http://www.walthowe.com/navnet/history.html
Since the Internet was initially funded by the government, it was originally limited to research, education, and government uses. Commercial uses were prohibited unless they directly served the goals of research and education. This policy continued until the early 90's, when independent commercial networks began to grow. It then became possible to route traffic across the country from one commercial site to another without passing through the government funded NSFNet Internet backbone. On the other hand maybe the internet was, like talent is supposed to be, : "A gift of God" that is, until a sunstorm knocks it out. REH From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of D and N Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2011 5:27 PM To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION Subject: Re: [Futurework] Cryptocurrencies--Doing for Money What BitTorrent Did for Music Not only does cryptocurrency exhibit uncultured prejudice, it has no place for human (slave) services of any kind, unless one could stretch the new meaning of financial services. It still takes money to buy bitcoin, so it's building on an existing fiat concept, then making an exclusive club of its participants. Using the currency but once, to me, would infer that only the bitcoin originators are making money (profit). Perhaps I don't truly appreciate the concept. I agree with Ray about government, not private industry, being the best financial vehicle for public services. In BC, we're looking at 100% ferry services (fares) hikes, on top of several hikes in recent years since the service was supposedly privatized. The 12 year old provincial Liberal government sold off pretty much everything, including 100 year land leases to logging. The competition from private industry didn't help keep prices low, where the two were partnered, however. Government gives their private industry partners every opportunity to make huge profits, and have eroded public trust, resources, and whole sectors as a result. Below, Ray said: But the real Achilles heel for your article Mike is that: the internet itself is funded and kept available to everyone by the governments of the world. Without governments and funding the internet is also highly subject to piracy (hacking) all over the globe as well as to destruction by the electromagnetic forces of the universe which will at some point destroy the cheap satellites that the private sector refused to properly fund. Internet is made available by governments of the world? Not sure what is meant. CERN and the US gov't research connections may have developed it, but ISPs, like SHAW or Rogers, actually pay for the cables and satellites which make most of it possible since 1995. Which means we are making it possible. I know that most library info is courtesy of gov't funds, government info, some of the banking--but the latter for their convenience and profit, too. The only real involvement of government is licensing and control of content, when they're concerned. This proposed regulation makes for the government control of private industry, should government tighten up, which they will for the sake of homeland security and assurance of corporate secrecy. Yet, they won't do it where it's really needed, like on Wall Street. Natalia >From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Although the history of the Internet arguably begins in the 19th century with the invention of the telegraph <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegraph> system, the modern history of the Internet starts in the 1950s and 1960s with the development of computers <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer> . This began with point-to-point communication <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point-to-point_communication> between mainframe computers <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainframe_computers> and terminals <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_terminal> , expanded to point-to-point connections between computers and then early research into packet switching <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packet_switching> . Packet switched networks such as ARPANET <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET> , Mark I <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Davies> at NPL in the UK <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Physical_Laboratory_%28United_Kingdom %29> , CYCLADES <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CYCLADES> , Merit Network <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merit_Network> , Tymnet <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tymnet> , and Telenet <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telenet> , were developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s using a variety of protocols. The ARPANET in particular lead to the development of protocols for internetworking <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internetworking> , where multiple separate networks could be joined together into a network of networks. In 1982 the Internet Protocol Suite <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Protocol_Suite> (TCP/IP) was standardized and the concept of a world-wide network of fully interconnected TCP/IP networks called the Internet <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet> was introduced. Access to the ARPANET was expanded in 1981 when the National Science Foundation <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Foundation> (NSF) developed the Computer Science Network <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSNET> (CSNET) and again in 1986 when NSFNET <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSFNET> provided access to supercomputer <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercomputer> sites in the United States from research and education organizations. The ARPANET was decommissioned in 1990. Commercial internet service providers <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_service_providers> (ISPs) began to emerge in the late 1980s and 1990s and the Internet was commercialized in 1995 when NSFNET was decommissioned, removing the last restrictions on the use of the Internet to carry commercial traffic. Since the mid-1990s the Internet has had a drastic impact on culture and commerce, including the rise of near instant communication by electronic mail <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-mail> , text based discussion forums, and the World Wide Web <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web> . The research and education community continues to use advanced networks such as NSF's very high speed Backbone Network Service <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VBNS> (vBNS) and Internet2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet2> . Increasing amounts of data are transmitted at higher and higher speeds over fiber optic networks operating at 1-Gbps, 10-Gbps, or more. The Internet continues to grow, driven by ever greater amounts of online information and knowledge, by commerce and entertainment, and by social networking <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_networking> . On 5/21/2011 2:43 PM, Ray Harrell wrote: "Welfare systems have always been based on a lack of income, a lack of wealth, or both. So when you can't measure or inspect any of them, what do you do?" Falkvinge Your article Mike, is an interesting concept but the assumption in the article quoted above is based on an-uncultured prejudice against high intellect jobs that are essential public goods and cannot or will not be funded by a private marketplace. That is a foundational problem of the whole concept in my opinion. For example, R & D Space Programs will never be funded except by governments. It's not the private market that is developing the space station and the future of the human race but governments with a strong financial base. Take information products for another, there is not a single chip-fab laboratory that has been developed solely by the private sector and Nuclear Power would be a dead issue without public subsidies and liability protection. And of course there is CERN and the other cosmological science machines. In my experience, the private market can barely run a municipal transit system that is affordable by everyone. Perhaps we should try the "Donald" out for apprentice to public transit and see if his "genius" could solve the problem for the efficiency of NYCity. (The "popularity" of his potential entrance into the Presidency race made one pundit question the value of Democracy itself. :>))) But it's not so easy as the glib folks would make it seem. For crucial systems like public transit, NYCity has to use both public and private sectors to serve as competitors to keep both disciplined but of the two, the private sector would eventually cut out the poor just as the trains and airlines have done since there is no longer a communist competitor to have to be better than. Still either would make for a disaster for public transit and put NYCity's whole urban work system in danger. Another for example: The Congress refuses to turn all of the reins of government over to the people (public or private) of Washington, D.C. because both wealthy and poor would be joined in an unholy alliance that would hurt the third party, the National government. Of course the National government is lousy at local politics as well, so everyone gets screwed but the federal government keeps working on the sacrifices of the citizens who choose to live in D.C. What is it about system's thought that is so beyond the current intellectual fashion? This can be terminal. Consider the satellite system about which I will speak more below. The private sector is built on scarcity NOT on availability to all citizens. (What your article doesn't state is that citizens can hide their income already. All they have to do is bury it in a corporation and "own" nothing. The answer for rich folks before Reagan.) But apart from this "self-interested narcissistic American capitalist's legacy" it is only the government, and not the private sector, that has the resources to develop the complex identity and the future of the young of every American citizen. If the American rich had their way, only their children would be educated, except for vocational technology. It's no secret that the servant class is firmly in the wealthy's control of media and jobs as the unions lose their power and complex culture becomes too expensive for even the culture workers like myself. These Economic "prophets" are actively lobbying to destroy American colleges for the lower 98%, (just as they did for the complex Arts in the last century). They wrote a lot in the 1880s about how they were going to preserve culture for all Americans and then proceeded to deconstruct it throughout the last century as an act of "productivity." ("It's in the bible of the market!") In the 21st century they became the owners of the complex soul and identity of Western culture in America. (Same 2% since 1900.) Owners of the foundation (Arts) of a huge part of all brain development in every citizen in the nation. The acceptance of the economic bible's dictum that "anything unpaid is leisure" and that the "economic sector is the foundation of society" has solidified the dogmatic foundation of the wealthy's ownership of complex cultural products. They control the kind of product the nation will use and the amount. Is it conscious or just a result of the system? Well you might as well ask whether Beethoven or Picasso knew the rules of acoustics and light or whether they were just "born" to it. The latter is a dumb statement filled with dark motivations. In my fifty years of work in the private sector it is my experience that if the private sector or "local" politics had its way we would still have racial discrimination at lunch counters. Civil Rights was developed by governments and the bigger the government the better for the average citizen. The education and development of the public resources of complex identity are suppressed by the private sector in favor of the young of the wealthy. Only a just and competent governmental structure or a good parent aristocrat are good for the societal and human potential of the poor. That was true in the past and is still so today wherever it is found. Personally I prefer the good democratic government to the good parent. But the real Achilles heel for your article Mike is that: the internet itself is funded and kept available to everyone by the governments of the world. Without governments and funding the internet is also highly subject to piracy (hacking) all over the globe as well as to destruction by the electromagnetic forces of the universe which will at some point destroy the cheap satellites that the private sector refused to properly fund. Properly funded government programs are the most efficient programs to protect satellites from the universe and from the Private Sector that would privatize the internet and eliminate the talented poor who would outcompete their untalented folks like the "Donald" (Trump) who would be hopeless without a capital base. ("Midline Mediocrity") I'm afraid that when it comes to thinking about the whole human potential and its necessity and development for a real legacy, the shallowness of the thinking on this website is beyond belief. Only surpassed by the shallowness of current economic systems thinking by religious prophets from the bible belt. That was not a swipe at Mike G. or any of the others who grasp the issues of community and the efficiency of human equality and potential, nor the real folks concerned with the process of legacy; however, the issues of cultural development as human potential and societal capital in a very dangerous universe has barely been scratched by any of us on this list. Remember years ago when some so called "futurists" on this list, were offended when I brought up the problem of dangers from space and natural catastrophes. Now it's all over the internet and no one thinks it's weird. I'm afraid society's leaders still believe the problem is "enemies and enemy systems" when the real problem is survival in a world filled with future real catastrophes as we just witnessed in Japan or with a New York HIV infected hotel maid in a fancy suite with a stupid world banker. I certainly don't equate the two in effect but the principle of ignoring nature and good sense is apparent in both cases. A failure of culture, government, human spirituality and intellect. I tend to think that Madam Butterfly's answer to disaster would have prevented these disasters in both cases. Ritual suicide would have given them both reason to think before they built an inadequate sea wall or made a poor choice of where they put their most valuable assets. As this cultural and spiritual failure effects all of us, we should all feel humiliated by that failure. Instead we miss the point of the fool who truly does sense impending disaster but relies upon a "thousands of years old book" as a manual for future events and predicts the end of the world in fifteen minutes at 6 this evening. Our minds and senses should be better. We argue about whether it's a cold or hot catastrophe but miss the point that either is a disaster that will kill millions and destroy our way of life. It's just too strange to believe. REH -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Gurstein Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 9:37 PM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: [Futurework] Cryptocurrencies--Doing for Money What BitTorrent Did for Music http://falkvinge.net/2011/05/19/the-information-policy-case-for-flat-tax-and -basic-income/ http://www.bitcoin.org/ _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
