mail me, I'll mail you.

gr...@apple2.com.invalid

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 5:23:28 AM9/5/00
to
In alt.folklore.computers,
in article <39B4232D...@earthlink.net>,
Mark Hohn <ho...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Gore looking at Picture of George Washington once asked
> "WHO is that?"

And to whom did he ask that question? I can see a knowledgeable parent
asking his young child that question. Context is important.

D.J.

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 5:29:01 AM9/5/00
to

Urp.

Sorry, but I haven't been billed for political broadcasts. Can't stand
political adverts by anyone of any party, etc.

[plonk]

JimP.
--
djim55 at tyhe datasync dot com. Disclaimer: Standard.
My Web pages Updated: August 24, 2000:
http://www.crosswinds.net/~djim51/newlnks.html
Registered Linux user#185746

Floyd Davidson

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 5:14:02 AM9/5/00
to
Karri Kalpio <ka...@batcave.moremagic.com> wrote:

>... Sometimes[1] I hope that Mr. Gore hadn't "taken the
>initiative" to help to make internet a public
>playground. Internet users were so much more informed when
>internet was mostly an academic thing...

Ah, yes. That was back in the days when the old timers on
Usenet, when faced with stupid posts, commonly make cracks like
"Well, what else could we expect... from an EDU domain."

Doc

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 6:27:02 AM9/5/00
to
On 5 Sep 2000 08:56:00 GMT, Chris Hedley

<cbh@REMOVE_THIS.teabag.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>This is all nice and groovy, but could we keep US politics on US politics
>newsgroups, please? I'm not sure where this all started, but the link to
>alt.folklore.computers is becoming increasingly tenuous IMHO...
>

Better yet, they could drop it altogether. It never had *anything* to do
with Linux, and they keep changing the Subject line just enough to evade the
killfile....

--
Doc Shipley
Network Stuff
Austin, Earth

donald tees

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 8:32:38 AM9/5/00
to
This is getting silly. Illegal? What law, pray tell?

I was connected to several networks way back when. I was breaking no laws.

Ron Hunsinger wrote in message ...
>In article
><91E057FD4E69EAE9.A66EE2A9...@lp.airnews.net>,
>jmay...@conmicro.cx wrote:
>
>> Oh? Why, exactly, was legislation necessary? Why would the Internet not
have
>> sprang up as it did without it?
>
>Think about what an ISP does. For a fixed fee, they'll sell you access to a
>network they do not own and did not build. There were many who felt that
>should be illegal. Almost everyone agreed that it was illegal.
>
>The only way to make it legal was to pass legislation making it legal.
>Without that legislation, ISPs would not exist. (Or, if they did, they'd be
>acting only as agents for the nationally funded networks, able to provide
>access only to people who could justify their access to the satisfaction of
>said nationally funded networks.)
>
>The very best alternative we could hope for is a world-wide network
>patterned after the world-wide telephone system. Built by large carries,
>similar to the national phone companies, and billed in much the same way.
>Sure, you could reach a web page in Japan from your home in New Jersey. And
>it would cost you only 75 cents a minute.
>
>How big would The Internet be with that kind of cost barrier? Fortunately,
>we had the key legislation at just the right time to make access completely
>unrestricted (and therefore virtually free).
>
>-Ron Hunsinger


John Varela

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 10:06:25 AM9/5/00
to
On Sun, 3 Sep 2000 23:36:34, tho...@best.com (Thomas Andrews) wrote:

> There was no illegal fund-raiser at the Buddhist temple.

That's right, there was no controlling legal authority.

--
John "or something like that" Varela
for e-mail add a to my user ID

TheCentralSc...@pobox.com

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 10:32:09 AM9/5/00
to
On Tue, 05 Sep 2000 14:17:10 GMT, Roger Blake <rogg...@inamme.com> wrote:
>
>Frankly all we need to know about your boy Gore is contained in his
>own writings. He's just another big-government-loving, socialistic,
>jackbooted thug.
>
>The creep won't be getting my vote.

Planning on voting for the big-government-loving rightwing
sleeping-with-the-religious-right jackbooted thug?

Peter Seebach

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 12:05:36 PM9/5/00
to
In article <87vgwcm...@barrow.com>,
Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
>10,000 was insignificant. There were 300,000 computers on the
>Internet in 1990. Soon the number was in the millions. The
>explosive growth followed Al Gore's legislative changes to the
>legal environment in which the Internet could operate.

No, the explosive growth stayed on a good old-fashioned exponential curve.

AOL made the internet what it is today. If Al Gore had never done anything,
we would still have roughly the same network, with roughly the same kinds
of things on it.

Now, I'm not a big fan of AOL's level of user education, but it was companies
like AOL, or UUNet, that made the internet change. If the government had
refused to pass any laws, the companies would have done it anyway.

-s
--
Copyright 2000, All rights reserved. Peter Seebach / se...@plethora.net
C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
Consulting & Computers: http://www.plethora.net/

Peter Seebach

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 12:06:41 PM9/5/00
to
In article <87n1hpp...@barrow.com>,

Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
> "During my service in the United States Congress,
> I took the initiative in creating the Internet."

Which is total bullshit, because his actions had no effect on *creating*
it. He may have pushed for some changes, but he did not singlehandedly
cause them, and if he'd died before he ever heard of the Internet, nothing
significant would have changed.

Peter Seebach

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 12:08:25 PM9/5/00
to
In article <87snrhn...@barrow.com>,
Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
>The Internet that existed at that point was not The Internet that
>existed afterwards. *VERY* different things.

So? The Internet we have today and the Internet we'll have in ten years
are also "*VERY* different things".

Post hoc fallacy. You assume that, because Gore did something around
the time a change you noticed occurred, Gore was involved.

I would argue that the changes in the Internet forced politicians to begin
recognizing it and adapting to it. The Internet took the initiative in
changing Al Gore. :)

>For example, neither
>you nor I would be able to access the previous Internet in the same
>way we do today, by paying a fixed monthly fee to an ISP. It was
>illegal.

And it would have been impossible for companies to just build a for-profit
network? Bullshit.

Peter Seebach

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 12:10:32 PM9/5/00
to
In article <hnsngr-ya0231800...@news.pacbell.net>,

Ron Hunsinger <hns...@sirius.com> wrote:
>The only way to make it legal was to pass legislation making it legal.
>Without that legislation, ISPs would not exist. (Or, if they did, they'd be
>acting only as agents for the nationally funded networks, able to provide
>access only to people who could justify their access to the satisfaction of
>said nationally funded networks.)

Yes. CompuServe did not exist, because it obviously would have been illegal.

Sorry, but I don't buy it. The nationally funded networks were interesting
for research, but if they had been destroyed utterly, we would have built
something indistinguishable from the Internet anyway, because companies had
access to TCP/IP stacks.

Peter Seebach

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 12:11:56 PM9/5/00
to
In article <MTws5.5400$R87.137370@sjc-read>,
Thomas Andrews <tho...@best.com> wrote:
>I wonder if people would still be objecting of Gore had said:

> "As a member of Congress, I took the legislative initiative in
> creating the internet."

>It's almost exactly the same sentence - the word "legislative" is
>redundant with "as a member of Congress" - but it would be harder
>to snip and misrepresent.

I would, because I don't think his legislation was particularly crucial.
:)

Peter Seebach

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 12:13:41 PM9/5/00
to
In article <8oudv3$g...@weyl.math.psu.edu>,

Alexander Viro <vi...@weyl.math.psu.edu> wrote:
> * Gore used a buzzword without any idea of its meaning

That was my understanding, given that it had a copyright notice prohibiting
copying.

Oh, and he had the famous bit where there was a thing asking kids to submit
their parents' contact info and/or email addresses for his spam list. ;)

Alexandre Pechtchanski

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 12:32:50 PM9/5/00
to
On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 11:30:15 -0700, MC Choco <nav...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[ snip ]

>DARPA created it in the 50s. In other words, the Department of
>Defense.

And what, pray, is the sky color on your planet?
In the 50s, indeed. Using postal pigeons, I'm sure.

--
[ When replying, remove *'s from address ]
Alexandre Pechtchanski, Systems Manager, RUH, NY

H Dziardziel

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 12:44:52 PM9/5/00
to
On Sat, 2 Sep 2000 15:11:56 -0700 (PDT), q...@crazedgopher.edu (Quinn
Penn) wrote:

>Could you computer people help us political folks? The below quotes
>are being tossed about to prove that Al Gore was indeed instrumental
>in bringing about the Internet.
>
>What is the truth? Is Algore The Father of the Internet?
>
Presumably making Tipper the mother of the pc?

Jay Maynard

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 12:59:20 PM9/5/00
to
On Mon, 04 Sep 2000 20:54:07 -0700, Ron Hunsinger <hns...@sirius.com> wrote:
>Think about what an ISP does. For a fixed fee, they'll sell you access to a
>network they do not own and did not build. There were many who felt that
>should be illegal. Almost everyone agreed that it was illegal.

You assume that, absent such legislation, there would not have been a
competing, and open, network springing up. I'm not at all sure such an
assumption is valid.

Anne & Lynn Wheeler

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 1:11:14 PM9/5/00
to

se...@plethora.net (Peter Seebach) writes:
> AOL made the internet what it is today. If Al Gore had never done anything,
> we would still have roughly the same network, with roughly the same kinds
> of things on it.
>
> Now, I'm not a big fan of AOL's level of user education, but it was companies
> like AOL, or UUNet, that made the internet change. If the government had
> refused to pass any laws, the companies would have done it anyway.

also note that during the late '80s and early '90s ... the government
had switched to and was dictating OSI (GOSIP) ... not TCP/IP. The
government was attempting to replace use of TCP/IP with OSI
implementations which didn't have an internet layer and would have
stopped internet growth dead in its tracks.

randoms refs:

http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#0
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#59
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#16
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#43
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm


also most of the internet growth in the 80s was the availability of
LANs and the tcp/ip stack on workstations and PCs. Prior to that
point, internet had been mainframes and minicomputers with
point-to-point connections. The number of workstations and PCs far
outnumbered the number of mainframes and minicomputers that had been
the networking nodes.

random refs:

http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#38c

the internal corporate network (all mainframes) reached 1000 nodes at
least a year before the "internet":

http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#110

The internal corporate network (distinct from bitnet, earn, etc)
reached 2000 nodes about the same time the "internet" reached 1000
nodes.

After that there was an explosive growth in internet nodes ... not
because of the NSFNET1 backbone (which only directly interconnected a
rather trivial number of nodes), but because of LANs, workstations,
and PCs all showing in the internet configuration.

--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | ly...@garlic.com, finger for pgp key
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/

Robert Hill

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 1:15:47 PM9/5/00
to
gr...@apple2.com.invalid wrote in
<greg-4tbe49n...@news.binary.net>: [note followups]

>In alt.folklore.computers,
>in article <39B4232D...@earthlink.net>,
>Mark Hohn <ho...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Gore looking at Picture of George Washington once asked
>> "WHO is that?"
>
>And to whom did he ask that question? I can see a knowledgeable parent
>asking his young child that question. Context is important.
>

It was at Montecello(sp?) Jefferson's estate, on the day of the
inauguration. Clinton/Gore started the day there to taunt Jefersons
ghost and for the usual pap that we get from polititions. It was not
actually a painting of Washington, but several busts of various founding
fathers (that may have included Washington, it's been 8 years) The
person he was asking was I presume the curator or some local expert.
Clinton got a look on his face like I'm sure he gets whenever he hears
Hillary outside the oval office and started schooching out of camera
view.

To be fair, it was early in the morning, and Al had a big day. Rush made
a big deal out of it, as the media reaction was exactly zero. Had Quale
done something like this we could have expected the Tonight show so skip
any guests and just rip on Quale.

I figure the press was too busy covering the latest port of TECO to
linux.

--
Robert "On topic" Hill

Jim Stewart

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 1:56:51 PM9/5/00
to
Quinn Penn wrote:
>
> Could you computer people help us political folks? The below quotes
> are being tossed about to prove that Al Gore was indeed instrumental
> in bringing about the Internet.
>
> What is the truth? Is Algore The Father of the Internet?

Troll Detector off-scale, tongue-in-cheek reply mode enabled:

Oh hell yes. Not only did he invent the Internet, he wrote sendmail and
named, ported Bell Labs UNIX to a PDP-11 at Berkeley, and designed the
first packet switching hardware. He also appeared to Gordan Bell in a
dream and gave him the inspiration for the DEC VAX line of computers.

Bill Bonde

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 3:14:34 PM9/5/00
to

Peter Seebach wrote:
>
> In article <8oudv3$g...@weyl.math.psu.edu>,
> Alexander Viro <vi...@weyl.math.psu.edu> wrote:
> > * Gore used a buzzword without any idea of its meaning
>
> That was my understanding, given that it had a copyright notice prohibiting
> copying.
>

Open Source means that you can get it and change it. Would Gore mind if
I downloaded his website, changed stuff around to make him look bad and
then put it back up somewhere?

John Hendrickx

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 3:43:01 PM9/5/00
to
Gore wasn't the father of the internet, but didn he perhaps coin the term
"information superhighway"? It was the first time I ever heard of it at
least. There was an article in Byte back around 1993, to the effect that
the still largely academic internet at that time could be seen as a
prototype for this information superhighway, but that it was doomed to be
replaced by the far more sophisticated, great, cool, etc ISH. Of course
it could be that the article envisioned an ISH that was secure with a
formal organization, in which case their reasoning would have made good
sense. Still wrong though.

Floyd Davidson

unread,
Sep 5, 2000, 3:49:52 PM9/5/00
to
wolf...@w202zrz.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE (Wolfgang Schwanke) wrote:

>hns...@sirius.com (Ron Hunsinger) writes:
>>jmay...@conmicro.cx wrote:
>
>>> Oh? Why, exactly, was legislation necessary? Why would the
>>> Internet not have sprang up as it did without it?
>
>>Think about what an ISP does. For a fixed fee, they'll sell
>>you access to a network they do not own and did not
>>build. There were many who felt that should be illegal. Almost
>>everyone agreed that it was illegal.
>
>That's exactly the same thing phone companies do. According to
>what logic

That is not what "phone companies" do. If, for example, you
have a contract with a local telco to provide you with access to
the PSTN, and you use that access... each and every telco
involved gets paid for the time you spend using the circuits
provided. Your telco hands a long distance call off to a an LD
carrier of one type or another. The LD carrier charges you a
fee, and pays one to 1) the originating telco, 2) the
terminating telco, and 3) any other LD carrier whose facilities
are used in the process of connecting your call.

There are slight variations on that within different countries,
however that is basically also the way international calls are
handled.

Just imagine for one moment an Internet that worked the same
way! And then remember back in the mid-1980's when some people
proposed *exactly* that! Are we all glad that Al Gore was
listening to people like Vint Cerf instead of others?

>is it illegal? Since the Internet is not "owned" by anyone in any
>meaningfuly way, and was built by many different individuals and
>organisations, it's close to pointless to argue about that point.
>
>And illegal according to what country's laws anyway? (You
>_have_ noticed that this discussion is awfully US-centric,
>haven't you?) In my country, no laws had to "legalise" ISPs,
>they just sprang up. Nor did any US-specific funding issue
>influence the development of the net, because our part of the
>net is financed from different sources.

Generally I do have a problem with US-centricity, but in this
particular case it is a fact that the US is where the Internet
originated. If the US had not financed ARPANET and then NSFnet,
your Internet would not exist, period.

>BTW, who exactly is this Al Gore person? I understand he's some
>American politician, but why should he be so important for the
>world?

No reason at all.

>I was using the Internet in 1990 in Germany, long before I
>first heard his name, or before his alleged achievings could
>have made an impact.

Are you sure it really was the Internet? (A lot of people
posting on this subject have indicated a great deal of confusion
about which networks actually were the Internet at that time, so
you may or may not have been.) Regardless, by 1990 the impact
had already been significant (from actions 4-5 years past by
that time).