The First Fifty Years Of The Internet
from the as-written-by-the-winners dept
Paul Kedrosky points us to an article in the latest issue of Vanity Fair recounting the first fifty years of the internet's history by assembling a bunch of the people who were involved in different stages from conception right up until today, and getting them to talk about it. As Kedrosky notes, there are a few small problems with it (most notably, it's very much history as written by the "winners" leaving out quite a bit and perhaps "enhancing" some stories a bit), but overall it's a fantastic and fun read full of great quotes.The more recent stuff in the article doesn't add much, but there's a great discussion of the early years, where there are even a few themes that may sound familiar around here -- including the idea that multiple people seem to come up with the same ideas at the same time. For example, the article notes that both Paul Baran and Donald Davies entirely independently came up with the idea of packet-switched networks, and one of Baran's quotes in the article is:
"I get credit for a lot of things I didn't do. I just did a little piece on packet switching and I get blamed for the whole goddamned Internet, you know? Technology reaches a certain ripeness and the pieces are available and the need is there and the economics look good -- it's going to get invented by somebody."It's Stigler's Law all over again.
Somewhat related to that is the interesting tidbit about how CERN originally wanted to patent the World Wide Web, until Tim Berners-Lee talked them out of it (as recounted by Robert Cailliau):
"At one point CERN was toying with patenting the World Wide Web. I was talking about that with Tim one day, and he looked at me, and I could see that he wasn't enthusiastic. He said, Robert, do you want to be rich? I thought, Well, it helps, no? He apparently didn't care about that. What he cared about was to make sure that the thing would work, that it would just be there for everybody. He convinced me of that, and then I worked for about six months, very hard with the legal service, to make sure that CERN put the whole thing in the public domain."Imagine how different the world would be if the Web were patented early on? It almost certainly would have massively stunted development.
Also, amusingly, from multiple people early in the piece, AT&T plays the roll of the clueless big company who wants nothing more than to kill the internet and keep its monopoly:
Paul Baran: The one hurdle packet switching faced was AT&T. They fought it tooth and nail at the beginning. They tried all sorts of things to stop it. They pretty much had a monopoly in all communications. And somebody from outside saying that there’s a better way to do it of course doesn’t make sense. They automatically assumed that we didn’t know what we were doing.AT&T trying to kill the internet, not seeing the business opportunity and insisting things could never work (when they obviously did)? That all sounds mighty familiar...
Bob Taylor: Working with AT&T would be like working with Cro-Magnon man. I asked them if they wanted to be early members so they could learn technology as we went along. They said no. I said, Well, why not? And they said, Because packet switching won't work. They were adamant. As a result, AT&T missed out on the whole early networking experience.
....
Bob Kahn: Let me put it into perspective. So here we are when there are very few time-sharing systems anywhere in the world. AT&T probably said, Look, maybe we would have 50 or a hundred organizations, maybe a few hundred organizations, that could possibly partake of this in any reasonable time frame. Remember, the personal computer hadn't been invented yet. So, you had to have these big expensive mainframes in order to do anything. They said, There's no business there, and why should we waste our time until we can see that there's a business opportunity?
....
Bob Metcalfe: Imagine a bearded grad student being handed a dozen AT&T executives, all in pin-striped suits and quite a bit older and cooler. And I'm giving them a tour. And when I say a tour, they're standing behind me while I'm typing on one of these terminals. I'm traveling around the Arpanet showing them: Ooh, look. You can do this. And I'm in U.C.L.A. in Los Angeles now. And now I'm in San Francisco. And now I'm in Chicago. And now I'm in Cambridge, Massachusetts -- isn't this cool? And as I'm giving my demo, the damned thing crashed.
And I turned around to look at these 10, 12 AT&T suits, and they were all laughing. And it was in that moment that AT&T became my bete noire, because I realized in that moment that these sons of bitches were rooting against me.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bob kahn, bob metcalfe, bob taylor, history, internet, paul baran, tim berners-lee
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Ah, the stupidity of AT&T's suits
However, the refusal of AT&T to see the full potential of Unix and the enormous market it could create led to licensing disputes...which led in turn to the search for alternatives....the most well-known of which of course is Linux, which is presently exploiting a good chunk of that same enormous market. Had AT&T had the vision to grasp what it held in its hands -- not just Unix, but the incredible resources of the people behind it -- then there might be no Linux and AT&T might be reaping considerable rewards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I imagine the WWW would have met the same fate as the Gopher protocol, which dominated prior to the WWW but was killed because its creator demanded licensing fees from users.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AT&T
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
horseshit from the master of demagogy
e-commerce is impossibe without reliable data encryption technology
The idea of public key cryptography and RSA algorithm were stories of the Patent System success ( ignore all the shitty lies Mikey will tell you)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: horseshit from the master of demagogy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: horseshit from the master of demagogy
the RSA patent expired back in 2001 so now it is free for you indeed punk
opensource monkeys haven't invented anything new
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: horseshit from the master of demagogy
No one, not even Mikey, thinks that all patents are bad. However, it does not follow that merely because some are good, that all are good.
And by the way, your dogmatic defense of patents is more out of touch with reality than Mikey's critique of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: horseshit from the master of demagogy
Of course, most ecommerce is conducted using open-source tools -- the Apache web server, shopping sites built with perl, python and PHP, and oh yes -- the OpenSSL encryption libraries. I'm sure this was an accidental oversight on your part.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: horseshit from the master of demagogy
You really think people are going to mostly stop buying and selling things over internet-like worldwide communication networks? Why would that happen? Or do you have some other definition of e-commerce?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: horseshit from the master of demagogy
Ecommerce generates considerable interest, publicity and arguably revenue; but it is a relatively unimportant aspect of the Internet -- it just happens to be one of those involving money, which is unfortunately how some people of limited perception solely assess value. Those equipped with superior insight realize that this is but one way to assess value, and not a terribly important or meaningful one at that. They recognize that other uses of the 'net (for instance: personal communication) have been and continue to be far more numerous and significant.
Ecommerce is just another marketplace, nothing more. But other things -- for instance, the rise of citizen journalism -- are far more interesting and important in the long run.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: horseshit from the master of patent trolling
angry dude wrote:
Except that the RSA patent was only ever valid in the US, while much of the growth in the Internet since the introduction of e-commerce has happened outside the US.
Notice the connection?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
clueless suits
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: clueless suits
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Come on little morons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Come on little morons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Come on little morons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.custompcmax.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
50?!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 50?!
You appear to have zero knowledge, understanding, or even the slightest comprehension of how the internet works today, and what technology it is based on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wow
Mind you, how old is the internet as we know it today? Can't have happened much before the mid-90's...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why is that head shaped imprint on my desk?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
50 years ago
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
no, it really isn't 50
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
agree
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the internet is definitely not 50
[ link to this | view in chronology ]