Slashdot Mirror
World of Ends
epeus writes "At World of Ends, Doc Searls and David Weinberger explain the End-to-End nature of the internet in terms so clear even your manager could understand them. 'The Internet isn't complicated. The Internet isn't a thing. It's an agreement. The Internet is stupid. Adding value to the Internet lowers its value.' and so forth."
So what I will say is that this has got to be one of the most confusing, yet clear topics I've read on /. in a long time.
8. "No one owns it.
Everyone can use it.
Anyone can improve it."
4. "Adding value to the Internet lowers its value."
So the Internet is destined to fail?
I hope he goes for a real-world case study -- the end to end transfer of a given porn movie. Definetely something your manager can read and relate to, plus it gives you an easy springboard onto such topics as average throughput, burst transmissions, etc :)
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Because (at least by the writeup) it sounds like they're delivering some sort of Zen-style analysis from within a cloud of blue smoke. How well does the sound of a hand stream over the Internet?
What I will say is that this has got to be one of the most confusing, yet clear first posts I've read on /. in a long time.
OOOOoommmmmmmmmm...OOOommmmmmmmmmmmm - Ooooooommmmmmmmmmm
Oy, its time to go home :/
Oh God I missed the "of" at first.
Heaven help us. I found out about Armageddon on slashdot.
---
in terms so clear even your manager could understand them
You greatly under estimate the power of the dork side.
---
Reality is for people who lack imagination.
Ah, silly me.
--- Ban humanity.
So should I sell my internet stock... or what?
"The Internet isn't complicated. The Internet isn't a thing. It's an agreement. The Internet is stupid. Adding value to the Internet lowers its value."
Looks like John Katz is back!
my beautiful friend...
wow, now that the internet is at an end, does it means we'll have to scale back to AOL and Compuserve and MSN?
That'd be fine for me if their servers have the security of Uplink mainframes..
That comment was delicious, like a newborn baby
"Adding value to the Internet lowers its value."
internet + 5 = internet - 5?
the public needs to be made aware of these important facts about the Internet, and how being end-to-end and "dumb" is where its value lies.
Does anyone really consider the internet to be just slow TV? I thought that idea went out 3 years ago. Even my grandparents are googling for information when they have a medical problem or want more info about something they saw on TV. They do not think of the Internet as slow TV.
Very popular slashdot journal for adul
The finalists for the 2003 Neville Chamberlain Appeasement Prize were announced in Baghdad IRAQ by President-for-Life Saddam Hussein. And they are:
1) Russia
2) Germany
3) Turkey
4) and 20 time winner...France.
The gutless Frogs remain the odds on favourite to win this cowardly prize.
So you are using an OC3 line as well? Very well... your schwartz is as big as mine...
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Despite this article's annoying use of absolutes (I know, I know, they're effective, but I hate it when people write an article as if its the last thing that will ever be written on that subject), they're mostly right. Think about it. We can do more on the Net now than 5 years ago, despite the best efforts of the RIAA, MPAA, US Govt, and pretty much every corporate interest out there. I have a feeling this will continue into the future, too.
Karma: pi (Mostly due to circular reasoning in posts).
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
g_______________________________________________g
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>__\___|____o
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>__|__/____a
t_______/\_|___C_____)/Insert\_(_____>__|_/_____t
s______/_/\|___C_____)__Cock_|__(___>___/__\____s
e_____|___(____C_____)\_Here_/__//__/_/_____\___e
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_e_x_*_
Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.
Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.
Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.
Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.
seriously :)
Consensus is good, but informed dictatorship is better
Someone talking about the internet and actually making sense doing it....we can't have that!
Someone who realizes that it is what it is and can't be bent to everyone and their brothers whims...
My thought has always been that the Internet is Chaos and it works best that way....
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
Oh God I missed the "of" at first.
Yep, you're definetely qualified to be the new slashdot editor
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Well, I tend to disagree. It tends to make people stupid though, and it's hellishly smart at that as well. Just look at this place :-)
No, you're stupid, you big stupid!
Signed,
The Internet
PS: I'm rubber you're glue
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Well then it's obviously an evil thing made by godless evil-doers that promotes terrorism...probably communism too, corrupts our children, and will bring an end to freedom loving people everywhere. But if we act fast to privatize it we'll all be saved.
RMS = Repetitive Mistake Syndrome
"We have nothing to lose but our stupidity"
smile, it makes everyone else wonder what you're up to
Clarity is certainly a quality one would wish an article to have, but this particular article appears to vastly over-simplify the subject at hand. It offers the reader a few wide reaching statements, which basically amount to precepts, and those, for some strange reason, I generally find obscene. To me, the article simply sounds like a repetition of a set of proverbs and nothing more.
I wonder if Al Gore realized this when he invented it...
[n8.r0n] http://petesweb.spymac.net/
We had a great working title for the project though:
The Internet: Triumph of the Commons.
foldplay your photos won't know what hit them.
This reminds me why the original MSN failed and Yahoo succeeded. Microsoft wanted to control the content providers (making them use its own proprietary tools), while yahoo used HTTP and HTML.
Sure, absolute control might mean they can offer more features, but absolute control also means everyone can't play. The file format of Microsoft Word was closed, and so it is hard to write programs which understand it. Microsoft gets richer, but users can't get their own data. Finally, when Microsoft sees there is no other big driver to get users to upgrade, they open up their file formats.
The internet succeeded because of its simplicity, and because of HTML and HTTP. Almost anyone can serve HTTP. And write some sort of HTML. The protocols are simple and well documented.
It's Humpty Dumpty logic:
--
Paul
Humpty Dumpty was wrong
Paul "Say no to feeping creaturism"
To me this article just points out what I feel is very obvious, both to me and to everyone else.
Nothing new about it.
But if it's so damn obvious, why do people still make these mistakes?
Because the mistakes made aren't mistakes from a first-person-perspective, but they ARE from a third.
wtf? my 2cents...
when we hit the singularity and the oosphere becomes sentinent, because part of it is made up of /. , it's gonna be a troll. With a taste for tentacle rape.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
A lot of people thought that the whole purpose of the industrial revolution was to use inventions like the cotton-gin to expand their plantations for unlimited controll and profits. While most people saw the invention as a great tool to end slavery, for others it was impossible to think of wealth in any other terms other than the size of a plantation, a farm, or estates. These people pushed slavery controlls to the point of civil war and were responsible for the deaths of millions.
I think today we have the same problem with "intellectual properties". It is impossible for people to think of wealth in any other terms than the number and amount of industires and people they can extract royalties from. It is impossible for them to understand that properties are not just about government edicts, or personal incentive, but natural forces - like everyone not being able to use the same thing at the same time. Well, with information - they can. And that is the real value of the internet.
Once again someone tries to back their own hippy values with an oversimplification of the 'NET'
In manager speak value=money.
:"Internet is stupid".
From rule 6 and 4 , money moves to suburbs and adding value to internet lowers its value. So the suburbs have real low value. Now rule 5 says All of internets money grows on its edges, again edges=suburbs . So rule 4 and 6 together contradict rule 5.
So if all these rules hold at once, Internet is real complicated, hence rule 1: "Internet is simple" is false.
So only rule 2 holds
.ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
slashdot would still be up all day long - maybe without comments enabled. ^_^
Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
The "attempting to add value decreases the value" theme was very well explored in a paper called "Rise of the Stupid Network." It's at: http://www.rageboy.com/stupidnet.html
It explains very well why networks should only get data from one place to another while doing nothing else.
A coworker just bet me it would be less than an hour before this post was marked as a troll since I'm an unregistered user. I think it will be marked as a flame, because it's on-topic.
Iraq border fence cut - U.N.
UNITED NATIONS (CNN) --U.S. Marines have violated the demilitarized zone between Kuwait and Iraq in the past two days and several breaches in the electric border fence have been made, according to the United Nations.
The development comes as chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix prepares to report Friday to the Security Council on Iraqi disarmament efforts.
About 100,000 U.S. and British troops are in Kuwait preparing for a possible air and ground attack on Iraq to dismantle its alleged weapons of mass destruction. Iraq denies it has any such weapons.
U.S. President George W. Bush said Thursday he had not yet decided whether to invade Iraq, but he added that U.N. Security Council members would decide in a matter of days whether they would join the United States in forcibly disarming the country. (Full story)
CNN's Martin Savidge in Kuwait City said the operations in the demilitarized zone (DMZ) could be scouting missions for any U.S. military action against Iraq.
CNN's Gordon Robison Friday reported from the edge of the DMZ that he witnessed two U.S. military Humvees pull several hundred meters into the zone and park. Robison said the occupants were upset that a CNN camera crew was present and videotaping them, and soon departed the area.
U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard said Thursday: "UNIKOM has reported numerous violations of the demilitarized zone between Iraq and Kuwait since the 4th of March by personnel in civilian clothes in 4X4 vehicles, at least some of whom were armed, and identified themselves as U.S. Marines."
U.S. military spokesmen in Kuwait had no immediate comment on the UNIKOM report, Reuters reported. The Kuwaiti mission to the U.N. said it was not aware of the story but downplayed its significance.
UNIKOM, the U.N. Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission, was established in 1991 after a U.S.-led coalition ejected Iraqi occupation troops from Kuwait in the 1991 Gulf War. Its job is to monitor the demilitarized zone and to "deter border violations and report any hostile action," according to the U.N.
Because of the activity, a U.N. official in Kuwait told CNN, UNIKOM forces inside the DMZ have requested permission to elevate their alert status from amber, which is level 2, to red, also known as level 3. At level 4, U.N. observers would be removed from the DMZ.
Wednesday, UNIKOM observed three breaches that had been cut in the electric fence erected by the government of Kuwait along the border with Iraq in a sector of the demilitarized zone, Eckhard said.
But according to the U.N. official in Kuwait, the Kuwaitis have opened between 10 and 15 gaps -- some up to 300 meters (328 yards) wide -- in the electrified fence inside the DMZ, and that marks for a total of about 30 have been made. The process began Wednesday and is ongoing, the official said.
Technically, if U.S. troops go through breaches in the demilitarized zone fence to enter Iraq from the south, they would be in violation of Security Council rules and it would be reported to the U.N.
By U.N. mandate, no military activity, other than police presence by Iraq and Kuwait, can take place in the DMZ.
U.S. officials said this scenario was not a problem, because if there is a war with Iraq, it would be a justified attack due to Iraq's treatment of Kuwait in the past and any possible mistreatment in the future.
The U.N. said if there is a violation of the demilitarized zone, it gets reported through a Kuwaiti liaison officer and a similar counterpart on the Iraqi side. The Security Council was informed of the incident Thursday.
Kuwaiti officials said there was construction under way on the Kuwaiti side of the demilitarized zone and it encroached on the fence, Eckhard said.
A spokesman for the Kuwaiti Defense Ministry told CNN while he had no comment on the reports of gaps in the fence, he claimed the structure is entirely within Kuwaiti territory, was constructed by Kuwait, and therefore any modifications to it by Kuwait would be legal.
-- CNN's Richard Roth, Martin Savidge and Liz Neisloss contributed to this report
Bush says he won't leave U.S. at Saddam's mercy
From John King
CNN Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON (CNN) --Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has "no intention of disarming" and presents a direct threat to the United States that must be confronted -- with or without U.N. approval, President Bush said Thursday.
"The risk of doing nothing, the risk of hoping that Saddam Hussein changes his mind and becomes a gentle soul, the risk that somehow inaction will make the world safer, is a risk I'm not willing to take for the American people," Bush said in his prime-time news conference.
"My job is to protect America, and that's what I'm going to do," he said. "I believe Saddam Hussein is a threat to the American people. I believe he's a threat to the neighborhood in which he lives.... I take the threat seriously, and I'll deal with the threat."
Bush stopped short of saying he's decided to take military action against Iraq, and said he still hopes a confrontation can be avoided. However, the president described diplomatic efforts to end the crisis as being in their "last phase," and at times he appeared openly skeptical that war could be averted.
"I wish that Saddam Hussein had listened to the demands of the world and disarmed. That was my hope," he said. "I hope we don't have to go to war. But if we go to war, we will disarm Iraq. And if we go to war, there will be a regime change."
"I know we'll prevail, and out of that disarmament of Saddam will come a better world, particularly for the people who live in Iraq."
Bush also said the United States will push next week for a vote on a new U.N. Security Council resolution, finding Iraq in breach of previous disarmament resolutions, even if it's clear there are not enough votes for it to pass.
"It's time for people to show their cards, let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam."
France, Russia and China, all permanent Security Council members with veto power, have expressed opposition to the resolution, along with Germany, a non-permanent council member. Administration officials had been hinting they might pull the resolution prior to a vote, rather than see it defeated.
Bush also made it clear that though the United States would prefer to work through the United Nations, he is ready and willing to take military action, even if the world body balks.
"I'm confident the American people understand that when it comes to our security, if we need to act, we will act. And we really don't need United Nations approval to do so," he said. "When it comes to our security, we really don't need anybody's permission."
But Bush also said that "when it's all said and done," the United States will have significant international support.
"If we have to use force, a lot of nations will be with us," he said.
The president expressed skepticism that giving U.N. weapons inspectors more time to do their work might lead to disarmament of Iraq, diffusing the crisis without war.
He said that while Saddam was allowing U.N. inspectors to destroy some missiles, the Iraqi president had ordered the production of new missiles. Bush also accused Iraqi operatives of moving biological and chemical agents around once or twice a day and even hiding them inside cars parked in residential neighborhoods to avoid detection.
"If the Iraqi regime were disarming, we would know it, because we would see it. Iraq's weapons would be presented to the inspectors, and the world would witness their destruction," he said. "Instead, with the world demanding disarmament, and more than 200,000 troops positioned near his country, Saddam Hussein's response is to produce a few weapons for show, while he hides the rest and builds even more."
"Inspection teams do not need more time or more personnel. All they need is what they have never received -- the full cooperation of the Iraqi regime."
On Friday, chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix will report to the Security Council on the progress of the inspection process. Bush said Blix needs "to answer a single question -- has the Iraqi regime fully and unconditionally disarmed
Making his case for the danger Saddam poses to the American people, Bush said he believes Iraq could provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists wanting to attack the United States, as they did on September 11, 2001.
"The price of doing nothing exceeds the price of taking action if we have to," he said. "The cost of the attacks on America on September 11th were enormous. They were significant. And I'm not willing to take that chance again."
But he also reiterated statements made in a speech last week that he believes a post-Saddam Iraq, with democratic institutions, could "serve as a catalyst for change" in the Middle East.
The president said that U.N. inspectors, aid workers and journalists inside Iraq would be warned and given a change to leave before any military action begins.
Bush also praised the cooperative efforts that led to the recent capture of al Qaeda operations chief, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and said, "We must smoke these al Qaeda types out one at a time."
When asked about North Korea, he said he was concerned about the Communist country developing nuclear weapons because it may choose to use them or sell them to dictators who might use them "to impose their will on the world."
The president said the United Nations, China, Russia, Japan and South Korea were all discussing the matter and he was hopeful for a diplomatic solution.
Dumb companies will get smart or die. Stupid laws will be killed or replaced.
I'd really like to believe this, but then I look at corporate welfare(often the saving of dumb companies) and I look at the laws being passed by people completing out of touch(Napster's not a glamorized FTP program! It's criminal, not sharing!(Or maybe sharing is criminal!))
It's kind of depressing.
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
A French company has been selling spare parts to Iraq for its fighter jets and military helicopters during the past several months, according to U.S. intelligence officials.
The unidentified company sold the parts to a trading company in the United Arab Emirates, which then shipped the parts through a third country into Iraq by truck.
The spare parts included goods for Iraq's French-made Mirage F-1 jets and Gazelle attack helicopters.
An intelligence official said the illegal spare-parts pipeline was discovered in the past two weeks and that sensitive intelligence about the transfers indicates that the parts were smuggled to Iraq as recently as January.
Other intelligence reports indicate that Iraq had succeeded in acquiring French weaponry illegally for years, the official said.
The parts appear to be included in an effort by the Iraqi military to build up materiel for its air forces before any U.S. military action, which could occur before the end of the month.
The officials identified the purchaser of the parts as the Al Tamoor Trading Co., based in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. A spokesman for the company could not be reached for comment.
The French military parts were then sent by truck into Iraq from a neighboring country the officials declined to identify.
Iraq has more than 50 Mirage F-1 jets and an unknown number of Gazelle attack helicopters, according to the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.
An administration official said the French parts transfers to Iraq may be one reason France has so vehemently opposed U.S. plans for military action against Iraq. "No wonder the French are opposing us," this official said.
The official, however, said intelligence reports of the parts sale did not indicate that the activity was sanctioned by the French government or that Paris knows about the transfers.
The intelligence reports did not identify the French company involved in selling the aircraft parts or whether the parts were new or used.
The Mirage F-1 was made by France's Dassault Aviation. Gazelle helicopters were made by Aerospatiale, which later became part of a consortium of European defense companies.
The importation of military goods by Iraq is banned under U.N. Security Council resolutions passed since the 1991 Persian Gulf war.
Nathalie Loiseau, press counselor at the French Embassy, said her government has no information about the spare-parts smuggling and has not been approached by the U.S. government about the matter.
"We fully comply with the U.N. sanctions, and there is no sale of any kind of military material or weapons to Iraq," she said.
A CIA spokesman had no comment.
A senior administration official declined to discuss Iraq's purchase of French warplane and helicopter parts. "It is well known that the Iraqis use front companies to try to obtain a number of prohibited items," the official said.
The disclosure comes amid heightened anti-French sentiment in the United States over Paris' opposition to U.S. plans for using force to disarm Iraq.
A senior defense official said France undermined U.S. efforts to disarm Iraq last year by watering down language of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 that last fall required Iraq to disarm all its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs.
France, along with Russia, Germany and China, said yesterday that they would block a joint U.S.-British U.N. resolution on the use of force against Iraq.
French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin told reporters in Paris on Wednesday that France "will not allow a resolution to pass that authorizes resorting to force."
"Russia and France, as permanent members of the Security Council, will assume their full responsibilities on this point," he stated.
France has been Iraq's best friend in the West. French arms sales to Baghdad were boosted in the 1970s under Premier Jacques Chirac, the current president. Mr. Chirac once called Saddam Hussein a "personal friend."
During the 1980s, when Paris backed Iraq in its war against Iran, France sold Mirage fighter bombers and Super Entendard aircraft to Baghdad, along with Exocet anti-ship missiles.
French-Iraqi ties soured after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait that led to the 1991 Persian Gulf war.
France now has an estimated $4 billion in debts owed to it by Iraq as a result of arms sales and infrastructure construction projects. The debt is another reason U.S. officials believe France is opposing military force to oust Saddam.
Henry Sokolski, director of the private Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, said French transfers of military equipment to Iraq would have "an immediate and relevant military consequence, if this was done."
"The United States with its allies are going to suppress the Iraqi air force and air defense very early on in any conflict, and it's regrettable that the French have let a company complicate that mission," Mr. Sokolski said.
Secretary of State Colin L. Powell last month released intelligence information showing videotape of an Iraqi F-1 Mirage that had been modified to spray anthrax spores.
A CIA report to Congress made public in January stated that Iraq has aggressively sought advanced conventional arms. "A thriving gray-arms market and porous borders have allowed Baghdad to acquire smaller arms and components for larger arms, such as spare parts for aircraft, air defense systems, and armored vehicles," the CIA stated.
Iraq also has obtained some military goods through the U.N.-sponsored oil-for-food program.
A second CIA report in October on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stated: "Iraq imports goods using planes, trains, trucks, and ships without any type of international inspections -- in violation of UN Security Council resolutions."
I thought it was funny. Oh well, sorry for you. I guess there must be some touchy moderators out there.
Inspectors report, Britain readies amendment
Powell: Iraq in 'category of non-cooperation'
UNITED NATIONS (CNN) --Chief U.N. weapons inspectors Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei told the U.N. Security Council on Friday that they were making progress, need more time, and have found no smoking gun in terms of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Meanwhile, Britain prepared to offer an amended resolution that could include a deadline for Saddam Hussein to come into full compliance with previous U.N. demands for full disarmament.
British Ambassador to the United Nations Jeremy Greenstock said Foreign Secretary Jack Straw will propose the amendment to the resolution presented two weeks ago by the United States, Britain and Spain. Greenstock said it could set a date by which the disarmament must be completed under the terms of the resolution. He said such a deadline would be this month.
A U.N. Security Council diplomat said that the possibility of a 10-day deadline was being discussed, but added that this could change.
The new resolution could be brought to a vote within the Security Council between March 10 and March 14, the source said.
Blix, executive chairman of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), told the council that inspectors have been given prompt access to Iraqi sites and have faced "relatively few difficulties." He said Iraq's cooperation could be a result of strong outside pressure.
ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told the council that inspectors have found no evidence that Iraq has revived its nuclear weapons program.
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said he was pleased to hear of some cooperation from the Iraqis, but "sorry" to hear that the cooperation had come grudgingly and "primarily under the threat of force."
"I still find what I've heard this morning in the category of non-cooperation," he told the U.N. Security Council Friday.
U.N. Resolution 1441 calls for full and immediate compliance, Powell said, "and we must hold Iraq to its terms."
Blix: Unresolved issues remain
Blix said that Iraq has not resolved all of the remaining issues regarding its weapons programs, and said that verifying Baghdad's disarmament would take time and that inspectors would need to remain once it was completed.
Blix also said that he hoped Iraq would be more forthcoming with documents and other evidence.
"Iraq, with a highly developed administrative system, should be able to provide more documentary evidence about its proscribed weapons programs," Blix said. "Only a few new such documents have come to light so far, and have been handed over since we began inspections."
He said Iraq has provided inspectors with names of people who took part in destruction of biological and chemical weapons in 1991, but that indicates it should have records.
Blix said that inspectors have not found any evidence of mobile or underground weapons facilities. He said Iraq is making a serious effort to quantify biological and chemical weapons destroyed in 1991, unearthing several complete bombs from a re-excavated site.
Blix added that Baghdad must also account for how much of the weapons were produced.
ElBaradei said inspectors have found no evidence that high-strength aluminum tubes and powerful magnets Iraq has purchased were intended for nuclear weapons production.
ElBaradei also said accusations that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger are "unfounded," and documents that allegedly proved it were faked.
He said that Iraqi scientists have agreed to be interviewed without escorts or recording devices -- and that inspectors were still seeking to have those interviews conducted outside of the country.
The briefing was followed by statements by members of the council and planned closed-door consultations on the new U.N. resolution.
Council reactions
German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, the first council member to respond to the report said that a new resolution was not needed and that peaceful means of resolving the Iraq matter "have not been exhausted."
"Baghdad could have taken many of the recent steps earlier and more willingly," Fischer said. "In recent days, cooperation has nevertheless notably improved. this is a positive development which makes all the less comprehensible why this development should now be -- should not be abandoned. there is real progress to be noted under implementation of the relevant security council resolutions in all fields.
He said the peaceful disarmament of Iraq would improve stability in the Middle East.
Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said the latest round of inspections have been "fruitful," and called for a U.N.-generated "list of tasks" for Iraq to complete, one that would answer "all remaining questions" about the disarmament.
For the first time in many years in Iraq there is a process of real disarmament under way," Ivanov said.
But Powell told the council that failing to hold Iraq to its resolution would damage the United Nations credibility.
Iraq has decided "to delay, to deceive, to try to throw us off the trail," Powell said.
Powell said the Security Council must tell Iraqi President Saddam Hussein that "we have not been taken in by his transparent tactics."
"Now is the time to tell Iraq that the clock has not been stopped," he said. "In the very near future, we should bring (a new resolution) to this council for a vote."
Bush: Final diplomatic stages
In a news conference Thursday night, President Bush dismissed any Iraqi cooperation as a "willful charade" and promised a vote in a few days on the resolution.
Although he said he had not yet decided whether to invade Iraq, Bush said that U.N. Security Council members would decide in a matter of days whether they would join the United States in forcibly disarming Iraq.
"No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote," Bush said. "It's time for people to show their cards, let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam."
The United States, Britain and Spain have been working hard to win the necessary votes for the resolution. But in the face of clear signals from veto-wielding Security Council members France, China, and Russia that they would oppose it, British and U.S. officials said Thursday they would be willing to amend the resolution in the hopes of overcoming opposition.
Bush accused Iraq of hiding weapons of mass destruction and said that if the world failed to confront that threat, free nations would face "unacceptable risks."
When asked about giving Iraqi President Saddam Hussein an ultimatum, a two- or three-day deadline to disarm, Bush said: "We're still in the final stages of diplomacy."
"I believe Saddam Hussein is a threat to the American people. I believe he's a threat to the neighborhood in which he lives," Bush said, listing how the Iraqi regime has invaded neighboring countries and poisoned its people.
Responding to a question about reluctance among some Security Council members on the issue of military action against Iraq, Bush said: "As we head into the 21st century, when it comes to our security, we really don't need anybody's permission." (Full story)
CNN Correspondents John King, Andrea Koppel, Nic Robertson and U.N. Producer Ronni Berke contributed to this report. For latest developments, see CNN.com's Iraq Tracker.
value DOES equal money in some ways, and the value of end-to-end of the internet, and the networking being "dumb" has made a LOT of people very rich.
Also the general bandwidth, your download rate and the "Hand" server's send rate; find the bottleneck and that will limit your "Ommmmm"'s per second, young grasshopper.
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
$$$$$exyGal ignored my Valentine day request for a date
The Internet is actually a thing. It's clearly defined in technical terms. They (the authors of that exposition) are blurring the boundaries between the technical and the sociological when they describe TCP/IP the way they do, for example. Yeah, IP is an agreement; hell, so is SSL. So is a file format. A technical protocol is a technical agreement, not a philosophical one.
If they (and other pundits) want to start discussing the sociological, philosophical and economic impacts of the Internet on society, then they should coin a new term for it. The Internet is precisely what it is - a technical construct. The societal impacts of it are something else entirely, and ought not to be also called The Internet.
Sorry for getting irritated. Slow burn over many months with the self-important and self-indulgent pronouncements of pretentious people.
Is it just me, or did anyone else read that as "World Ends"?
[[snip]] "Stupid is sturdy." [[/snip]]
Well, that certainly explains my geeky lack of anything resembling musclemass..
"We can build businesses without having to worry that Internet, Inc. is going to force us to upgrade, double its price once we have bought in, or get taken over by one of our competitors."
But what if RoadRunner decides to raise the price of my cable access? I could pay the price, or just not use broadband, eh?
"...First you must go left, that's what you were going to say, wasn't it?"
"Not necessarily..."
I was referring to the "by adding value, you take away value" line in the writeup, and apologize for not making this clear. I certainly didn't mean to make digs at either the writeup or the site, I was just making a witty observation without the wit.
HTH, and have a nice day.
I always thought the "information highway" analogy was most accurate. The net is simply a way to get your data from here to there. This makes it clear that the only way to make money from the net is in construction/materials (think Cisco) but like road construction I can pay anyone that knows how to do that. Or put up a toll booth, bu notice how many real roads don't have em because people take other routes. It's like infrastructure - everyone uses it, but it's not a business in itself. Get a clue, provide something of value and people will give you money for it. And remember, what used to be of value may not be today.
Nice article but the people who really need to be forced to read and comprehend it are SBC and Yahoo management.
For the past several months SBC has been attempting a hard sell to get me to 'upgrade' to Yahoo DSL and install their quality monitoring software. I haven't fallen for this in spite of increasingly frantic snail mails and emails. People on craigslist have reported that the 'upgrade' destablizes windows and the new email has alot of problems. I see this so-called upgrade as an attempt to install spyware and turn my dsl bill into the equivalent of a cell phone bill. Since I'm a linux user their software won't run on my machine anyway. I'm waiting to see if I get my service terminated for not signing up.
Anyway, how do we get these clueless newbies also known as CEOs to give up and realize that the internet isn't TV ?
This has to be one of the most ironic, yet appropriate First Posts subject lines I've seen on /. in a long time...
This site is a reprise of some of the themes that were in their book from a few years ago, The Cluetrain Manifesto. It is still available online. I think of the internet as a kind of infrastructure that nobody owns, like a highway. The potential perils are of a takeover of large companies that want to make you carry p(Assports) or "pay tolls" to cross into certain parts of it. They are the ones who, in the words of the book, believe in "engorging people with material goods so as to make them poop out dollars". The internet has another potential that is not so crassly commercial: for self-expression, for the acquisition of knowledge, to be able to connect with others wherever concerning almost anything. People have the ability to turn away from the crassly commercial, if they choose to see something else of value besides what the popular culture puts before them.
Always look on the briight side of life! (whistle, whistle)
'The Internet isn't complicated. The Internet isn't a thing...'
'The internet is a place where people the world over gather to bitch about movies and share pronography'
Holden McNeil, Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back
This might be a little nitpicky, but I think the number of deaths caused by the U.S. Civil War was closer to 600,000.
The college kids and profs of the 60's and 70's scoffed at Ma Bell's near bullet-proof monopoly [at the time]. They also had DARPA money to design an always reliable Military network--one where as long as a single wire remained between two points there was communication.
Look at the results of what they created. Contrast that with the 80 year-old telcos. Why didn't the telcos inovate this stuff first? Because they didn't have to! And if they didn't want to, they kept anyone else from innovation too! So yeah, they were techno-hippies just like those other guys in the late 1700's [Tomas, george, ben, john, etc were equally if not more "hippie" at the time. Look what they created!] Free markets mean just that. Most capitalist believe in free markets right up until they expect the Govt. to step in and protect their lucrative monoploies!
...The Internet Logs Onto YOU!!
His statement is also false. The Internet existed, and it had the name Internet before Al Gore got involved. Al Gore created the Internet sure as he created the Mona Lisa.
So Gore mis-spoke. No big deal. The greater damage is done by him and his defenders who years later insist it is true that he created something at a certian time when in fact it was around before and was created by someone else. It takes a big man to admit a mistake, and it takes a small man to weave a web of lies to cover it up.
In a CNN interview on 9 March 2000, Al Gore claimed "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
Was Al Gore really the "Father of the Internet"? Well, no. Albert Gore, Junior, was not elected to Congress until 1976, although his father Albert Gore, Senior, was previously a Senator. Junior represented Tennesee's Fourth District in the House of Representatives, then was elected to the US Senate in 1984. (Source: "Current Biography Yearbook 1987", page 213, edited by Charles Moritz, published by The H.H. Wilson Company, NY, copyright 1987 and 1988.) The Pentagon funded the original development of the Internet, and the military contracting company Bolt Beranek and Newman (BBN) began constructing it in 1969. It was originally called ARPAnet, since the agency that funded it was named ARPA. By 1973 it was a modest success.
Wired News does a nice job of debunking Gore's claim.
The best thing to do is add capacity, so that fewer packets get queued. However, TCP will do it's level best to saturate any link, and will always force packets to be queued (or dropped) during ramp-up, unless the total transfer length is shorter than the integrated ramp-up time.
What I propose is that short packets go to the head of the queue. If you're doing file transfer with TCP, you'll be using path MTU-sized packets, whereas if you're doing VoIP or telenet, your packets will be much smaller. Move the shortest packets to the head of the queue, and TCP will accommodate.
You're suggesting that by creating an environment that allows the (rich) decision makers to have a fast internet, without requiring the (poor) others to also have a fast internet, is going to make the internet better?
Simple concept for you: If your structure resists preference, the rich will insist that it's good for everyone so it will be good for them. If your structure accomodates preference, the rich will insist that it's good for them.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
You're thinking of the Internet as a thing that could have been invented, you're thinking of the IP protocol. Gore didn't claim to have invented that. He's taking just credit for taking the initiative in creating "The Internet" as we know it today. He played a major role in creating a worldwide, free, and open network. The fact that it was based on existing technology is irrelevant. If it was based on BITNET, IPX, EtherTalk, or some new network protocol, it would still be the Internet. The Internet wasn't invented, it was, and still is being, created.
-Ryan C.
-Ryan C.
"He's taking just credit for taking the initiative in creating "The Internet" as we know it today."
More spin. The Internet was around before Gore was on the scene. The Internet as we know it today is just a LITTLE bit different from the time Gore was involved, wouldn't you think?
Face it, he blew it. No big deal, except for those who distort words and history to try to get around the fact that people, including Al Gore, do make mistakes sometimes.
"He played a major role in creating a worldwide, free, and open network."
If true, then he helped the Internet along. He did not create it.
History lesson: Henry Ford did not invent the automobile. Bill Gates did not create the GUI. Apple did not invent the personal computer (nor did IBM).... and Al Gore did not create, invent, conjure, implement, materialize, or otherwise bring the Internet into being.
Oh God I missed the "of" at first.
Don't worry, George Bush will see that you were right the first time! He'll get rid of those nasty Iraqis, hoarding all that sweet, sweet oil for your SUV. While he's busy destabilizing the Middle East, more terrorist attacks may be prompted here in the US, and North Korea (you know, that crazy guy who threatened war?) will go forgotten while he builds an arsenal of long-range nuclear weapons.
Here's a helpful score card:
Iraq: Tiny dictator that hasn't attacked anyone since Bush's daddy while trying to steal Kuwait over 10 years ago. Has short range missiles that don't fly too straight. Leader enjoys gassing rebels (especially when Reagan was paying for it), torture, killing family members, and long walks along the perimeter. Problem to nearest neighbors that claim to be "friends" of America (you know, those guys that fund and house terrorists, pay blood money to families of "martyrs", spew hatred of America in their schools, etc.)
North Korea: Tiny dictator that has nuclear weapons or is very close. Has medium range missiles and will have long range missiles capable of hitting American targets. The leader also enjoys starving and torturing his subjects, and saber rattling with an eye toward actual global war
Moderators: this is NOT flamebait. It is a troll. Learn the difference!