3 ms·

The internet is a network of networks. Nobody claims DARPA invented sending signals over wires, or even computer networks. Then DARPA contribution was literal

by zepto 5y ago

The internet is a network of networks. Nobody claims DARPA invented sending signals over wires, or even computer networks. Then DARPA contribution was literally to work out how to connect separate networks together into a practical wide area network. The internet is a network of networks. We would of course have had one in some form. The one we have is based on DARPA’s.

WalterBright 5y ago
> The one we have is based on DARPA’s. I know that. My point is to point out that government funding was not the key to the internet. The two keys to the internet are computers and wires (going back to the telegraphy system). > Then DARPA contribution was literally to work out how to connect separate networks together into a practical wide area network. That was also invented several times. They were often called "gateways" at the time.
- zepto 5y ago
  What darpa did was a lot more that ‘gateways’. As for government funding not being key. I’m not sure we can say either way. It certainly was key to what we ended up with. We’d have had some kind of internet in any case, but who knows what it would have looked like and what kind of tollbooths etc would have been set up on it had the model been different.
  - WalterBright 5y ago
    > What darpa did was a lot more that ‘gateways’. What a gateway does is connect two different protocols - just what gave it the name "inter"net. > had the model been different Indeed nobody can know the details of what might have been. But consider operating systems. Capitalism has delivered a free one that is arguably very, very good. Linux, if that's not obvious :-) Who could have predicted that? Capitalism also produced very high quality software that goes with it, for free. It's possible we would have had something better than the internet protocol. For example, one that is completely decentralized and not dependent on a central authority to manage things like domain names and assign IP addresses. For example, GUIDs could be used instead. Are you sure that the current internet protocol is the best system? Or is it just that the internet protocol won out because it had a head start in the universities? For another example of a fault in the internet protocol, say I go to google.com. It fails. What's at fault - the browser, the network card, the cable, the router, tje cable modem, the cable to the house, the ISP, or google's server? There appears to be no way to know, or at least in 25 years of using the internet it's still a matter of poking around the system in my house, rebooting the router, phoning the ISP to see if they know of a failure, etc. All I get is a screen saying it didn't work.
    - zepto 5y ago
      > Capitalism has delivered a free one that is arguably very, very good. Linux, if that's not obvious :-) Who could have predicted that? Linus was at a free public university with free healthcare and the state supporting his living expenses when he created Linux. About as far from capitalism as you can get. > Capitalism also produced very high quality software that goes with it, for free. I like capitalism and defend it often, however I think that investment matters, regardless of whether it comes from the state or private sources. > It's possible we would have had something better than the internet protocol. Yes, or it’s possible we’d have a closed system run by a giant company.
      - WalterBright 5y ago
        > Linus was at a free public university with free healthcare and the state supporting his living expenses when he created Linux. About as far from capitalism as you can get. That's a pretty hard stretch there. The university did not finance Linux, it financed his education. Linus could just as well have partied instead. Free healthcare is nice, but for the vast majority of 20 year olds, very little healthcare is needed.
        zepto 5y ago
        > The university did not finance Linux, A strawman which nobody has claimed. > it financed his education. It financed whatever he wanted to do as part of his education. > Linus could just as well have partied instead. As you must surely agree, having made this statement. > Free healthcare is nice, but for the vast majority of 20 year olds, very little healthcare is needed. Sure, ignore the part where they paid his living expenses. The point is that Linus was financed by the state, and Linux was obviously not an entrepreneurial project. Claiming it is somehow a triumph of ‘capitalism’ is spurious at best. iOS is a triumph of capitalism. For what it’s worth, I think both iOS and Linux are good things in the world. I just don’t see how Linux is evidence of anything capitalistic.

by zepto 5y ago

WalterBright 5y ago

> The one we have is based on DARPA’s. I know that. My point is to point out that government funding was not the key to the internet. The two keys to the internet are computers and wires (going back to the telegraphy system). > Then DARPA contribution was literally to work out how to connect separate networks together into a practical wide area network. That was also invented several times. They were often called "gateways" at the time.

zepto 5y ago
What darpa did was a lot more that ‘gateways’. As for government funding not being key. I’m not sure we can say either way. It certainly was key to what we ended up with. We’d have had some kind of internet in any case, but who knows what it would have looked like and what kind of tollbooths etc would have been set up on it had the model been different.
- WalterBright 5y ago
  > What darpa did was a lot more that ‘gateways’. What a gateway does is connect two different protocols - just what gave it the name "inter"net. > had the model been different Indeed nobody can know the details of what might have been. But consider operating systems. Capitalism has delivered a free one that is arguably very, very good. Linux, if that's not obvious :-) Who could have predicted that? Capitalism also produced very high quality software that goes with it, for free. It's possible we would have had something better than the internet protocol. For example, one that is completely decentralized and not dependent on a central authority to manage things like domain names and assign IP addresses. For example, GUIDs could be used instead. Are you sure that the current internet protocol is the best system? Or is it just that the internet protocol won out because it had a head start in the universities? For another example of a fault in the internet protocol, say I go to google.com. It fails. What's at fault - the browser, the network card, the cable, the router, tje cable modem, the cable to the house, the ISP, or google's server? There appears to be no way to know, or at least in 25 years of using the internet it's still a matter of poking around the system in my house, rebooting the router, phoning the ISP to see if they know of a failure, etc. All I get is a screen saying it didn't work.
  - zepto 5y ago
    > Capitalism has delivered a free one that is arguably very, very good. Linux, if that's not obvious :-) Who could have predicted that? Linus was at a free public university with free healthcare and the state supporting his living expenses when he created Linux. About as far from capitalism as you can get. > Capitalism also produced very high quality software that goes with it, for free. I like capitalism and defend it often, however I think that investment matters, regardless of whether it comes from the state or private sources. > It's possible we would have had something better than the internet protocol. Yes, or it’s possible we’d have a closed system run by a giant company.
    - WalterBright 5y ago
      > Linus was at a free public university with free healthcare and the state supporting his living expenses when he created Linux. About as far from capitalism as you can get. That's a pretty hard stretch there. The university did not finance Linux, it financed his education. Linus could just as well have partied instead. Free healthcare is nice, but for the vast majority of 20 year olds, very little healthcare is needed.
      - zepto 5y ago
        > The university did not finance Linux, A strawman which nobody has claimed. > it financed his education. It financed whatever he wanted to do as part of his education. > Linus could just as well have partied instead. As you must surely agree, having made this statement. > Free healthcare is nice, but for the vast majority of 20 year olds, very little healthcare is needed. Sure, ignore the part where they paid his living expenses. The point is that Linus was financed by the state, and Linux was obviously not an entrepreneurial project. Claiming it is somehow a triumph of ‘capitalism’ is spurious at best. iOS is a triumph of capitalism. For what it’s worth, I think both iOS and Linux are good things in the world. I just don’t see how Linux is evidence of anything capitalistic.