|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 05 2012 @ 02:42 AM EDT |
Steve Crocker invented RFCs.
That alone should have been worth a comment from PJ.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: whitehat on Sunday, August 05 2012 @ 04:55 AM EDT |
But industry tried to come up with better solutions. IBM
had SNA (System Network Architecture) to let different
systems communicate. DEC had something called NSA (if I
remember right), Honeywell had HDSA (Honeywell Distributed
Systems Architecture) and thermostats. Guess the thermostats
were not important here. The point is that nobody else
succeeded in creating a network, in which everybody could
participate. I think the computer vendors spent way more
money than the government, and conducted more international
conferences, but were unable to achieve
equivalent results.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 05 2012 @ 07:48 AM EDT |
And we all know how free good gooberment is.
Give or take a few trillion.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: squib on Sunday, August 05 2012 @ 08:03 AM EDT |
A naval historian may be able to add more weight to this than me but I think
'Governments' invented packet switching many times before. For instance: Back in
the days of sailing ships, many sank/got storm damaged/ etc., on route.
Therefore, if a monarch (king/queen) wanted to reliable communications to his
far off colonies/battle fleet etc., the scribes had to employ copyists to make
multiple copies, so that every ship destined to that area could carry the same
missive (old word for letter). If any ship had to stop by for repairs, it would
then send back a message to say, that its missive had been passed on to the
master of a another vessel heading that way. On final arrival, at its intended
destination, the recipient’s scriveners would post back details (with a
multiple copy reply) describing when which copies came, together with how.
Failure, of any one vessel to deliver the message was also very good feed back
to the powers that be, as to health and efficiency of the trade routes. These
ancient methods of communication across the empire seem to be quite the same
as what is known to day as packet switching. Even down to message
interception and false redirects to another web page. The point to note here, is
that the individual merchants on these routes where in competition with each
other and thus unlikely to collaborate with the possibility of giving their
competition an advantage, whereas 'state' missives were sealed and beyond their
eyes. The 'State' also had the resources to put such a complicated communication
system into effect. Historical accounts abound with comments such as “it was HMS
Xxxx that first bought news”... etc.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jjs on Sunday, August 05 2012 @ 09:07 AM EDT |
As described in "The Road Ahead" v1.0 (in V2.0 apparently
this original design never happened, instead Bill Gates
thought of this wonderful concept called the Internet. MS
history is like the old Soviet history - they keep it in 3
ring binders to make it easy to change).
---
(Note IANAL, I don't play one on TV, etc, consult a practicing attorney, etc,
etc)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: dio gratia on Sunday, August 05 2012 @ 05:02 PM EDT |
There are 82,969 U.S. patents mentioning "Ethernet" in the
Specification. There are 262,971 U.S. patents mentioning "Internet"
in the specification and 583,083 mentioning "network".
From this you could infer industry gave it's best shot at trying to stake out
the Internet. You could likely contemplate the necessity of cooperating to make
the Internet work stopped patent Armageddon, and that some number of the actions
we see are due to NPE's. A golden goose that industry managed not to cook due
to it's importance to too many companies.
There's probably an inverse relationship to the number of industry participants
and the likelihood of patent wars. The trough was rich enough for everyone to
feed from. Of course we see something different in an industry with fewer
players, like smart phones or aircraft (early in the previous century).
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 05 2012 @ 08:42 PM EDT |
The internet like almost every other usefull technology that has been developed
with government backing came from military research.
Why can the military get innovation right when every other government department
fails so badly at it.
One simple answer. The millitary is developing technologies for it's own use
may of which by pure coincidence are usefull for civilian applications.
Almost every other govenment agency backing tech development is working on tech
to foist on the rest of use to achive some goal that is ultimately political.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|